EPTthats why theres a million terrans in Code S and 0 protoss.
At lower levels it doesn't really matter but it sucks to watch GSL and watch every protoss get butt raped.
Why cannot the SC-community accept imbalance? - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Lewan72
United States381 Posts
thats why theres a million terrans in Code S and 0 protoss. At lower levels it doesn't really matter but it sucks to watch GSL and watch every protoss get butt raped. | ||
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
Other than that, I also don't really agree with the comparison being made because the balance in a RTS is a lot more important than in a fighting game. Don't get me wrong, I do not intend to say that fighting games are skill less or anything, in fact the mechanical skill required to play them might be harder than SC2 - probably not than SC:BW tho - but it's more like yeah... a RTS with 3 races is really only fun if all 3 races are somewhat balanced. In a fighting game you have a lot more characters than there's races in SC2 as many already mentioned, it means if one race is unplayable you only have 2 left to play. If one out of 10 characters has no chance to win that is obviously not as bad as one race being unplayable. Other than this comparison I generally agree with you that SC2 is yet balanced at all, it is also very much too early to be able to even tell that. The current "imbalances" are caused by both, new patches and metagame shifts. Also people seem to forget that theres atleast 2 more expansions coming up that will completely throw off the current balance, let alone all the patches that are soon to come again. Before all expansions have been released, Blizzard stop to be agressive with the patching and gives the game (and us, the gamers) the time to balance out it self we just can not tell if it is balanced or not - we can only claim it is imbalanced right now - don't forget that NOTHING of what we have in our hands is final yet. Give it time. Accept there will be imbalance for a few more years. Or just give the game a break for some time if you don't like that fact. Just my two cents.  | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On August 13 2011 11:58 Lewan72 wrote: I hate people who say even if the game imbalance it doesn't affect results. thats why theres a million terrans in Code S and 0 protoss. At lower levels it doesn't really matter but it sucks to watch GSL and watch every protoss get butt raped. There are actually currently 8 Protoss, 17 Terrans and 7 Zergs in Code S. The GSL in general is a very small sample and at the top, each race has had success. There have been 2 Terran champions, with 3 golds, there have been two Zerg champions with 4 golds, there has been one Protoss champion with 2 golds. In addition, outside Korea you still see a fair bit of success for each race. | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
| ||
|
ScaSully
United States488 Posts
| ||
|
sevia
United States954 Posts
If you're willing to lay out a reasoned explanation as to why one race or build is completely imbalanced and needs to be patched, we're willing to listen. But you had better have damn good evidence, because based on match statistics from high-level tournaments and leagues, SC2 is pretty well balanced. Imbalance is a hundred zergs losing to one terran, not one zerg losing to a hundred terrans. | ||
|
T0fuuu
Australia2275 Posts
Also the sample size for non-mirror match ups is quite small compared to mirror so it often pushes statistics one way or the other. In korea almost half the games played in gsl are tvt and in the foreigner scene there seems to be more top protoss and terran towards the top. Some people take this as a sign of imbalance itself but if you look on sc2ranks etc there is no 1 race that dominates every region. If the game was truly broken then we would see only 1 race being good in every region. | ||
|
tyCe
Australia2542 Posts
| ||
|
sCfO20
176 Posts
I'm paraphrasing, but it certainly does hold a lot of truth. Did you see Genius hold that banshee tank timing from ThorZain? | ||
|
Azureflames
United States35 Posts
