|
I think at some point (probably not here) a discussion should be had among rational people about the nature and goals of game balance, and only then have a discussion about specific situations where it is relevant, how to address it, and why you addressed it.
Because I think the question has gotten kind of off-track here, mostly because we're all using different definitions for "imbalance". We should define what we think balance and imbalance are and then define how we want it applied.
Everyone wants some imbalance. Imbalance of results, for example. The player who is playing better at the moment should usually win. If he happens to be Terran, or Protoss, or Zerg, that should not come into play. If (keep in mind that this is hypothetical and has no basis in reality) all Zerg players were just outright better, than they should all have more wins.
Racial imbalance is another thing. Do you want perfect racial balance? All three races are now exactly the same, except for completely superficial aspects. Even their in game "sizes" will be equalized despite appearances. All the same skills, all the same buildings, all the same everything. All the same. Does that really sound all that fun? It would be cool if you really love that one race and love the mirror match-up, but personally, I like having to plan my strategy around my opponents race. I like the fact that if I play against a Zerg the same way I do against a Terran, I will probably lose. I like that Zerg is sometimes a better race for certain situations, but that Terran is also better in some areas or situations.
I guess what I mean when I say "balance" is a "balance of opportunities." Not that I will win if I engage a Zerg in a choke, but that I might. Not that the Zerg will win if he faces my (Terran) army in the middle of an open field. Just that he might. I'm even okay with it being probable, in certain situations, that he will win if we engage in a certain way. I think at the beginning of the game, and in most (but not all) situations throughout the game, we should have a roughly equal chance of winning. That's where it gets hard though, because I do like soft-counters, and I do like hard-counters, so I do like a little bit of "don't let (insert race here) do that, because then it becomes very hard for (insert race here) to deal with it" and I want some of that to remain.
In the end, I think we should all step back and consider these things and then ask ourselves, how imbalanced is this game, really? Looking at the highest levels with no emotion, no "my favorite player who is totally awesome just lost or won", no "my favorite race isn't (or is) dominating". Just look at the facts of the game (not win ratios) and races and ask how imbalanced it is.
Then, and only then, should people start talking about how to fix perceived imbalances.
|
On January 05 2012 03:58 meadbert wrote:
Foreign Terrans are doing well. Kas is #1 among foreigners on TLPD right now.
Except the next top 3 foreign players are protoss and imo all those 3 protoss have much better PVT than inca..
|
At the top Protoss is by far the worse race statistically. Look at elos. Look at GSLs. Glaring absence of protoss at the tippy top/winners. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV ....In addition race representation is not evenly distribted @ 33%. Zerg has that problem as well of only about 20-25% zerg in GSL but at least they win or take second pretty regularly and are ranked high in ELO unlike Protoss.
I don't know if it's just protoss players arnt as good as thier Zerg and Terran compatrioits or something is wrong with the game accounting for these statistics. BW was/is similar as well strangly enough. I tend to think Protoss is pigionholed into just a few builds due to it's underperforming airforce and becomes predictable and countered for the pros. Who knows -we probably need more time. Strats impossible or nearly impossible to hold need a look at. Right now I think 1/1/1 and some bunker rushes for zerg are still an issue.
|
On November 27 2011 23:09 hugman wrote:
He's right though.
Missing a MULE doesn't halt your SCV production, while missing an Inject does
Last time I checked, zergs could still produce units without using a Queen... nothing is "halted" from missing an injection.
|
On January 12 2012 22:08 tdt wrote:At the top Protoss is by far the worse race statistically. Look at elos. Look at GSLs. Glaring absence of protoss at the tippy top/winners. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV ....In addition race representation is not evenly distribted @ 33%. Zerg has that problem as well of only about 20-25% zerg in GSL but at least they win or take second pretty regularly and are ranked high in ELO unlike Protoss. I don't know if it's just protoss players arnt as good as thier Zerg and Terran compatrioits or something is wrong with the game accounting for these statistics. BW was/is similar as well strangly enough. I tend to think Protoss is pigionholed into just a few builds due to it's underperforming airforce and becomes predictable and countered for the pros. Who knows -we probably need more time. Strats impossible or nearly impossible to hold need a look at. Right now I think 1/1/1 and some bunker rushes for zerg are still an issue.
korean terrans are miles ahead of the other races. that's why there's so many in gsl
|
Inject vs Mule cs Chrono never stops being discussed lol. But what you have to do is to look at the complete mechanical process for a race. While the Inject might me the most important not to miss, zerg can still stockpile larva, something that neither protoss or terran can do. So this discussion can go on for ever.
