|
On June 29 2014 05:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 03:58 keglu wrote:On June 29 2014 03:09 Salient wrote:On June 29 2014 02:16 Mojito99 wrote:
T v P lategame is somewhat missunderstood i feel like.
A true ghost viking composition is in theory at least on par if not stronger vs P lategame.
The issue being that in these scenarios control is key. And the T lategame army requires significantly more control then the P lategame army. Right now there are only a couple of Terrans who willingly go to the lategame vs P and their control shows it.
It becomes sort of a downward spiral: T lategame is harder to control, therefore try to end it in the midgame - but that also means you get less practice for the lategame. I sort of agree. Taeja made late game TvP look imbalanced in favor of Terran when he 4-0'd MC, 3-0'd HerO, 2-0'd Patience and Oz, and also 2-0'd a few EU foreigners (who have been known to take games or even series from Koreans) all within the course of a week. He made his opponents look kind of helpless. It was interesting to me because his opponents are known for good PvT. Team Liquid did a strategy highlight article about HerO's PvT because it was so good. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/445605-how-to-run-a-pvt-clinic-hero-at-iem Taeja on top of his game is at level ofthese top Kespa players, tier above Koreans playing in EU/US. Yeah, but if the only thing that is keeping terrans down is a lack of execution then we can just stop balance whining now and admit the game is balanced and that terrans are just lazy. You don't just ignore evidence presented of *how* to TvP just so you can say that Terrans are underpowered. What Taeja's run shows is that the two races are actually *very* close to being balanced but there is something small that is preventing lowbies from performing as well as Taeja and Maru. It can't be that the game is a hard and has a skill ceiling because TL has taught me that SC2 is ezmode. So I wonder what it is that is seperating top level players from non-top-level players...
I'm ok with late game TvP, I feel like it's in Terran player hands (neutralize/avoid AoE and win). Bio TvZ is in much worse state.
|
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote:Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Oc9x1bJ.png) Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April). Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem. All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period.
5 more ZvZ compared to TvT indicates something much more serious than the winrate itself. Only the very best Terran remains and they are the ones that still have a low winrate against good or mediocre Zerg players.
|
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote:Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post. Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April). Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem. All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period. Show nested quote +On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote:Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pKEYuFe.png) Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now. In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs. As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers. Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way. On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote:Uploading the latest Aligulac list. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wem39XJ.png) Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now. But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ.
Time for blizzard to not adress mutalisks again.
Still think they should nerf at least blink timings, if not blink and oracle timings vs Terran too. The issues still remain on so many maps (King Sejong, Frost). In general, it's nearly impossible to make only maps without ledges somewhere and expect them to differentiate from another. There is only so much you can do when you have waste tons of space around bases on empty space, while retaining useful expansions and distances.
|
On June 29 2014 06:21 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote:Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post. Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April). Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem. All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period. On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote:Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post. Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now. In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs. As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers. Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way. On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote:Uploading the latest Aligulac list. Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now. But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ. Time for blizzard to not adress mutalisks again. Still think they should nerf at least blink timings, if not blink and oracle timings vs Terran too. The issues still remain on so many maps (King Sejong, Frost). In general, it's nearly impossible to make only maps without ledges somewhere and expect them to differentiate from another. There is only so much you can do when you have waste tons of space around bases on empty space, while retaining useful expansions and distances.
Well that's why I posted about the stim timing, if stim is finished earlier it narrows the window where blink and oracle are effective.
|
On June 29 2014 06:04 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 05:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 29 2014 03:58 keglu wrote:On June 29 2014 03:09 Salient wrote:On June 29 2014 02:16 Mojito99 wrote:
T v P lategame is somewhat missunderstood i feel like.
A true ghost viking composition is in theory at least on par if not stronger vs P lategame.
The issue being that in these scenarios control is key. And the T lategame army requires significantly more control then the P lategame army. Right now there are only a couple of Terrans who willingly go to the lategame vs P and their control shows it.
