|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
On September 26 2014 22:48 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 20:25 Hider wrote:He believes that patches are no different than changing map pools and hence should be something we should be willing to easily lean to. I think that that is a load of horse shit since patches changes things way more than map changes change: not all tournaments play the same maps, not all strategies are used on the same maps. Changing a map to nerf/buff x will also do the same to all other things similar and not similar to X. No he says that patches can have the same effect as map changes. Some patch changes will ofc differ. For instance: Blink cooldown buff increase --> General blink nerf Blink being unable to go into highground --> Similar effect as changing maps. He doesn't say anywhere that every single patch always has the same effect as a map change. His second point is that by fixing core balance issues through patches, it allows mapmakers more creativity instead of being restricted by certain rules (for instance forcefields, blink restricts map design). The issue I have with you is that for some reason every debate you have been invovled in, the discussion seems to center about what people actually said/what they meant/something completely else instead of focussing on whether there is merit to their arguments. All other posters can argue "normally" against each other in this forum regardless of whether they agree or disagree. But you really seem to either completely ignore the intention of the posters or just intentionally trying to misunderstand them. There is no misunderstanding. Hence why I said to him that we have fundamental difference in opinion. Being that I responded to when he said: "That's a question of philosophy. Unless we have very good reasoning to believe that this will change on its own, patching now is better than patching later." Wherein I tell him that I don't believe we should patch constantly, that patching should be something held back as long as possible. His argument against that it is that it's no different than map changes, and hence why it should be okay. That is the core of his argument. But map changes are ephemeral and can be ignored from tournament to tournament, from season to season. GSL can think they like blink-able maps while mlg can hate it. Ladder could have gold bases while tournaments can have no gold bases. Maps can be put on a veto system, maps could also be in a draft system where each player brings his own preferred maps to each match. Map changes does not fix or repair a core problem unless the group of players playing it agree on it. Different groups of players can have different opinions an map changes allows them to craft their own micro-community where the metagame is one thing or another. Patches are changes forced upon a the totality. Even if your community LOVEs strategy X, you will lose it and be unable to play it amongst each other if the change is a patch instead of merely a shift map making philosophies. By nature they cannot be ever the same and hence cannot be comparable.
Since the WCS system took hold how much difference is there really between map pools at tournaments and even compared to ladder.
As it stands a big nerf to play styles by maps currently = a de facto nerf to said strats across the board.
Outside of 'if it exists, it is a valid strategy' absolutism, most people seem to be pretty OK with the tweaks made via patches (and a change in map pool) that made Blink builds a bit less potent vT.
|
blink-proofing maps did heavy damage to elevator based play though.
|
On September 26 2014 23:10 Meavis wrote:
blink-proofing maps did heavy damage to elevator based play though.
Also weakened reaper play, weakened defensive blink play since its now harder or stalkers to reinforce a doom dropped base, weakened colossus play with the increased number of dancing spider problems in televised games, etc...
blink proofing maps did not only affect blinking stalkers.
|
On September 26 2014 23:01 TokO wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 21:41 MstrJinbo wrote:It's really unfair that this argument never apply to widow mines though. Also that Terran's always seem to not care about the fact that a DT costs 125 gas. That's because making the argument is absurd. Widow mines: 1.) are only cloaked in one spot. The have to uncloak to move. 2.) can't attack buildings 3.) fire once every 40 seconds Basically a widow mine gets into your base and you aren't ready, it a big annoyance. If a dark Templar gets into your base, it will kill everything. You missed the argument I was objecting to. That DT's prevent move-outs and aggressive plays without bringing mobile detection. (I tried to say that this was unfair when widow mines basically negates any prolonged assault by both protoss and zerg unless they bring mobile detection with them, and for a significantly cheaper price than other races similar mechanisms such as DT's and Swarm Hosts.) The offensive capacity of the DT themselves were accounted for in the previous pages, in which I argued that the change wouldn't necessarily affect the power of the dt plays, as they would come into a play when the Terran has ample opportunity to defend. Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 21:41 MstrJinbo wrote: Basically a widow mine gets into your base and you aren't ready, it a big annoyance. If a dark Templar gets into your base, it will kill everything. This is quite a misrepresentation as well. Both counter-plays against DT and Widow Mines is similar in that you pull away units while you wait for either a scan, turret or an observer, after which you clear out the DT or Widow Mine. Their dps is of course relative to their costs. By the way, if you didn't read the posts, this isn't a discussion whether there is any imbalance in the units. It's more about the lack of diversity in styles and builds.
