EPTI have a feeling that all the people who say they hate T and Z,...are protoss players.
A what race do you play thread...for science - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
BushidoSnipr
United States910 Posts
I have a feeling that all the people who say they hate T and Z,...are protoss players. | ||
|
Sporadic44
United States533 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + i dont understand what you expect to get out of this thread and let me explain why. i'm always open to discussion regarding sc2 and peoples philosophy behind it. Therefore im willing to chime in on this thread's subject. I like how you make a direct notion toward the inevitable bias that is seen regarding the races in SC2. As it seems, sometimes people hold their opinions a little too close to them. as if how they feel is something that they are obligated to cherish, as well as be respected by the holder of said belief's peers. thats why balance discussions can go south fast. people are so ingrained in their own perspectives that its difficult to accept another's as something valid or even logical. thus the problem of bias arises. So this thread at the least is honest about favoritism. However the way the OP has gone about it is a clusterfuck of irony and juxtaposition. The thread title states "for science" yet the subject matter is completely unscientific. I'll even include a definition of the scientific method as written on merriam-webster.com to further my point. : principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses you've made your hypothesis, despite lack of direction you are trying to prove something with this. and thats where the science ends here. you attempt to collect data with your poll but the procedure is to loaded that surely the results will yield nothing substantial. You justify the poll by saying it will help understand what the TL bias is. Immediately after said statement you declare your own bias. which believe it or not, effects the way people respond to a question. If you were being objective you'd simply ask, "what race do you play" after your hypothesis. I'll simply quote your next line in hopes you're smart enough to understand why its a flawed statement. "So..post what race you play. However! Try not to just pick the race you play." After I answered the first loaded question i was wondering where this study of yours was going. As soon as i read the second poll i didnt bother even considering the question. "What race do you hate" is an absurd way to seek data. because once again, the question presupposes a certain mindset in your research participants. I would conclude my analysis of your study in saying this; You're hypothesis goes unproven because it failed before it got off the ground. You made an attempt to record bias of TL members regarding sc2 races, using a bias method of doing so. The methods and procedure of carrying out said experiment are more confusing than the purpose itself. "choose your racial bias" is not specific and can mean pretty much anything. "The race im good with" "the race i think is overpowered" "the race i find appealing but dont play because i lack the skill" are all acceptable responses to having a bias. the question of what race you hate is just as non-specific while still being incredibly bias in nature. for instance i dont hate any race, so i didnt answer that question. i saw one of your participants picked his own race, zerg because of zvz. do you see why you must be as specific and non-subjective as possible? So some advice for your next poll. give less of your opinion when searching for results on the subject of bias. obviously if your poll is on your favorite food or favorite unit in the game, feel free to share and express your opinion. but when you take a poll attempting to prove something "for science" be scientific about it. keep it short and sweet. the more concise the better when trying to prove something through data. you let the results speak for themselves. have a clear hypothesis using the "if...then" format you learned back in 6th grade. and make sure you have some sort of correlation in mind from the data. TL:DR on account of faulty scientific methods this poll should not be taken seriously as statistically significant. However most of the responses thus far have been worth reading based on the merit of humor. especially the cartoons. of course thats just my bias talking  | ||
|
TENTHST
United States204 Posts
did that not cross your mind? if 70% of the Zerg community is complaining about being weak, what does that tell you? and, no, personally I think TERRAN is actually the most broken race in the game - for reasons I will not get into here. I have argued, for some time now, that PROTOSS vs ZERG is actually a pretty dynamic matchup. Perhaps the Colossus needs a -1 or -2 range nerf, but aside from that its balanced. However, TERRAN vs ZERG has been in Terran's favor, statistically, since October - and has not changed. I fail to see how players who can 2 port banshee/4 rax scv all-in/or win the game with a handful of mineral-only hellions have earned their points. This is why ladder race appropriation is irrelevant. The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. | ||
|
TheResidentEvil
United States991 Posts