It becomes sort of a downward spiral: T lategame is harder to control, therefore try to end it in the midgame - but that also means you get less practice for the lategame. I sort of agree. Taeja made late game TvP look imbalanced in favor of Terran when he 4-0'd MC, 3-0'd HerO, 2-0'd Patience and Oz, and also 2-0'd a few EU foreigners (who have been known to take games or even series from Koreans) all within the course of a week. He made his opponents look kind of helpless. It was interesting to me because his opponents are known for good PvT. Team Liquid did a strategy highlight article about HerO's PvT because it was so good. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/445605-how-to-run-a-pvt-clinic-hero-at-iem Taeja on top of his game is at level ofthese top Kespa players, tier above Koreans playing in EU/US. Yeah, but if the only thing that is keeping terrans down is a lack of execution then we can just stop balance whining now and admit the game is balanced and that terrans are just lazy. You don't just ignore evidence presented of *how* to TvP just so you can say that Terrans are underpowered. What Taeja's run shows is that the two races are actually *very* close to being balanced but there is something small that is preventing lowbies from performing as well as Taeja and Maru. It can't be that the game is a hard and has a skill ceiling because TL has taught me that SC2 is ezmode. So I wonder what it is that is seperating top level players from non-top-level players... I'm ok with late game TvP, I feel like it's in Terran player hands (neutralize/avoid AoE and win). Bio TvZ is in much worse state.
That's not even true though. Even if Terran controls perfectly, they still have to win upwards of 3-4 battles to absolutely close the game out, and if they screw up even once than protoss wins. Terran cannot pursue protoss into cannons, warpins, and backup storms, and instead must effectively starve Protoss out, but if Protoss wins a battle then they have won the game. Putting aside which army is more powerful, this is a major, major problem. Sure, if terran plays perfectly then they win, but if protoss does things like flanks with high templar, splits high templar, good warp prism harass, then terran is likely to make a couple of mistakes and those mistakes will lose him the game, as opposed to Protosses who if their whole army gets emped they can back off into reserve high templar and regenerate energy/shields, and if they lose their army they will have enough defense often to not even lose a base. (Take a game on MMA's stream yesterday, he wins a battle with protoss with around 40 supply of bio left over +medivacs with a few emps left. He naturally tries to kill a base after the battle, but he runs into a storm and Protoss warps in 15 zealots, and MMA makes a few kiting mistakes and loses the game shortly after to a fully rebuilt t3 protoss army.) But all protoss needs to do against terran is trade evenly in a battle, after which they can simply reinforce more quickly and push to a win. This, I think, is the major problem in lategame TvP and obviously Terran's army is not enough stronger than Protoss's to warrant this, especially when you factor in tempests.
|
On June 29 2014 05:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 03:58 keglu wrote:On June 29 2014 03:09 Salient wrote:On June 29 2014 02:16 Mojito99 wrote:
T v P lategame is somewhat missunderstood i feel like.
A true ghost viking composition is in theory at least on par if not stronger vs P lategame.
The issue being that in these scenarios control is key. And the T lategame army requires significantly more control then the P lategame army. Right now there are only a couple of Terrans who willingly go to the lategame vs P and their control shows it.
It becomes sort of a downward spiral: T lategame is harder to control, therefore try to end it in the midgame - but that also means you get less practice for the lategame. I sort of agree. Taeja made late game TvP look imbalanced in favor of Terran when he 4-0'd MC, 3-0'd HerO, 2-0'd Patience and Oz, and also 2-0'd a few EU foreigners (who have been known to take games or even series from Koreans) all within the course of a week. He made his opponents look kind of helpless. It was interesting to me because his opponents are known for good PvT. Team Liquid did a strategy highlight article about HerO's PvT because it was so good. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/445605-how-to-run-a-pvt-clinic-hero-at-iem Taeja on top of his game is at level ofthese top Kespa players, tier above Koreans playing in EU/US. Yeah, but if the only thing that is keeping terrans down is a lack of execution then we can just stop balance whining now and admit the game is balanced and that terrans are just lazy. You don't just ignore evidence presented of *how* to TvP just so you can say that Terrans are underpowered. What Taeja's run shows is that the two races are actually *very* close to being balanced but there is something small that is preventing lowbies from performing as well as Taeja and Maru. It can't be that the game is a hard and has a skill ceiling because TL has taught me that SC2 is ezmode. So I wonder what it is that is seperating top level players from non-top-level players...