I take it you don't play Zerg much. We attack when widow mines are on the field all the time. Having overseers helps but if you are good at baiting out mine shots you are fine. DTs, nope can't leave your base. With mines you can go around it, you can bait out shots. You can't do that with DT.
Again mines can't attack buildings, so turrets are an option there. It a DT is in your base, good luck getting a turret up. Scans and air based detectors are your only option. For Terran and Protoss (and Zerg without a lair) that takes time, during which DT has free reign of the base. Most turrets build quicker than the mines cooldown, so no they are not the same. There is a reason the tech path for DTs is longer and more costly.
All in all, you are putting a solution to a problem that I don't think exists. Protoss has very good harrass potential in the midgame. Stargate, warp prisms, proxy pylons warping in zealots. What you want is harrass potential with little investment in every situation. You know what, Robo is pretty essential in all match ups. So are pylons. Look at top Protoss play, you have constant counters from proxy pylons and warp prisms (DTs included) all the time. They don't seem to have problems on that front. So I don't see any need to impower the already strong 2 base tech plays with even cheaper DTs.
|
On September 26 2014 23:45 MstrJinbo wrote: I take it you don't play Zerg much. We attack when widow mines are on the field all the time. Having overseers helps but if you are good at baiting out mine shots you are fine. DTs, nope can't leave your base. With mines you can go around it, you can bait out shots. You can't do that with DT.
Again mines can't attack buildings, so turrets are an option there. It a DT is in your base, good luck getting a turret up. Scans and air based detectors are your only option. For Terran and Protoss (and Zerg without a lair) that takes time, during which DT has free reign of the base. Most turrets build quicker than the mines cooldown, so no they are not the same. There is a reason the tech path for DTs is longer and more costly.
First of all, it's unfair that you compare the worst case scenario in case of DT harass with the best case scenario of Widow Mine harass, in terms of the defender. You don't compare the best case scenario of both harasses and think about how the outlook for each side is after. In the case of the Protoss player, he tends to have to scramble for AoE, while the Widow Mine requires a very small investment from Terran to access. As a result, you see widow mines being mixed into TvP play very often, while the absence of any templar tech at all is very scarcely seen.
Secondly, Terrans and Zergs upon scouting Stargate, have no issue with investing in static defense. Why does the merging of Templar techs have to represent such an unsolvable issue for both races, when they probably both agree that playing against chargelot templar styles are easier and hence require less resources in order to be in equal footing in terms of the armies.
((EDIT: Just saying as I'm ignoring some parts of your argument, as I never said that a single Widow Mine was as potent as a DT. Of course, given their cost, a DT should be about 4 times as dangerous as a single Widow Mine.))
On September 26 2014 23:45 MstrJinbo wrote:All in all, you are putting a solution to a problem that I don't think exists. Protoss has very good harrass potential in the midgame. Stargate, warp prisms, proxy pylons warping in zealots. What you want is harrass potential with little investment in every situation. You know what, Robo is pretty essential in all match ups. So are pylons. Look at top Protoss play, you have constant counters from proxy pylons and warp prisms (DTs included) all the time. They don't seem to have problems on that front. So I don't see any need to impower the already strong 2 base tech plays with even cheaper DTs.
It's not harass potential in every situation, it's harass potential in the case that a weaker tech path is chosen. Comparable potential for other races would e.g. be blue flame hellion runby's with mech, mutalisks inherent mobility with muta-ling play. Both force the opposing player to stay at home to the same degree that DT would. With HotS, the core compositions of Terran and Zerg had their tempo upped considerably, given the buffs to medivacs and mutalisks. Protoss received buffs to the phoenix, but the phoenix isn't as much of a core unit as the opposing races, which meant that the regular ground-based compositions of Protoss has considerably lower tempo.
Also, your last sentence really make no sense, as I in no way suggested to make DTs cheaper. If anything, DT tech would be more expensive. DTs themselves would still have the same cost, hence, making the cost-reward relation still be similar.
|
On September 26 2014 16:29 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 16:25 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
Dreamhack will be a good tournament to see the overall balance now, all races have good players there.
I really want to see how the top zergs hold themselves in TvZ now. One single tournament is never a good way to judge balance. But yeah, pretty hyped for the tournament. soO is hopefully gonna wreck through it.
