|
Chill: This thread is about how the perception of balance is not in-line with hard statistics. If you don't have a comment about that fact, DO NOT post in this thread. |
On April 02 2011 01:01 Datum wrote:
This reminds me of when people were talking about how imba Terran was. Now, Terran is losing quite a bit. Sure, there were patches that helped balance, but what it came down to was people figuring out how to beat Terran. Notice how Zerg and Protoss strategies have changed far more in the last couple months than Terran strategies have. Maybe it's time for Zerg and Terran to adapt to Protoss strategies.
Also, the statistics in the OP are irrelevant. Many of the games take place pre-patch, they don't take skill into account (if nestea had beaten San in GSL Jan, it would not speak to PvZ balance), it takes games into account that have nothing to do with balance (6-pools, cannon rushes, etc.). Finally, without an error range, we can't really take anything from the data, other than a very general idea.
Terrans started losing games when map pool changed. Not because of patches. But nevertheless metagame is still developing. I think Infestors are something to look for to solve zerg's problems in ZvP.
|
On April 02 2011 04:25 Psychlone wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2011 04:19 Arisen wrote:
I think if you want to do an analysis of the difference in percieved imbalance with actual gameplay, you have to remove false data. The percieved imbalanced is that a zerg can't kill a protoss if he plays safe and gets a maxed army, usually consisting of 3-4 colossus, sentry, stalker, and some void rays. How many of the games where Z won in your research did the protoss reach that composition?
The problem for me is I never see a zerg breaking this composition, even though zerg win a decent amount of the time vs protoss. This is because zergs will put a ton of pressure when protoss wants to take his third and break him there, but he never reached that composition he wanted. That's what is so frustrating. It seems like once they do get that composition, there isn't a thing you can do. And once I see that composition as a spectator, I basically feel the game is over, and the rest is formality. I'm not saying the match is imbalanced, necissarily, just that I have yet to see satisfactory ways to kill an end game protoss as zerg, and I would like to see the stats reflecting how many of the zerg wins actually came from games where protoss reached their "perfect compositions" and remove data where zerg defended and won vs gateway all-ins, or broke the protoss early, etc It's not a perfect composition at all. It dies in 3 seconds to the right Zerg composition. It doesn't even require skill to beat it. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195058
Wow I never thought of this before, except when I was watching pro players do it and it got raped by a protoss death ball!
As to the poster before me, yeah, it can be fun to watch the zerg try to break the protoss, but if th protoss is commited to playing safe (parking his army in between his bases so he can easily respond to nydus and drops and pressure at the front) you're just throwing away units if you engage into that fortified position. Then just like you said, the zerg loses when it goes up. Sure he can try for a base race, but the chances at this point in time of killing that ball are extremely slim. That's why it's frustrating to watch. Sure, it's fun to watch the lead up, but once he has it, it's no longer a mystery. He's going to roll out and win. Sure, there might be some way to kill it that we haven't discovered yet, and I'm not convinced blizzard needs to do something, but of the ways we know about, there isn't really a way to beat it, thus, if a protoss really wants a win, that's basically what he's going to do, and the zerg is basically screwed.
Sure, a lot of people like MC like to play risky, and a zerg can absolutely win versus that, and a zerg might be able to break a protoss before he gets his composition if the protoss messes up, but once he does have it, he basically wins, which is so anti-climactic and I think is a bad way for a matchup to work.
|
Well Protoss maybe have been a bit overpowered, but there were some recent nerfs and especially the MLG Maps (big, no close spawns) favor Zerg a lot.
So please chill.
|
I think part of the reason for being disappointed as a spectator watching Protoss matches comes from the lack of variety. When it seems the same thing happens every time, it is less fun to watch. This could clearly spiral into discussing re-distributing power among Protoss units, but that would be off topic. It's hard to really come up with a why here, but the OP has shown that perceptions can be very misleading without backing them up with some numbers; however, if you think about the Protoss games you've seen that were awesome and memorable, I would bet that they were not colossi death balls.
|
I remember coming to a similar conclusion when posting in the "Why is Protoss doing so bad in the GSL?" thread from back in the pre-MC era. You might feel like your race suffers a distinct disadvantage, but statistically they aren't doing as bad as it seems like they would be if there really was an imbalance. For what it's worth, note that the number of patch changes between then and now which actually have a beneficial impact on protoss are relatively few - the biggest of which was the change to the map pool...
|
Wow I never thought of this before, except when I was watching pro players do it and it got raped by a protoss death ball!
What pros? What match? All the pros I see make roaches against Protoss.
|
It's cool to see the statistics change so much off the back of one player.... All the stats are pretty close except GSL, where MC brings the average up to 60%. =D
On topic - balance is still evolving, as the metagame and the maps do. Give it a few years.
|
I want to thank Slusher for taking the time to write a thread summing up this statistical evidence, because I was getting tired of responding to every single imbalance QQ with "your opinion that it's *impossible* for Race X to beat Race Y is not defended by the statistics".
Awesome OP. It definitely shows that people might be over-reacting a bit too much towards their personal losses.
|
Mind. Blown.
Seriously though, the OP brings up a fantastic point, I'm honestly shocked that the w/l discrepancy in PvZ is that low.