Not really. And the reason why I say this is because it's a double edge sword. It's true, most Ts don't do late game vs P. They try to keep it in the mid game forever. However, this also means that P doesn't get much practice against the Ts that do the super late game with them. Thus they suffer from lack of experience as well(giving the edge to the late game Ts).
I mean, you can see this playing out in the current meta, really. Protoss is getting more use to Ts play style. More and more games just seem to be Protoss surviving the Ts onslaught in the mid game and moving into the late game with little damage done then just rolling them(since the Terrans are putting so much into the mid game).
That's not to say the current play style doesn't work. Infact it still seems it does pretty well. But less so now than it did before.
All I'm saying is, just because a few Terran(literally a few) are doing super late game vs P and winning doesn't really mean that Terran has a "very" good/is balanced/strat/style/w.e vs P. Just that it could be catching them off guard due to lack of experience fighting that style.
Like one of the big things with mass ghost/viking is that you can easily kill the observers and cloak the ghosts so they can do clean up. What happens when the Protoss keeps 1/2/3 observers near by to make this waaay more difficult for the Terran? Not saying that the ghost/viking ball requires you to do that, but it's one of the big advantages it has.
Anyways, just something else to think about.
|
lol you guys are still discussing tvp? IMO you guys should be trying to figure out tvz because Z is just dismantling terrans left and right.
|
On June 29 2014 11:28 Deonto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 05:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 29 2014 03:58 keglu wrote:On June 29 2014 03:09 Salient wrote:On June 29 2014 02:16 Mojito99 wrote:
T v P lategame is somewhat missunderstood i feel like.
A true ghost viking composition is in theory at least on par if not stronger vs P lategame.
The issue being that in these scenarios control is key. And the T lategame army requires significantly more control then the P lategame army. Right now there are only a couple of Terrans who willingly go to the lategame vs P and their control shows it.
It becomes sort of a downward spiral: T lategame is harder to control, therefore try to end it in the midgame - but that also means you get less practice for the lategame. I sort of agree. Taeja made late game TvP look imbalanced in favor of Terran when he 4-0'd MC, 3-0'd HerO, 2-0'd Patience and Oz, and also 2-0'd a few EU foreigners (who have been known to take games or even series from Koreans) all within the course of a week. He made his opponents look kind of helpless. It was interesting to me because his opponents are known for good PvT. Team Liquid did a strategy highlight article about HerO's PvT because it was so good. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/445605-how-to-run-a-pvt-clinic-hero-at-iem Taeja on top of his game is at level ofthese top Kespa players, tier above Koreans playing in EU/US. Yeah, but if the only thing that is keeping terrans down is a lack of execution then we can just stop balance whining now and admit the game is balanced and that terrans are just lazy. You don't just ignore evidence presented of *how* to TvP just so you can say that Terrans are underpowered. What Taeja's run shows is that the two races are actually *very* close to being balanced but there is something small that is preventing lowbies from performing as well as Taeja and Maru. It can't be that the game is a hard and has a skill ceiling because TL has taught me that SC2 is ezmode. So I wonder what it is that is seperating top level players from non-top-level players... Not really. And the reason why I say this is because it's a double edge sword. It's true, most Ts don't do late game vs P. They try to keep it in the mid game forever. However, this also means that P doesn't get much practice against the Ts that do the super late game with them. Thus they suffer from lack of experience as well(giving the edge to the late game Ts). I mean, you can see this playing out in the current meta, really. Protoss is getting more use to Ts play style. More and more games just seem to be Protoss surviving the Ts onslaught in the mid game and moving into the late game with little damage done then just rolling them(since the Terrans are putting so much into the mid game). That's not to say the current play style doesn't work. Infact it still seems it does pretty well. But less so now than it did before. All I'm saying is, just because a few Terran(literally a few) are doing super late game vs P and winning doesn't really mean that Terran has a "very" good/is balanced/strat/style/w.e vs P. Just that it could be catching them off guard due to lack of experience fighting that style. Like one of the big things with mass ghost/viking is that you can easily kill the observers and cloak the ghosts so they can do clean up. What happens when the Protoss keeps 1/2/3 observers near by to make this waaay more difficult for the Terran? Not saying that the ghost/viking ball requires you to do that, but it's one of the big advantages it has. Anyways, just something else to think about.