I'm not looking at just one tournament, but Terrans keep saying Terran players are just better everytime they do well in tournaments.
They really can't use that excuse here.
|
On September 27 2014 00:33 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 16:29 Big J wrote:On September 26 2014 16:25 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
Dreamhack will be a good tournament to see the overall balance now, all races have good players there.
I really want to see how the top zergs hold themselves in TvZ now. One single tournament is never a good way to judge balance. But yeah, pretty hyped for the tournament. soO is hopefully gonna wreck through it. I'm not looking at just one tournament, but Terrans keep saying Terran players are just better everytime they do well in tournaments. They really can't use that excuse here.
Classic is going to beat herO
Life is going to cheese out soO
then Classic will beat Life and then brainfart against *put some random Protoss name here* and then it's going to be TvT until the finals 
|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
On September 27 2014 00:33 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 16:29 Big J wrote:On September 26 2014 16:25 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
Dreamhack will be a good tournament to see the overall balance now, all races have good players there.
I really want to see how the top zergs hold themselves in TvZ now. One single tournament is never a good way to judge balance. But yeah, pretty hyped for the tournament. soO is hopefully gonna wreck through it. I'm not looking at just one tournament, but Terrans keep saying Terran players are just better everytime they do well in tournaments. They really can't use that excuse here.
I really think this is overstating it. This is brought out when people use Korean Ts like Taeja, Polt et al beating down on foreigners as proof of T imbalance.
|
On September 27 2014 00:46 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2014 00:33 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:On September 26 2014 16:29 Big J wrote:On September 26 2014 16:25 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
Dreamhack will be a good tournament to see the overall balance now, all races have good players there.
I really want to see how the top zergs hold themselves in TvZ now. One single tournament is never a good way to judge balance. But yeah, pretty hyped for the tournament. soO is hopefully gonna wreck through it. I'm not looking at just one tournament, but Terrans keep saying Terran players are just better everytime they do well in tournaments. They really can't use that excuse here. I really think this is overstating it. This is brought out when people use Korean Ts like Taeja, Polt et al beating down on foreigners as proof of T imbalance.
I don't think I've ever seen it used for Taeja vs foreigners; I have definitely seen it for Taeja vs Koreans though.
The time I saw it used most was like early 2014, when everyone was arguing that Protoss was imbalanced, but Taeja kept winning stuff, which was highly inconvenient for the balance whiners. To roughly paraphrase...
(totally made up quotes)
"Taeja won Homestory Cup 9"
"Doesn't count, Jaedong, Scarlett, MC, Bomber, Jjakji, and Stork are bad."
"Taeja won Dreamhack Summer without dropping a map"
"Doesn't count, Jaedong, MC, HerO, San, First, Patience, and Hyun are bad."
"Taeja won IEM Shenzen"
"Doesn't count, Zest, Jaedong, San, Solar, Innovation, and TRUE are bad."
Which...there can be truth to these arguments, since I've seen cases in other games where someone was just better than everyone else. Take SSBM, which is objectively provably not balanced, but which was dominated for years by a Peach player, when Peach has never been top tier. The difference there was, the gap between the best Peach player and the second best Peach player was enormous...like...1st place at Evo vs...round of 32, maybe? This hasn't really been the case with Terran. There's no clear best in the world at Terran, although sure, Taeja is one of the candidates.
|
Wait, only forgg left in the top 8 at dreamhack? I thought T was imba now?
|
On September 27 2014 22:31 johnbongham wrote:
Wait, only forgg left in the top 8 at dreamhack? I thought T was imba now?
The terran lineup was the weakest by far and the strongest one were elimiated by Soo or in TvTs...
|
Soo is more imba than T :D
|
On September 27 2014 22:42 Kuchikikun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2014 22:31 johnbongham wrote:
Wait, only forgg left in the top 8 at dreamhack? I thought T was imba now? The terran lineup was the weakest by far and the strongest one were elimiated by Soo or in TvTs...
Oh no, other races using Terran's own argument against them!
Maybe there's some truth to it? 
