|
On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:21 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
correct, although I do think that if zerg guesses wrong they get punished harder.. so I suppose they have a disadvantage in that way. What if they guess correctly? I would argue that if the Zerg guesses correctly, there's nothing T or P can do to stop them. For example, if the Zerg guesses that the Protoss is going to move out at the 10 minute mark with a push and they make 50 zerglings and intercept, the game is over. Zerg wins. So in a sense the disadvantage balances the advantage. It's true that if they guess incorrectly, its bad for them... they lose 25 potential drones... so it's roulette. it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big. On May 14 2011 04:27 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:16 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:14 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
not when you were spending them on your economy or tech in order to stay even with your opponent. If he is going all in, you're not staying even, you're getting too far ahead economically. The game does not favor all in's, though some maps do/did. sure, you want to have only a slight advantage against an allin player and devote the rest to defense. the problem is, as I said in my first post, that scouting is shit for all three races so it's incredibly difficult to gauge what your opponent is doing and react appropriately. Welcome to RTS games with fog of war. Making correct decisions off of limited information is a cornerstone not only of the game but of the entire genre. except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible.
yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2.
|
On May 14 2011 04:00 randplaty wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 03:54 BurningSera wrote:On May 14 2011 03:42 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 03:40 Endymion wrote:
1st bold, are you serious blizzard? no other race has such an instant lose button, especially if going for early aggression, and not only do you embrace it but you openly condone it? wow..
Actually both Terran and Protoss do have an auto lose button. It's called forgetting to put your depot back up or not putting your zealot on hold position. I'd say that is the equivalent of forgetting to build a spore crawler. i dont usually say 'no' to anyone's opinion but i feel like do now. No, T/P dont have auto lose button. depot/hold-zealots can potentially cause you damage but if you have no units to defend the lings runby AND didnt scout that he has quite some amount of lings, is your own fault. Z? if you didnt prepare for 2port banshee, 4banshee fly into your base you are GGed. read the post, Blizzard acknowledged that zerg has weak early AA. Blizzard acknowledged that there was a problem when the spore crawlers were out of position. "However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play."So this patch fixes that. Now zergs are happy right? If 2 port banshee were impossible to stop, why isn't that build standard in TvZ? If you're P or T and lings are in your main, you auto lose. Your main army could be slightly out of position and you lose. It could be early game and you don't have many units. It could be that your main army is engaging the main army of zerg and you auto lose. Both mistakes are equivalent. They're mistakes that shouldn't happen and they're mistakes that if you make, you deserve to lose... just like if you forget to make a spore crawler.
i was referring to your 'depot/hold-zealot is the same as without getting spore in time', which is clearly not true. T/P need those buildings anyway(if they dont wall is their risk) while i need to build an early evo and do at least 2spores(which can be totally useless) to hold early air.
you dont see 2port banshee that much now because all pro zergs do scout and if they dont see anything before 6mins they will sac a overlord. if the overlord scout fails you will see a spore goes up/more queens. it is a standard now every zergs will strongly aware of banshee/dt cheese, since they are fatal.
and you are saying main army attack while lings runby? that is nothing to do with 'auto lose button'. you should know the risk of lings runby before you move out and forget depot up.
let get this straight:
~7mins 2banshee with cloak arrive, and T/P/Z didnt see that coming at all->
Toss: you have stalker, all you need to do is react correctly(build obs or cannon) while banshees cloak, they wont cloak for long anyway. lets say >50% chance you will be GGed(depends on micro/mistakes of both sites).
Terran:scan.marines. we all seen this one quite often in TvT...