Except that I do not believe for a second that "terrans not going to late game often enough" is the reason Taeja and Maru are good. Their winrate does not hinge on protoss getting surprised that ghosts and vikings are units.
|
On June 29 2014 12:12 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 11:28 Deonto wrote:On June 29 2014 05:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 29 2014 03:58 keglu wrote:On June 29 2014 03:09 Salient wrote:On June 29 2014 02:16 Mojito99 wrote:
T v P lategame is somewhat missunderstood i feel like.
A true ghost viking composition is in theory at least on par if not stronger vs P lategame.
The issue being that in these scenarios control is key. And the T lategame army requires significantly more control then the P lategame army. Right now there are only a couple of Terrans who willingly go to the lategame vs P and their control shows it.
It becomes sort of a downward spiral: T lategame is harder to control, therefore try to end it in the midgame - but that also means you get less practice for the lategame. I sort of agree. Taeja made late game TvP look imbalanced in favor of Terran when he 4-0'd MC, 3-0'd HerO, 2-0'd Patience and Oz, and also 2-0'd a few EU foreigners (who have been known to take games or even series from Koreans) all within the course of a week. He made his opponents look kind of helpless. It was interesting to me because his opponents are known for good PvT. Team Liquid did a strategy highlight article about HerO's PvT because it was so good. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/445605-how-to-run-a-pvt-clinic-hero-at-iem Taeja on top of his game is at level ofthese top Kespa players, tier above Koreans playing in EU/US. Yeah, but if the only thing that is keeping terrans down is a lack of execution then we can just stop balance whining now and admit the game is balanced and that terrans are just lazy. You don't just ignore evidence presented of *how* to TvP just so you can say that Terrans are underpowered. What Taeja's run shows is that the two races are actually *very* close to being balanced but there is something small that is preventing lowbies from performing as well as Taeja and Maru. It can't be that the game is a hard and has a skill ceiling because TL has taught me that SC2 is ezmode. So I wonder what it is that is seperating top level players from non-top-level players... Not really. And the reason why I say this is because it's a double edge sword. It's true, most Ts don't do late game vs P. They try to keep it in the mid game forever. However, this also means that P doesn't get much practice against the Ts that do the super late game with them. Thus they suffer from lack of experience as well(giving the edge to the late game Ts). I mean, you can see this playing out in the current meta, really. Protoss is getting more use to Ts play style. More and more games just seem to be Protoss surviving the Ts onslaught in the mid game and moving into the late game with little damage done then just rolling them(since the Terrans are putting so much into the mid game). That's not to say the current play style doesn't work. Infact it still seems it does pretty well. But less so now than it did before. All I'm saying is, just because a few Terran(literally a few) are doing super late game vs P and winning doesn't really mean that Terran has a "very" good/is balanced/strat/style/w.e vs P. Just that it could be catching them off guard due to lack of experience fighting that style. Like one of the big things with mass ghost/viking is that you can easily kill the observers and cloak the ghosts so they can do clean up. What happens when the Protoss keeps 1/2/3 observers near by to make this waaay more difficult for the Terran? Not saying that the ghost/viking ball requires you to do that, but it's one of the big advantages it has. Anyways, just something else to think about. Except that I do not believe for a second that "terrans not going to late game often enough" is the reason Taeja and Maru are good. Their winrate does not hinge on protoss getting surprised that ghosts and vikings are units.