I agree, weak-ish Terran player pool this tournament compared to Z representation, and Z's doing surprisingly well vP this tournament.
|
On September 28 2014 00:07 Pursuit_ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2014 22:42 Kuchikikun wrote:On September 27 2014 22:31 johnbongham wrote:
Wait, only forgg left in the top 8 at dreamhack? I thought T was imba now? The terran lineup was the weakest by far and the strongest one were elimiated by Soo or in TvTs... Oh no, other races using Terran's own argument against them! Maybe there's some truth to it? I agree, weak-ish Terran player pool this tournament compared to Z representation, and Z's doing surprisingly well vP this tournament.
It's the same Terran bonjwa's as always. MMA, jjakji, Polt all were there (Taeja not, but one is always missing). The only outstanding non-regular tournament attandees here are Classic, herO and soO. And nearly every tournament has some of those.
The situation at this tournament is not that different to the other ones
Terrans won those tournaments because someone wins when good players play against each other. But it was neither to expected, nor unexpected (judging by playerquality). If we went through each tournament in detail, there'd be some where a Terran won and Terran had the best lineup, and some where a Terran won but some other race had a better lineup. And some where no Terran won to begin with.
|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
I'd definitely have Solar up there, unless you're counting him as a regular attendee which I suppose he is getting to be
|
On September 28 2014 01:08 Wombat_NI wrote:
I'd definitely have Solar up there, unless you're counting him as a regular attendee which I suppose he is getting to be
Yes, Solar is pretty good too and not a regular. Didn't really want to put him up there with soO, Classic and herO, but he's absolutely capable of taking this.
|
Northern Ireland25073 Posts
I'd have him down as a more dangerous opponent than Classic, although that's probably being a bit harsh on the latter
|
On September 28 2014 00:28 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2014 00:07 Pursuit_ wrote:On September 27 2014 22:42 Kuchikikun wrote:On September 27 2014 22:31 johnbongham wrote:
Wait, only forgg left in the top 8 at dreamhack? I thought T was imba now? The terran lineup was the weakest by far and the strongest one were elimiated by Soo or in TvTs... Oh no, other races using Terran's own argument against them! Maybe there's some truth to it? I agree, weak-ish Terran player pool this tournament compared to Z representation, and Z's doing surprisingly well vP this tournament. It's the same Terran bonjwa's as always. MMA, jjakji, Polt all were there (Taeja not, but one is always missing). The only outstanding non-regular tournament attandees here are Classic, herO and soO. And nearly every tournament has some of those. The situation at this tournament is not that different to the other ones Terrans won those tournaments because someone wins when good players play against each other. But it was neither to expected, nor unexpected (judging by playerquality). If we went through each tournament in detail, there'd be some where a Terran won and Terran had the best lineup, and some where a Terran won but some other race had a better lineup. And some where no Terran won to begin with.
Bomber, Flash, Innovation are also missing and often travel (although maybe Innovation wont be travelling as much now?). So are Maru, Cure and Reality but they don't travel outside of Korea often (I think?).
And in the past Terran's were arguing that when Taeja (the best Terran at the time aside from possibly Maru) won a tournament (such as HSC IX) with low Z / P representation (MC, Patience, Stork, Jaedong, Scarlett, Snute being the 3 best of their respective races at the tournament), it wasn't that Terran was suddenly doing well, it was that Taeja was just outplaying his opponents. In a tournament with Zest / Rain / herO / soO / Soulkey / Solar, Terran's were arguing Taeja's chances of winning would have been much worse.
Now I'm just saying that a tournament with normal Terran representation missing a lot of the big name Terrans with top Z/P representation doesn't mean Terran isn't too strong atm, it just means the Top Z/P players are capable of winning vs MMA / ForGG / Jjakji / Polt (and especially with Polt and MMA, the two I would say are potentially in the Top5 of Terran players atm, falling out in TvT).
|
soO is playing really disgustingly for a Zerg who lost his pool and lair. Holy shit. Looking forward to the GSL finals.
Zerg not OP though, but looks like the a-move is pretty good against widow mines. Zerglings seems to distance themselves better than when people are doing the split surround play where everything hits at the same time.
|
On September 28 2014 03:22 TokO wrote:
soO is playing really disgustingly for a Zerg who lost his pool and lair. Holy shit. Looking forward to the GSL finals.
Zerg not OP though, but looks like the a-move is pretty good against widow mines. Zerglings seems to distance themselves better than when people are doing the split surround play where everything hits at the same time.
The only reason he looked that strong is forgg is not playing anywhere near as well as other people have with that style. If soo walked into the booth and played like that vs innovation in august 2013 he'd be wrecked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