|
On January 13 2012 00:20 dhe95 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2012 22:08 tdt wrote:At the top Protoss is by far the worse race statistically. Look at elos. Look at GSLs. Glaring absence of protoss at the tippy top/winners. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV ....In addition race representation is not evenly distribted @ 33%. Zerg has that problem as well of only about 20-25% zerg in GSL but at least they win or take second pretty regularly and are ranked high in ELO unlike Protoss. I don't know if it's just protoss players arnt as good as thier Zerg and Terran compatrioits or something is wrong with the game accounting for these statistics. BW was/is similar as well strangly enough. I tend to think Protoss is pigionholed into just a few builds due to it's underperforming airforce and becomes predictable and countered for the pros. Who knows -we probably need more time. Strats impossible or nearly impossible to hold need a look at. Right now I think 1/1/1 and some bunker rushes for zerg are still an issue. korean terrans are miles ahead of the other races. that's why there's so many in gsl
change korean terrans with terran design then you have a true statement
|
On January 05 2012 03:38 Jenia6109 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 03:33 meadbert wrote:On January 05 2012 02:10 keglu wrote:On January 05 2012 01:21 meadbert wrote:
PvT is heavily imbalanced at the highest level right now and race winrates are hiding it.
Just look at ELO on team liquid. The best PvT player in Korea is Inca right now, but there are 11 Terrans who have higher TvP ELOs than his PvT. Despite being the best PvT player in the world he will be the underdog against most Code S Terrans.
The race winrates have been hiding the imbalance, because the previous Code S had 5 Protoss and about 20 Terran. The result is that while Protoss wins 41% of its games vs Terran, if it had been the 10 best Protoss vs the 10 best Terran it would have been much worse. My program that is similar to ELO considers win rates when the two players are even ranked within their respective races (If you are #4 Protoss I consider vs #2-#8 Terran) and I am currently seeing PvT at 32% in Korea.
If Inca was best PvTer in the world your race would be in big trouble. Luckily he's not. Who is best PvTer in world in your opinion? As I see there are no Protoss that plays on level of MVP/Nestea/MMA/DongRaGue right now. So that's why Protoss winrate is so low.
Well, I think HerO is in PvZ, actually, that guy pulls off impossible stuff :o! and it works!
|
Norway10161 Posts
I have not so much a problem with balance (me losing is because I am really really bad at the game), but I feel like sc2 is a bit "set". This will be from a terran perspective because quite honestly I couldnt kill an undefended base as z or p.
Let me elaborate.
For example, SK Terran is no good vs zerg. Fungal hardcounters bio to uselessness. Banelings slaughter bio with no tanks. And vs protoss mech is useless, but at the same time Vikings is not optional at all. With enough colossus and storm bio is useless. But mech is useless as well.
So basicly bio with Vikings is the game vs protoss, while marine/tank is the game vs zerg. Alternatives are basicly funny kinds of harass or allins before the good stuff comes out.
Is it just me, or does it seem like sc2 need some work on varations?
|
United States15275 Posts
On January 13 2012 04:30 ToKoreaWithLove wrote:
I have not so much a problem with balance (me losing is because I am really really bad at the game), but I feel like sc2 is a bit "set". This will be from a terran perspective because quite honestly I couldnt kill an undefended base as z or p.
Let me elaborate.
For example, SK Terran is no good vs zerg. Fungal hardcounters bio to uselessness. Banelings slaughter bio with no tanks. And vs protoss mech is useless, but at the same time Vikings is not optional at all. With enough colossus and storm bio is useless. But mech is useless as well.
So basicly bio with Vikings is the game vs protoss, while marine/tank is the game vs zerg. Alternatives are basicly funny kinds of harass or allins before the good stuff comes out.
Is it just me, or does it seem like sc2 need some work on varations?
The problem is that there is no SK Terran in SC2. The Raven does not fill out the role of the Science Vessel well enough to serve as a substitute.
Bio with stim is cost-effective against banelings, provided you split well.
Mech works in TvZ. Yes, mech is generally bad in TvP.
Your basic complaint seems to be less about "less variations in SC2" and more about "why are some unit compositions only made in certain matchups, and why are some unit compositions completely ignored?". Those are very different questions.
|
Why are people still comparing mules and injects? They are completely different.
Injects are almost 100% of zerg's macro, mule is a tiny portion of terran's macro
|
On January 13 2012 05:28 iky43210 wrote:
mule is a tiny portion of terran's macro
If you mean the level of mechanical dificulity it takes to exectue,than I see your point,but I hope you don't mean something else.
|
On December 31 2011 16:14 Asymptote1 wrote:
And let me tell you something obvious that all protoss players know, regardless of the the shield damage of EMP, if protoss cant use their casters, it loses the engagement every single time and thats a fact
Let me tell you something obvious that all terran players know, regardless of the range of emp/storm, if one storm hits your clumped marines, it is a lost engagement even if you emp every single templar afterwards.
|
On January 13 2012 04:21 ToastieNL wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 03:38 Jenia6109 wrote:On January 05 2012 03:33 meadbert wrote:On January 05 2012 02:10 keglu wrote:On January 05 2012 01:21 meadbert wrote:
PvT is heavily imbalanced at the highest level right now and race winrates are hiding it.