It's not getting surprised. It's knowing something. Completely different. And I mean obviously they are good players. Just saying there's another side to the coin.
And Maru generally does the midgame playstyle. In fact, I can't really recall a game here lately where he played a super late game vs P(a game where he doesn't try to keep it in the midgame/early lategame loop).
|
On June 29 2014 13:01 Deonto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 12:12 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 29 2014 11:28 Deonto wrote:On June 29 2014 05:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 29 2014 03:58 keglu wrote:On June 29 2014 03:09 Salient wrote:On June 29 2014 02:16 Mojito99 wrote:
T v P lategame is somewhat missunderstood i feel like.
A true ghost viking composition is in theory at least on par if not stronger vs P lategame.
The issue being that in these scenarios control is key. And the T lategame army requires significantly more control then the P lategame army. Right now there are only a couple of Terrans who willingly go to the lategame vs P and their control shows it.
It becomes sort of a downward spiral: T lategame is harder to control, therefore try to end it in the midgame - but that also means you get less practice for the lategame. I sort of agree. Taeja made late game TvP look imbalanced in favor of Terran when he 4-0'd MC, 3-0'd HerO, 2-0'd Patience and Oz, and also 2-0'd a few EU foreigners (who have been known to take games or even series from Koreans) all within the course of a week. He made his opponents look kind of helpless. It was interesting to me because his opponents are known for good PvT. Team Liquid did a strategy highlight article about HerO's PvT because it was so good. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/445605-how-to-run-a-pvt-clinic-hero-at-iem Taeja on top of his game is at level ofthese top Kespa players, tier above Koreans playing in EU/US. Yeah, but if the only thing that is keeping terrans down is a lack of execution then we can just stop balance whining now and admit the game is balanced and that terrans are just lazy. You don't just ignore evidence presented of *how* to TvP just so you can say that Terrans are underpowered. What Taeja's run shows is that the two races are actually *very* close to being balanced but there is something small that is preventing lowbies from performing as well as Taeja and Maru. It can't be that the game is a hard and has a skill ceiling because TL has taught me that SC2 is ezmode. So I wonder what it is that is seperating top level players from non-top-level players... Not really. And the reason why I say this is because it's a double edge sword. It's true, most Ts don't do late game vs P. They try to keep it in the mid game forever. However, this also means that P doesn't get much practice against the Ts that do the super late game with them. Thus they suffer from lack of experience as well(giving the edge to the late game Ts). I mean, you can see this playing out in the current meta, really. Protoss is getting more use to Ts play style. More and more games just seem to be Protoss surviving the Ts onslaught in the mid game and moving into the late game with little damage done then just rolling them(since the Terrans are putting so much into the mid game). That's not to say the current play style doesn't work. Infact it still seems it does pretty well. But less so now than it did before. All I'm saying is, just because a few Terran(literally a few) are doing super late game vs P and winning doesn't really mean that Terran has a "very" good/is balanced/strat/style/w.e vs P. Just that it could be catching them off guard due to lack of experience fighting that style. Like one of the big things with mass ghost/viking is that you can easily kill the observers and cloak the ghosts so they can do clean up. What happens when the Protoss keeps 1/2/3 observers near by to make this waaay more difficult for the Terran? Not saying that the ghost/viking ball requires you to do that, but it's one of the big advantages it has. Anyways, just something else to think about. Except that I do not believe for a second that "terrans not going to late game often enough" is the reason Taeja and Maru are good. Their winrate does not hinge on protoss getting surprised that ghosts and vikings are units. It's not getting surprised. It's knowing something. Completely different. And I mean obviously they are good players. Just saying there's another side to the coin. And Maru generally does the midgame playstyle. In fact, I can't really recall a game here lately where he played a super late game vs P(a game where he doesn't try to keep it in the midgame/early lategame loop).
Oh okay, I can see that.