If you watch fox news, you know you are getting the republican side. I know that going in. I want to know going in, what bias are you getting here on TL. If you have no bias then you dont need to vote. That might've been a good choice because if the majority of people don't have a bias then thats important. However, if you play one race its an automatic bias. If anything is wrong with this poll is asking people to recognize their own bias. Thats the only real drawback. | ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
| ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:08 TENTHST wrote: Might want to rethink that considering right now Nestea and Losira are the two large favorites to win GSLMaybe Zerg players QQ the most because Zerg is underpowered and they are constantly losing to players of significantly inferior skill. did that not cross your mind? if 70% of the Zerg community is complaining about being weak, what does that tell you? and, no, personally I think TERRAN is actually the most broken race in the game - for reasons I will not get into here. I have argued, for some time now, that PROTOSS vs ZERG is actually a pretty dynamic matchup. Perhaps the Colossus needs a -1 or -2 range nerf, but aside from that its balanced. However, TERRAN vs ZERG has been in Terran's favor, statistically, since October - and has not changed. I fail to see how players who can 2 port banshee/4 rax scv all-in/or win the game with a handful of mineral-only hellions have earned their points. This is why ladder race appropriation is irrelevant. The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. | ||
|
Carkis
Canada302 Posts
| ||
|
b0urne420
Canada112 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:08 TENTHST wrote: Maybe Zerg players QQ the most because Zerg is underpowered and they are constantly losing to players of significantly inferior skill. did that not cross your mind? if 70% of the Zerg community is complaining about being weak, what does that tell you? and, no, personally I think TERRAN is actually the most broken race in the game - for reasons I will not get into here. I have argued, for some time now, that PROTOSS vs ZERG is actually a pretty dynamic matchup. Perhaps the Colossus needs a -1 or -2 range nerf, but aside from that its balanced. However, TERRAN vs ZERG has been in Terran's favor, statistically, since October - and has not changed. I fail to see how players who can 2 port banshee/4 rax scv all-in/or win the game with a handful of mineral-only hellions have earned their points. This is why ladder race appropriation is irrelevant. The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. if you still lose to 2port banshee then you obviously don't know how to play zvt very well. it's an all-in strat, of course it will be devastating if you're not ready for it. the fact that you don't know how to hold it off doesnt make a race op. its so easy to scout and see coming, even if you dont necessarily see the starports. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:11 Irrelevant wrote: I always find myself rooting for zerg, however at the same time I hate them and wish to see them lose and make the fanbois cry. TvZ is very frustrating, but i see the balance in the match up. I know that both Zerg and Terrans feel frustrated in the Match up. But personally i really hate Protoss, especially since i hate marauders and never make them. I Make more BCs and Ghosts then i do Marauders. And in TvP I go BioMech/Mech builds, and when Toss just walks into my tank lines after i harass and kill all his workers,He comes out winning, mainly due to Collosi, and then files mass Gateway into my base before i can reinforce -_-. Yeah i hate Protoss. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:08 TENTHST wrote: Maybe Zerg players QQ the most because Zerg is underpowered and they are constantly losing to players of significantly inferior skill. did that not cross your mind? if 70% of the Zerg community is complaining about being weak, what does that tell you? and, no, personally I think TERRAN is actually the most broken race in the game - for reasons I will not get into here. I have argued, for some time now, that PROTOSS vs ZERG is actually a pretty dynamic matchup. Perhaps the Colossus needs a -1 or -2 range nerf, but aside from that its balanced. However, TERRAN vs ZERG has been in Terran's favor, statistically, since October - and has not changed. I fail to see how players who can 2 port banshee/4 rax scv all-in/or win the game with a handful of mineral-only hellions have earned their points. This is why ladder race appropriation is irrelevant. The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. You lose to 2-Port -_-. Queens and Drones, Queens and Drones get a spore for each base. Same goes against Hellions. Queens and Drones. Except you get spines instead. Nobody should outright lose to a 2 port if your half decent. I 2 port at times and really its just a harass heavy build that takes map control in order to expand by pinning the opponent. And from experience it only really works well against Toss. Since you will have a huge mineral dump afterwards and Marine Banshee is pretty good against Toss. If you snipe the Collosi that is -_-. | ||
|
fraktoasters