Z:lets say you are lucky you have 3queens, they will be focused down by cloaked 2banshees....do i need to say more? is basically same case as P but we dont have any tier 1 AA like stalker. higher chance of getting GGed than P. is this so called 'auto lose button'? i dont know, but i can assure you that if the T was competent, the Z is 100% lost the game for sure.
|
On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:21 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
correct, although I do think that if zerg guesses wrong they get punished harder.. so I suppose they have a disadvantage in that way. What if they guess correctly? I would argue that if the Zerg guesses correctly, there's nothing T or P can do to stop them. For example, if the Zerg guesses that the Protoss is going to move out at the 10 minute mark with a push and they make 50 zerglings and intercept, the game is over. Zerg wins. So in a sense the disadvantage balances the advantage. It's true that if they guess incorrectly, its bad for them... they lose 25 potential drones... so it's roulette. it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big. On May 14 2011 04:27 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:16 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:14 Treemonkeys wrote:
[quote]
If he is going all in, you're not staying even, you're getting too far ahead economically. The game does not favor all in's, though some maps do/did. sure, you want to have only a slight advantage against an allin player and devote the rest to defense. the problem is, as I said in my first post, that scouting is shit for all three races so it's incredibly difficult to gauge what your opponent is doing and react appropriately. Welcome to RTS games with fog of war. Making correct decisions off of limited information is a cornerstone not only of the game but of the entire genre. except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2.
It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage.
If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you.
|
On May 14 2011 04:48 Sapphire.lux wrote:
This thread has degenerated into who can whine the most. We all play SC2 people and yes, the race you play is the worst and you have to be a vastly superior player to win against the other races.
this sums it up pretty much
|
On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:21 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
correct, although I do think that if zerg guesses wrong they get punished harder.. so I suppose they have a disadvantage in that way. What if they guess correctly? I would argue that if the Zerg guesses correctly, there's nothing T or P can do to stop them. For example, if the Zerg guesses that the Protoss is going to move out at the 10 minute mark with a push and they make 50 zerglings and intercept, the game is over. Zerg wins. So in a sense the disadvantage balances the advantage. It's true that if they guess incorrectly, its bad for them... they lose 25 potential drones... so it's roulette. it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big. On May 14 2011 04:27 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:16 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
sure, you want to have only a slight advantage against an allin player and devote the rest to defense. the problem is, as I said in my first post, that scouting is shit for all three races so it's incredibly difficult to gauge what your opponent is doing and react appropriately. Welcome to RTS games with fog of war. Making correct decisions off of limited information is a cornerstone not only of the game but of the entire genre. except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage.
what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage.
maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time.
If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you.
if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up.
|
On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:21 randplaty wrote:
[quote]
What if they guess correctly? I would argue that if the Zerg guesses correctly, there's nothing T or P can do to stop them. For example, if the Zerg guesses that the Protoss is going to move out at the 10 minute mark with a push and they make 50 zerglings and intercept, the game is over. Zerg wins. So in a sense the disadvantage balances the advantage.
It's true that if they guess incorrectly, its bad for them... they lose 25 potential drones... so it's roulette. it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big. On May 14 2011 04:27 Treemonkeys wrote:
[quote]
Welcome to RTS games with fog of war. Making correct decisions off of limited information is a cornerstone not only of the game but of the entire genre. except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. Show nested quote +If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up.
You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game.
|
I really feel that the last episode of sotg hurt the community. Now every thread in teamliquid degenerate in a "zerg is flawed" argument, when at the same time zerg players winrate in tourneys has never been higher against protoss or terran. A lot of new builds are created, zergs are winning a lot everywhere but it's not enough because "zerg is flawed".
There is still zero proof of that, but idra said it so it must be true ><
All this coinflip and flawed argument is really ridiculous, because it goes against the facts and the results.
|
On May 14 2011 00:10 Iyerbeth wrote:
I'm shocked at how many Terrans are upset that there is now more than one unit that Protoss has that can do anything against them, especially considering how easily that one unit was completely shut down with the Strike Cannons.
You are only looking at part of the picture. Protoss not only gained a way to deal with thors but they did it in a way that terrans lost a way to deal with HTs. There is not a whole lot that can properly deal with HTs that terran has. Much like protoss didn't have much to deal with thors. So the way Blizzard went about it certainly warrants some discussion.