Maru is most known for never making ghosts no matter how deep in the late game he gets. Its hilarious actually.
|
On June 29 2014 12:01 FreeZEternal wrote:
lol you guys are still discussing tvp? IMO you guys should be trying to figure out tvz because Z is just dismantling terrans left and right.
The numbers indicate the problem arises with both MU's. There's no sequence here, both need attention.
|
Does aligulac winrates really make any sense? The games that are taken in consideration are those played at a certain skill level. And if imbalance skews Terran player's skill levels, then fewer Terran games will be played. The only ones that are played are with those Terran players good enough to compete with all the zergs and protosses out there. Thus this way of measuring does not reflect the actual balance, it merely reflects the statistics of those matches actually being played in tournaments (saying nothing of what is going on behind the scene). It's more or less systematic cherry-picking.
|
I think the problem with the really lategame in TvP is not the army vs. army part. Even if it takes a bit more control, a ghost + viking army can indeed face a T3 protoss army and win convincingly. It is hard, but I think that's not the main issue. The main problem with lategame TvP in my opinion is that, once Terran is spread out on 4, 5 bases or more, defending Protoss harrass gets super hard. Zealots/DT run-by's, warp prism in the main/natural, Blink stalkers squads running wild, etc. Non micro'ed zealots vs. micro'ed bio is really not cost effective because of kiting. But if both sides do not micro ( say because both players are busy with their main army in a lategame situation), then 3-3 zealots because insanely cost-effective vs non-micro'ed bio. And if you add in DT's that don't get scanned straightaway, it's just a stomp.
That's, in my opinion, why going willingly into the lategame vs. P is not the favorite choice of terrans at the moment...
|
On June 29 2014 16:48 cheekymonkey wrote:
Does aligulac winrates really make any sense? The games that are taken in consideration are those played at a certain skill level. And if imbalance skews Terran player's skill levels, then fewer Terran games will be played. The only ones that are played are with those Terran players good enough to compete with all the zergs and protosses out there. Thus this way of measuring does not reflect the actual balance, it merely reflects the statistics of those matches actually being played in tournaments (saying nothing of what is going on behind the scene). It's more or less systematic cherry-picking.
Exactly, that's why population numbers have been the key metric for a while, and Aligulac gives you a kind of population indicator with the number of mirror MU's. While the winrates for T aren't great, the population numbers are very troubling.
|
On June 29 2014 16:48 cheekymonkey wrote:
Does aligulac winrates really make any sense? The games that are taken in consideration are those played at a certain skill level. And if imbalance skews Terran player's skill levels, then fewer Terran games will be played. The only ones that are played are with those Terran players good enough to compete with all the zergs and protosses out there. Thus this way of measuring does not reflect the actual balance, it merely reflects the statistics of those matches actually being played in tournaments (saying nothing of what is going on behind the scene). It's more or less systematic cherry-picking.
That argument is well-known amongst frequent discussants. The following is assumed:
Assumption
If a race A is (significantly) less represented than race B and their matchup attains a winrate a:b, then the real balance of that matchup should be considered a':b', with a'=<a and b'>=b.
In words, a less represented race should be considered weaker than the winrate suggests.
The argumentation being: only the better players even get to play many games in tournaments (or get even sent to tournaments). Thus making it so that the better players of the weaker race play more games against weak opponents of the other race, hence, raising the winrate of the underpowered race. While the worse players of the underpowered race play even less games to begin with, hence, can't compensate for that increase in winrate.
Since there are 3races and imbalance in only one matchup alone is enough to skew the representation, direct conclusions for the matchups are hard. But TvZ is probably in a very bad shape currently (since the winrates are far down). And TvP doesn't look very good either (in Korea it looks like anytime Protoss and Terrans meet in the later stages of a tournament especially in a longer series - hence proven-to-be-the-best-of-their-race-in-that-moment-of-time-players playing in a series with less random outcome - the Protoss seems to win much more than the Terran).
|
I'm starting to think this is a poor joke. Terran has been severely underperforming for 7 months, and as of yet, stats have actually been getting worse instead of better. That is downright insulting to Terran players and very, very bad for tge game in general. It's time to tackle some of the opvious flaws in this game (which can only happen in lotv) and it is time to finally buff terran majotly. Stim, Tanks, Thor, BC, Banshee, all these units have potential, but are pathetically weak... Useless, dare I say.