Also Chill is a moderation God.
|
As of right now the game is fine ya zergs just need to learn how to adapt to the game and stop QQing about protoss death ball. Protoss don't need to be nerf to the ground.
|
As much as people blame blizzard for not understanding their own game, I think the game really has been getting more balanced with each patch.
|
On April 02 2011 04:54 00Visor wrote:
Well Protoss maybe have been a bit overpowered, but there were some recent nerfs and especially the MLG Maps (big, no close spawns) favor Zerg a lot.
So please chill.
The problem is that the new maps (and cross positions) theoretically also favor Protoss reaching this deathball level with two easily protected bases and also don't effect the efficiency of 4gate. It's not as black and white as "Zerg map" and "Protoss map."
I'd love to see the stats on the newer, larger maps for comparison as well as the composite stats of the older ones.
|
While i do agree that it is not the most entertaining to watch once protoss has their "death ball" and theres not really much a zerg is going to do to stop it, its all about stopping the toss from getting to that point. Just going to use Idra vs Cruncher TSL3 series as an example.
+ Show Spoiler +Game 1 Idra was just content to macro up and try the "zerg will replenish their units faster after getting wrecked by deathball" strategy, and its fairly obvious that against a unit comp like that roach/hydra isn't going to make any effect. Game 2 Idra came out playing harass crazy in one of the most entertaining gmaes i've seen in a while. I think that nobody will argue that if Idra had played like that in Game 1 he would have won without a doubt. Game 3 just needed better scouting. But its been sown that zerg has plenty of viable ways of beating of toss, maybe just not once they have their deathball... whether that is 'imba' is up to you i guess. - didn't know if i needed to spoiler that but i did to be safe.
User was warned for this post
|
This very thread is a death trap:D
|
I think people are just too impatient =/ Proper counters and metagames all take time to evolve for a RTS game.. for a while there was no doubt protoss looked terribly weak in the first few GSL's - remember back then when people were cheering for a protoss to go far (can't believe it now huh lol)? Then toss players started changing the style they play (despite not having received any significant buffs and mainly nerfs) and are now performing well. Could they be too strong? Possibly, but we don't know that right now, we need to give time for terran/zergs to try new things and adapt - from the release to now, there's always been something at any given point of time that seems overpowered or unfair in the game. If people demand changes instantly instead of playing it out, the game will never ever be balanced because there's always going to be something that seems too strong at that moment before the counter is figured out.
As a toss player and spectator though, I definitely do wish carriers/templars were stronger so that there are other play styles aside from collosus deathballs. Man, come to think of it, I really miss watching carriers in action 
Also, yeah, I'd definitely be interested in seeing the race statistics for all the big tournaments in the last month or two (IEM, GSL, TSL etc. etc.) - I could be wrong, but from what I've seen so far myself, zergs have had their fair share of victories against protoss; I definitely don't think its as lopsided as some posters make it out to be.
|
I know how you feel, everytime I watch a ZvP I always start by expecting the Protoss to win because I've seen way too many games where Zergs seemed to outplay their opponents and still lose to what I think is completely ridiculous. It's like everytime I hear a zerg player getting matched up against a protoss player all the fun of the tournament evaporates.
|
On April 02 2011 04:45 bokeevboke wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2011 01:01 Datum wrote:
This reminds me of when people were talking about how imba Terran was. Now, Terran is losing quite a bit. Sure, there were patches that helped balance, but what it came down to was people figuring out how to beat Terran. Notice how Zerg and Protoss strategies have changed far more in the last couple months than Terran strategies have. Maybe it's time for Zerg and Terran to adapt to Protoss strategies.
Also, the statistics in the OP are irrelevant. Many of the games take place pre-patch, they don't take skill into account (if nestea had beaten San in GSL Jan, it would not speak to PvZ balance), it takes games into account that have nothing to do with balance (6-pools, cannon rushes, etc.). Finally, without an error range, we can't really take anything from the data, other than a very general idea. Terrans started losing games when map pool changed. Not because of patches. But nevertheless metagame is still developing. I think Infestors are something to look for to solve zerg's problems in ZvP.
I think ZvP's biggest problem is in the opening that P can do, if the P does what MC does where he open with just sentries like he is FEing and kills all scouting overlords and just 4gates, then there really is nothing zerg can do. And as a spectator it kills all the fun knowing that the zerg player can do absolutely nothing but guess.
|
|
|
Its a common thing in all rts games. Once a certain race is consider to be SLIGHTLY better than the others, the community instantly gets into "omg totally op, super imba"-mode.
ZvT was never as bad as many people said it was.
PvZ is not as bad as many people say it.
Fun fact: Some sc2 communities are a little bit behind regarting what race to blame while in "omg totally op, super imba"-mode. The german battle.net forums are full of Protosses claming that PvT is IMPOSSIBLE to win and all Terran needs to do is mass tier1 and a move.
|
On April 02 2011 10:03 Grummler wrote:
Its a common thing in all rts games. Once a certain race is consider to be SLIGHTLY better than the others, the community instantly gets into "omg totally op, super imba"-mode.
ZvT was never as bad as many people said it was.
PvZ is not as bad as many people say it.
Fun fact: Some sc2 communities are a little bit behind regarting what race to blame while in "omg totally op, super imba"-mode. The german battle.net forums are full of Protosses claming that PvT is IMPOSSIBLE to win and all Terran needs to do is mass tier1 and a move.
The difference here is that you can give them a replay of how a Protoss player can beat a Terran bio ball. But you can't really give a replay of how Zerg can beat a Protoss that kills their scouts and has a zerg player in the dark and then uses mass FF to kill a Zerg. You can't really help that, which is why its so depressing to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