On August 13 2011 11:53 skirmisheR wrote:You misunderstood the FoW. What I meant was that there is things you can't react to in SF4 as well as there are things you cannot react to in SC2. If your opponent hides his build or relies on hidden info the game becomes more of a coinflip. The same applies to SF4, if your opponent blindcounters what you are doing you lose even if you are the better player overall. SC2 is still an RTS and SF4 is still a fighting game, but the FoW in SC2 has a counterpart in SF4. Excuse my english. The idea of playing 'standard' in SC2 is to use a build that is resilient to early game pressure/surprises while still developing your economy. Later in the game it is very possible to scout your opponents unit composition and tech buildings. Often times a lack of information(despite several scouting attempts) on your opponent can be very telling as to what they are doing. Advanced timing knowledge and being able to extrapolate what your opponent is doing from small amounts of information is key to limiting/eliminating "coin flips". E.g. scouting your opponent has x number of sentries at a specific point in the game and knowing that he has too many to be doing a heavy tech build. Another often important piece of information is quick counting drones at Zerg bases and/or noticing what hatches from eggs. Both of those can be very telling as to what a Zerg player is going to do in the short-term. A lot of people feel that ZvZ can be a coin flip of a match up yet Nestea boasts a powerful 92% win rate, 23-2. Hard to argue against those results. You don't have to react to everything that happens in StarCraft II. A lot of times preparation is the most important. E.g. getting and evo chamber + a spore or two at the timing of DT's/banshees or an early lair if you feel you need it or can get away with it. | ||
|
corvalliswolf
United States9 Posts
| ||
|
Datum
United States371 Posts
| ||
|
-_-
United States7081 Posts
Anybody else feel like the Bisu Build Order is really: 1) Fast expo. 2) Build a ton of corsairs and dts. 3) Pray Zerg forgets how to build overlords and spore colonies. LOL.I'm sick of the balance talk. I don't think I'm going to read any more balance threads period. I just like playing my favorite game :D (PS: I never had the multitasking required to control either dt sair or dt reaver :p) | ||
|
LegendaryZ
United States1583 Posts
On August 13 2011 11:49 LilClinkin wrote: I'll just assume you aren't very good at RTS or fighting games to have made this statement. At high levels of play, the genres are extremely similar. The only true difference is mechanics. At high levels, strategy plays a big part in NASCAR. The same is true about tennis, Counterstrike, Pac Man, and competitive pistol shooting. But all the genres are extremely similar. The only true difference is the mechanics... -_- See what I did there? As for the OP, LOL at saying Daigo switched to a high tier from mid tier. Which mid tier character was that? The character with almost no bad matchups? Daigo always played a high tier character. Maybe not top tier like Yun, but definitely on the higher end of the scale. As for why there's a difference in views on balance, people whine about imbalance in both games. It's just a little bit more accepted in fighting games because it's unreasonable to make every character viable. There's certainly plenty of bitching when there are a select few god tier characters, though. | ||
|
Altar
United States577 Posts
| ||
|
Maghetti
United States2429 Posts
| ||
|
Cyrak
Canada536 Posts
This has become so common within the scene that it's recognized as a pointless argument and thus is shunned. It is also how legitimate imbalances can be completely ignored. The end result is that Blizzard is going to do what they're going to do and whatever they do decide to do won't be based on what happens in a post on the forums. Thus it's better for TL mods to shut down pointless balance arguments before they completely overtake the forums the way they have on the official battle.net ones. | ||
|
lbmaian
United States689 Posts
| ||
|
lizzard_warish
589 Posts
On August 13 2011 11:17 mprs wrote: No, imbalance is when the rewards of an action far outweighs its risk, and consistently outdoes the standard responses of other races. By your POV we literally should never create a balance patch, ever ever ever ever ever, because we never ever will have tried any and all variations of possible responses. Saying the game is imbalanced implies that you have tried every possible thing, and there is no way to win. This hasn't happened yet. Until it happens, it is not called imbalance and it is called giving up. Please attempt to make logically coherent posts in the future. ------ People complain about imbalance because there is only three races, and the game is competitive. We dont want to be narrowed into into one or two races, or accept that were playing with out hands tied behind our back, because of the laziness of developers. | ||
|
ZergMaestro
United States169 Posts
Saying SC2 isn't balanced shits all over the players who do win. | ||
| ||