It may also be timw to just let go of Time Warp, Ocvercharge, Mutaspeed etcetera, and try to tone those down a bit.
|
5 more ZvZ compared to TvT indicates something much more serious than the winrate itself. Only the very best Terran remains and they are the ones that still have a low winrate against good or mediocre Zerg players.
This. The Hellbat change was never really adressing the fundamental issue. Rather, it only seemed to give terran addiitonal options between the 8th and 11:30th minute mark. But terrans were already doing decently in that time period anyway. Rather, the issue for terran is more related to the 12th-14th minute mark where zergs simply have a much stronger battling army.
I assume Blizzard thought that they would indirectly buff terran in the 12-14 minute mark by making terrans pushes stronger in the early game, thus forcing the zerg to have a couple fewer drones, but that's simply such a risky/ineffective way of balancing the game and is a ton more likely to lead to snowball situations. Like if terran becomes just a tad too strong in the early game --> he snowballs and wins easily later on.
Or if terran doens't do critical damage early game --> it snowballs in favour of zerg.
Blizzard should simply have adressed the midgame, which IMO is the real problem, and they could have done that by changing (buffing) the Widow Mine.
Blizzards Widow Mine nerf should go down in history as a change that was worse than the Queen Range buff (because at least there was a balance issue with 3range Queens as terrans could simply absolutely dominate early game with a couple of Hellions - Rather the issue back in WOL was simply the Infestor itself, not the Queen).
But 8-10 months ago, we had this TvZ matchup that worked well. Zergs had figured out how to stop the paradepush and we saw a lot more back-and-fourth games. Aliguac numbers supports (FYI), and IMO the matchup was very fun and skill-intensive for both races.
Yet, Blizzard thought Widow Mines were used too often (?) and wanted to see more Hellbats/Siege Tanks along with bio (?), so they nerfed a unit that actually rewarded micro in favor of incentivizing more usage of the Amoving Hellbats or Siege Tanks that only really rewards turtling into timing attacks + still sucks.
That's was such a poor logic by Blizzard, and would IMO be comparable to Blizzard nerfing the Banelings splash damage by 25% or something like that in order to encourage more Hydra usage.
|
On June 29 2014 17:02 LoneYoShi wrote:
I think the problem with the really lategame in TvP is not the army vs. army part. Even if it takes a bit more control, a ghost + viking army can indeed face a T3 protoss army and win convincingly. It is hard, but I think that's not the main issue. The main problem with lategame TvP in my opinion is that, once Terran is spread out on 4, 5 bases or more, defending Protoss harrass gets super hard. Zealots/DT run-by's, warp prism in the main/natural, Blink stalkers squads running wild, etc. Non micro'ed zealots vs. micro'ed bio is really not cost effective because of kiting. But if both sides do not micro ( say because both players are busy with their main army in a lategame situation), then 3-3 zealots because insanely cost-effective vs non-micro'ed bio. And if you add in DT's that don't get scanned straightaway, it's just a stomp.
That's, in my opinion, why going willingly into the lategame vs. P is not the favorite choice of terrans at the moment...
Yeh this was my argument as well (from a couple of pages back). I think if we took the harass/multitasking part out of TvP late game, so players would only focus on main battle micro, terrans would be in pretty good spot late game. And that's also why I thought giving terran free Ghost upgrade was a poor fix as well because it doesn't adress late game at all. Rather it simply makes it easier for terran to get Ghosts in midgame.
Prior to the Ghost upgrade patch, I had actually expected that Blizzard would reduce BT of Ghosts as that would have been a slightly more effective fix for the late game. Ofc it wouldn't have fixed the fundamental issue completely, but it would at least have adressed the actual issue (late game instead of midgame!)