Not only that but having to get strike cannons to have your thors be less vulnerable to the counter against strike cannons is obviously flawed.
|
On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:21 randplaty wrote:On May 14 2011 04:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
correct, although I do think that if zerg guesses wrong they get punished harder.. so I suppose they have a disadvantage in that way. What if they guess correctly? I would argue that if the Zerg guesses correctly, there's nothing T or P can do to stop them. For example, if the Zerg guesses that the Protoss is going to move out at the 10 minute mark with a push and they make 50 zerglings and intercept, the game is over. Zerg wins. So in a sense the disadvantage balances the advantage. It's true that if they guess incorrectly, its bad for them... they lose 25 potential drones... so it's roulette. it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big. On May 14 2011 04:27 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:16 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
sure, you want to have only a slight advantage against an allin player and devote the rest to defense. the problem is, as I said in my first post, that scouting is shit for all three races so it's incredibly difficult to gauge what your opponent is doing and react appropriately. Welcome to RTS games with fog of war. Making correct decisions off of limited information is a cornerstone not only of the game but of the entire genre. except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you.
I think Flash's winning rate is much higher than 70% after he became actually good... perhaps the last two years? I'd venture saying it's probably around 90% during that period.
|
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?
I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.
No. If you read between the lines, you'll see they saw mass-Thor strategies as being completely OP. The problem isn't that they didn't sanction the strategies, but rather that the startegy broke the game.
|
On May 14 2011 05:00 MrCon wrote:
I really feel that the last episode of sotg hurt the community. Now every thread in teamliquid degenerate in a "zerg is flawed" argument, when at the same time zerg players winrate in tournays has never been so high against protoss or terran. A lot of new builds are created, zergs are winning a lot everywhere but it's not enough because "zerg is flawed".
There is still zero proof of that, but idra said it so it must be true ><
All this coinflip and flawed argument is really ridiculous, because it goes against the facts and the results.
If people can't step outside Idra's line of thought, fuck em, it will truly only hold them back in this game and most will probably either get over it or just give it up on the game. Until that happens it can be annoying though.
Yes there is a element of chance/luck in this game, it is actually impossible to create a game with limited information without having that. At the same time, it is much more complicated than the people who want to simplify it by calling it a coin toss. The decision making and "guessing" as some want to call it, is a skill in itself, and perhaps the most important skill required to be good at SC, after you have the mechanics down.
|
On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big.
[quote]
except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game.
so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed, skill isn't everything when it comes to winning, the design of the game matters too.
|
Yay I LOVE these!
I have a feeling they don't explain it all either, ofc.
Cus for example they explained the Sentry change, but it also works because it balances out the WG timing in other matchups because Sentries are commonly gotten in PvZ and PvT anyways, so they can just use more chrono on WG to make up for the 20 sec nerf. (Actually idk if they thought about this, or if they did PvP seemed to be the main reason so I guess that's why).
|
On May 14 2011 05:04 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:00 MrCon wrote:
I really feel that the last episode of sotg hurt the community. Now every thread in teamliquid degenerate in a "zerg is flawed" argument, when at the same time zerg players winrate in tournays has never been so high against protoss or terran. A lot of new builds are created, zergs are winning a lot everywhere but it's not enough because "zerg is flawed".
There is still zero proof of that, but idra said it so it must be true ><
All this coinflip and flawed argument is really ridiculous, because it goes against the facts and the results.
If people can't step outside Idra's line of thought, fuck em, it will truly only hold them back in this game and most will probably either get over it or just give it up on the game. Until that happens it can be annoying though. Yes there is a element of chance/luck in this game, it is actually impossible to create a game with limited information without having that. At the same time, it is much more complicated than the people who want to simplify it by calling it a coin toss. The decision making and "guessing" as some want to call it, is a skill in itself, and perhaps the most important skill required to be good at SC, after you have the mechanics down.
This is spot on. Using more familiar words, he is talking about "game sense." How do you play the game based on the information you have about hat is happening? This is an absolutely critical component of playing this game well at every single level.
|
On May 14 2011 05:08 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:
[quote]
So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game. so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed.