Just look at ELO on team liquid. The best PvT player in Korea is Inca right now, but there are 11 Terrans who have higher TvP ELOs than his PvT. Despite being the best PvT player in the world he will be the underdog against most Code S Terrans.
The race winrates have been hiding the imbalance, because the previous Code S had 5 Protoss and about 20 Terran. The result is that while Protoss wins 41% of its games vs Terran, if it had been the 10 best Protoss vs the 10 best Terran it would have been much worse. My program that is similar to ELO considers win rates when the two players are even ranked within their respective races (If you are #4 Protoss I consider vs #2-#8 Terran) and I am currently seeing PvT at 32% in Korea.
If Inca was best PvTer in the world your race would be in big trouble. Luckily he's not. Who is best PvTer in world in your opinion? As I see there are no Protoss that plays on level of MVP/Nestea/MMA/DongRaGue right now. So that's why Protoss winrate is so low. Well, I think HerO is in PvZ, actually, that guy pulls off impossible stuff :o! and it works!
I honestly thought he would be the next Protoss hero (no pun intended) but it really doesn't look like he's that strong in Korea, even his PvZ looks pretty mediocre there.
|
On January 13 2012 04:30 ToKoreaWithLove wrote:
I have not so much a problem with balance (me losing is because I am really really bad at the game), but I feel like sc2 is a bit "set". This will be from a terran perspective because quite honestly I couldnt kill an undefended base as z or p.
Let me elaborate.
For example, SK Terran is no good vs zerg. Fungal hardcounters bio to uselessness. Banelings slaughter bio with no tanks. And vs protoss mech is useless, but at the same time Vikings is not optional at all. With enough colossus and storm bio is useless. But mech is useless as well.
So basicly bio with Vikings is the game vs protoss, while marine/tank is the game vs zerg. Alternatives are basicly funny kinds of harass or allins before the good stuff comes out.
Is it just me, or does it seem like sc2 need some work on varations?
Yeah i think there's quite a lot of people who are getting bored by the little diversity that the game shows at this point, 18 months after the release. I'm really bored by seeing the same stuff over and over again in most of the matchups. Like TvZ MarineTank against LingBlingMuta. As a master random player who refuses to learn builds i still have some fun because i like to try crazy stuff, but as a viewer of tournaments i'm starting to lose my interest in matches that are not the highest of prolevel.
I hope so much that the Zerg expansion brings instability into the game.
|
On December 31 2011 16:14 Asymptote1 wrote:
EDIT: If anyone could do me a favour and repost this on the official blizzard sc2 forums in general or where ever I would deeply appreciate it, I cant use their forums at the moment so would be nice if someone could repost for me.
Blizzard brought patch 1.4.2 a couple months back, and things seemed to be going ok for a little while, but as the dust is settling all I can say is that the game is probably more broken then it has ever been. Mid masters toss btw.
PvZ, Now honestly this matchup has been completely in the gutter since the early part of the year with the infestor craze but now its a little bit too much, with the mass muta style on the rise, protoss continually finds itself almost forced into awkward base trade scenarios that it can never win because of mass spine crawler walls that preven the toss from actually getting the zergs base. And the spine crawler wall strat isnt even exclusive to the muta style, practically any style works terrific with it because it nullifies the possibility for protoss to counter attack, or just do a normal attack ever.
The biggest problem I find with this matchup is probably the infestor, I cant believe that people stopped using this thing even after it was only tapped on the head with the lightest nerfs possible, the root on fungal is still rigged, and believe me I use High Templar every single game against zerg without fail and I know for a fact feedback is not a viable solution seeing as how the same range issue that existed during the infestor craze still exists now, and the movement speed issues between the two casters also exist which makes it easier for the faster moving caster (the infestor).
In all honesty, I do believe the infestor has been overnerfed. NP is now down to 7 range which means any spare colossus can easily target down infestors that are using NP with two hits.
In fact, the only reason infestor/ling was popular wasn't at all because of the infestor - it was because zerg finally had a strat where they had an abundance of units with equal - or sometimes better upgrades then protoss. The infestor was mearly there to keep colossus numbers in check. Without the ability for infestors to do even that - infestor builds are rather weak all around.