Exactly, that's why population numbers have been the key metric for a while, and Aligulac gives you a kind of population indicator with the number of mirror MU's. While the winrates for T aren't great, the population numbers are very troubling.
Ladder statistics supports this trend as well.
- 30.39% of all players are terran on the ladder (30.5% zerg, 29.4% protoss)
- 25% of players in GM are terran (38% zerg, 35% protoss,)
- 28.44% of players in master league are terran (36.6% zerg, 32.2% protoss)
What that means: A lot of players play terran, and assuming that the average terran player = the same skill level as the average toss/zerg player, terrans should have 30.4% players in Masters/GM. Since the actual numbers are below that, ladder statistics effectively imply that the race is underpowered. And zerg seems to be the most OP race.
|
Terran should just get the fusion core drop pod upgrade already, calling down marines like mules.
|
On June 29 2014 18:03 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +5 more ZvZ compared to TvT indicates something much more serious than the winrate itself. Only the very best Terran remains and they are the ones that still have a low winrate against good or mediocre Zerg players. This. The Hellbat change was never really adressing the fundamental issue. Rather, it only seemed to give terran addiitonal options between the 8th and 11:30th minute mark. But terrans were already doing decently in that time period anyway. Rather, the issue for terran is more related to the 12th-14th minute mark where zergs simply have a much stronger battling army. I assume Blizzard thought that they would indirectly buff terran in the 12-14 minute mark by making terrans pushes stronger in the early game, thus forcing the zerg to have a couple fewer drones, but that's simply such a risky/ineffective way of balancing the game and is a ton more likely to lead to snowball situations. Like if terran becomes just a tad too strong in the early game --> he snowballs and wins easily later on. Or if terran doens't do critical damage early game --> it snowballs in favour of zerg. Blizzard should simply have adressed the midgame, which IMO is the real problem, and they could have done that by changing (buffing) the Widow Mine. Blizzards Widow Mine nerf should go down in history as a change that was worse than the Queen Range buff (because at least there was a balance issue with 3range Queens as terrans could simply absolutely dominate early game with a couple of Hellions - Rather the issue back in WOL was simply the Infestor itself, not the Queen). But 8-10 months ago, we had this TvZ matchup that worked well. Zergs had figured out how to stop the paradepush and we saw a lot more back-and-fourth games. Aliguac numbers supports (FYI), and IMO the matchup was very fun and skill-intensive for both races. Yet, Blizzard thought Widow Mines were used too often (?) and wanted to see more Hellbats/Siege Tanks along with bio (?), so they nerfed a unit that actually rewarded micro in favor of incentivizing more usage of the Amoving Hellbats or Siege Tanks that only really rewards turtling into timing attacks + still sucks. That's was such a poor logic by Blizzard, and would IMO be comparable to Blizzard nerfing the Banelings splash damage by 25% or something like that in order to encourage more Hydra usage.
Where the Hellbat patch is concerned, it may be a while before its effects are fully known. Things like this take time. Now that the WCS season is drawing to a close, the full effect of the patch (if any) will be known in the following season. Pro players generally tend to want to stick with refined known strategies rather than unrefined new ones. Will it have the desired effect? I don't know. But, it's a mistake to think that the effects of patches are instant when they can take time.
Secondly, there is some revisionism going on with your post with regard to Blizzard. Blizzard held off patching the WM for quite a while and instead sought first to give the overseer a speed buff before directly nerfing the Mine. It was nerfed in response to a tirade of persistent QQ and design concerns and cries that TvZ had become stale (4M all day every day). I remember this period well as I wrote about it in a blog post summarising my thoughts on balance and design. Also, rightly or wrongly, many Zergs did not find it fun to play and some people did not find it fun to watch (as the game was often decided at the Zerg's 4th). Do I think it should have been nerfed? No. But, you are imposing your own POV onto the past.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