United States617 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:14 Irrelevant wrote: Might want to rethink that considering right now Nestea and Losira are the two large favorites to win GSL Yeah he must have forgotten that being considered favorites means Zerg isn't UP. Those two things clearly have a direct correlation. You should save these sorts of statements for when Zergs win the GSL, not just have people rooting for them. Anyways, I'm just hoping they don't get cheesed out. On May 03 2011 09:24 b0urne420 wrote: if you still lose to 2port banshee then you obviously don't know how to play zvt very well. it's an all-in strat, of course it will be devastating if you're not ready for it. the fact that you don't know how to hold it off doesnt make a race op. its so easy to scout and see coming, even if you dont necessarily see the starports. I see Zerg players at the very top of the ladder lose to 2 port banshee every now and then. It's just a really unforgiving strat. If the Zerg didn't prepare for it or has queens caught out of position its over. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
and from my experience, i've had little problem facing deathballs with ultra/infestor/+ mixture, the tricky part is getting to that mixture(waiting for both infestor upgrades to finish at the same time tech'ing to hive). | ||
|
Sporadic44
United States533 Posts
if you notice people all seem to have differentiating feelings on the races in this game. but i know i have never lost a game and felt that my opponents race or my own were solely to blame. i know i can always play better and that perfection is an illusion. no one will ever be perfect at sc2. you can get damn close, but never perfect. | ||
|
Staboteur
Canada1873 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:08 TENTHST wrote: Maybe Zerg players QQ the most because Zerg is underpowered and they are constantly losing to players of significantly inferior skill. did that not cross your mind? if 70% of the Zerg community is complaining about being weak, what does that tell you? and, no, personally I think TERRAN is actually the most broken race in the game - for reasons I will not get into here. I have argued, for some time now, that PROTOSS vs ZERG is actually a pretty dynamic matchup. Perhaps the Colossus needs a -1 or -2 range nerf, but aside from that its balanced. However, TERRAN vs ZERG has been in Terran's favor, statistically, since October - and has not changed. I fail to see how players who can 2 port banshee/4 rax scv all-in/or win the game with a handful of mineral-only hellions have earned their points. This is why ladder race appropriation is irrelevant. The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. Baha, I have to laugh at ZvT still being considered Terran favoured. I'm a shit-tier diamond Zerg, and even I can see how infestors fully negating bio, whilst also maintaining utility against virtually any other unit compistion pushes the balance in favour of the Zerg. Sure, it isn't an insurmountable obstacle, but quite like how it takes far better micro to deal with blue flame hellions with only zerglings, it takes far better control to maintain usefulness of marines when infestors come into play. Also, though Terran can do a lot of strange, abusive all-ins or pressure... if they -don't- do those, they'll likely lose straight up. Terran macro pales in comparison to that of an unhindered zerg, so any pressure could sort of be viewed as a reverse all-in. To claim that the matchup is favoured towards terran is silly... and this is coming from a guy who killed 16 hellions at the cost of 6 drones and a handful of zerglings throughout the course of a game and -STILL- lost. | ||
|
Philip2110
Scotland798 Posts
| ||
|
Philip2110
Scotland798 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:08 TENTHST wrote: Maybe Zerg players QQ the most because Zerg is underpowered and they are constantly losing to players of significantly inferior skill. did that not cross your mind? if 70% of the Zerg community is complaining about being weak, what does that tell you? and, no, personally I think TERRAN is actually the most broken race in the game - for reasons I will not get into here. I have argued, for some time now, that PROTOSS vs ZERG is actually a pretty dynamic matchup. Perhaps the Colossus needs a -1 or -2 range nerf, but aside from that its balanced. However, TERRAN vs ZERG has been in Terran's favor, statistically, since October - and has not changed. I fail to see how players who can 2 port banshee/4 rax scv all-in/or win the game with a handful of mineral-only hellions have earned their points. This is why ladder race appropriation is irrelevant. The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. Ban please, posts like this derail threads and piss me off | ||
|
Carkis
Canada302 Posts
| ||
|
Carkis
Canada302 Posts
| ||
|
Zulco
Sweden12 Posts
On May 03 2011 09:08 TENTHST wrote: The real problem here is that Zerg is missing some key ingredients to a comprehensive race; there are far too many ways to exploit Zerg weakness, especially at the higher levels. The true test of racial balance is not ladder, but tournament results. And mark my words, Zerg will not win another major tournament (read: GSL), until there is a significant buff in their favor. I guarantee it. the first statement i think i can agree with but the second is already proved wrong! + Show Spoiler + idra won IPL, sure not the greatets starting players but still a very sold set of players in the later rounds! ima a toss player and dident vote on the hate part. what is it to hate, play with what u got and play to win! | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
random fighting | ||
| ||