My logic is flawed because Blizz could break the game if they wanted to? You aren't making any sense.
|
I think if 4 gates are strong now its because people are cutting less probes to do it. They aren't relying on the timing of the warpgate. I've been doing it lately with great success, I don't use chrono on warpgate, I use it on units or a fast +1 atk (usually finishes right around the time my 4 gate is ready). Because you get more workers and fighting units before you attack, its harder to scout and it can be much more deadly and easy to transition out of. The thing is though, because we aren't relying as much on an earlier timing, our chronoboosts and extra minerals (we don't need the gates as soon) can be put to offense or defense. I think the change has been great so far and I have noticed a difference in all of my PvP's so far. Its still a little like Colos wars, but I think that will change also the farther we get from just 4 gating all the time. I love how 4 gate could actually be a good pressure build now, instead of the obvious all-in'ing that was happening between all Protoss players, just stuck on 1 fucking base.
|
On May 14 2011 05:10 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:08 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game. so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed. My logic is flawed because Blizz could break the game if they wanted to? You aren't making any sense.
edited my post to make more sense
|
On May 14 2011 05:03 s4life wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:37 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:34 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:28 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:21 randplaty wrote:
[quote]
What if they guess correctly? I would argue that if the Zerg guesses correctly, there's nothing T or P can do to stop them. For example, if the Zerg guesses that the Protoss is going to move out at the 10 minute mark with a push and they make 50 zerglings and intercept, the game is over. Zerg wins. So in a sense the disadvantage balances the advantage.
It's true that if they guess incorrectly, its bad for them... they lose 25 potential drones... so it's roulette. it's still shitty game design.. sure, risk and chance and guessing all have their place but it should be possible for a player to come back from the disadvantage they obtain by guessing incorrectly through good play, but in SC2 that doesn't seem to happen (with rare exceptions) because the advantage/disadvantages are too big. On May 14 2011 04:27 Treemonkeys wrote:
[quote]
Welcome to RTS games with fog of war. Making correct decisions off of limited information is a cornerstone not only of the game but of the entire genre. except right now it's not correct decisions, it's correct guesses. the limited information you can get (even after investing into scouting) isn't definitive, it isn't even close and it doesn't narrow down your opponent's options much either. So is nestea some kind of statistically anomaly? How on earth is he able to make the correct decisions so often? he's really good. I don't think that helps him beat a nexus-cancel warpgate allin without blind countering it, though. nor does it help him tell between a 1rax expand or a 6rax allin. Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. I think Flash's winning rate is much higher than 70% after he became actually good... perhaps the last two years? I'd venture saying it's probably around 90% during that period.
You can search yo :p From 2009/05/13 (2 years to the day), his winrate is 76%. That makes him a BW God, yet he's still losing a full quarter of his games.
As a comparison, the likes of Nestea and IdrA - who I think everyone would agree are good but no bonjwas like Flash - have winrates of around 65%.
|
On May 13 2011 19:09 darmousseh wrote:This is, imo, the best patch blizzard has released yet. Every change makes perfect sense without affecting the overall balance of the game too much in anyone's favor. Essentially this patch makes pvp SOOOO much more flexible especially the sentry build time reduction and the massive + range of archons. 
I personally would have liked more wg research time as a protoss player, but other than that I think it was a good patch overall.
|
On May 14 2011 05:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:10 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 05:08 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:39 Treemonkeys wrote:
[quote]
Which is why every tournament uses a Best of X format, you can't get away with doing the same thing every game. no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game. so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed. My logic is flawed because Blizz could break the game if they wanted to? You aren't making any sense. edited my post to make more sense
Well you still aren't making any. The skill of any game is inherently defined by that game, weather it is considered "flawed" or not.
The flaws you speak of have nothing to do with SC2 specifically, but they would be "flaws" with ANY rts game that uses fog of war. So play a different game.
Lets make a game where you have a limited amount of information, and you can take steps against each other to obtain and/or deny information.
Now lets make it possible where in that same game, you can ALWAYS have the information you need to make the correct decision.
It is a contradiction that cannot exist in reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