Then you go on to complain about caster speed.... which honestly I'm not even going to bother countering... Its like saying "Zealot needs to be nerfed because it has better dps then a zergling"
As for your complaining paragraph about mutalisks - have you even tried doing what HuK, naniwa and other top protoss do? You cant play the same way against mutalisks as you would roach/corrupter, you'd die. Mutalisks are annoying and they want a base trade - meaning they cant stand up in a straight up fight. Its been proven over and over again. Thats not a balance issue thats just a tactical error on your part to favour base trading.
|
On January 12 2012 22:08 tdt wrote:
At the top Protoss is by far the worse race statistically.
The worst race by what measure? Surely it isnt all of them. They have 3/5 in the TLPD foreigner top 5 right now, so thats one measure of high level play. NA GM is 40% Protoss right now, so that's one measure of high level play. For the first time ever, NA GM Protosses have the highest win rate.
You see that I'm not talking about Korea, and I see that too. IMO Korean Terrans like MMA, MVP & perhaps Jijakji are the best players in the world. Comparable Zergs are DRG, Nestea, Idra (in TvZ, yea im tossin him in there). Comparable Protosses are Hero and MC. MC plays a really greasy style and Hero is still a rising star. Koreans like Terran more because of the high micro capabilities, Boxer's fame and because there are more Korean Terrans to learn from.
Lets imagine a hypothetical scenario.
Terran is OP at the start of the game
More people play Terran and do well
Terran is nerfed
All the shitty Terrans stop doing well
There is still an abundance of top terrans
There are now more top Terrans to learn from, benefitting the Terran community as a whole.
What Protosses can you learn from?
You cant really "learn" how to all in like MC, because its all about his unit control. You can steal builds from Tyler, I guess, but he isn't really a top player. You can learn from Hero, but again, his skills are simply sick unit control.
The best player to learn from, at least in PvZ, is SlayerSBrown. Watch his game 1 vs losira on GSL (cant remember which tourny).
As for PvT, well the latest win rate graphs said it was pretty balanced, I think. My ladder experience says its pretty balanced, GM winrates around the globe say its pretty balanced.
Declaring an entire race OP or UP like you are doing is not the purpose of this thread. The purpose of this thread is to discuss much more specific flaws in the game, resulting in a disparity in skill requirements for success.
|
Actually its good they nerfed neural, what started happening when zerg all en masse learned that the infestor existed due to buff they would just fungal your army and neural your collosus with there being almost nothing the toss can do without splitting up forces beforehand and being very vulnerable to lings or all the other extremely speedy shit zerg has at its disposal.
Now ghosts that's some OP bullshit, counter all zerg T3 units with a single spell you say? Make all of protoss shields and mana useless with a single instant damage spell?
But ofcourse that doesn't count because terrans are better players.
Hah!
|
Also to the guy above me, terran play has seen by far the least innovation, terrans have never needed to adapt much because they never had terrible losing streaks like p or z.
One would say that zerg and protosses would be better then terrans in that situation if the game was truly balamced eight?
|
On December 31 2011 16:14 Asymptote1 wrote:
PvT,The most classic rigged scenario that protoss finds itself in is when terran puts the bulk of its army just outside the natural and drops a couple full medvacs of bio into the protoss main and makes the protoss either choose between keeping his tech alive of his eco alive, either way protoss loses the game.
EMP, Now look, there are a lot of people who say its "balanced" now, its a complete joke, the way terrans use ghosts now its not possible to defend it properly. What they do is go send some of the ghosts up first to do their free emp splash since you cant feedback them in time because of range issues and then even if protoss has spread his/her units correctly as soon as protoss attacks with its units, their army will ALWAYS stick together like glue, once this happens a couple seconds into the engagement, terran merely uses the rest of the ghosts he was saving in the back and then poof, all hope of the protoss using their casters is gone.
And let me tell you something obvious that all protoss players know, regardless of the the shield damage of EMP, if protoss cant use their casters, it loses the engagement every single time and thats a fact
You are ranting about your own losses. No shit you lose to that double medivac drop timing. Thats basically Terrans entire strategy until top masters.
EDIT: I'm sure you could find alternatives to defeating this standard strategy, but perhaps cannons would help.
On January 13 2012 08:15 Scootaloo wrote:
Also to the guy above me, terran play has seen by far the least innovation, terrans have never needed to adapt much because they never had terrible losing streaks like p or z.
One would say that zerg and protosses would be better then terrans in that situation if the game was truly balamced eight?
Do you play Terran? You probably just cant see the subtle innovations in Terran play. Please, Scootaloo, your not bringing anything to the discussion here. I don't want to play the Devils Advocate to your QQ arguments from a year ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
