|
On November 07 2012 01:49 malaan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 22:18 tomatriedes wrote: Things are looking really bleak in PvZ now. MC loses to NA zergs, Seed and Squirtle are struggling with zerg, LIfe, Leenock, Symbol, Curious and Hyun are all looking practically invincible in the match up. Rain was the one bright spot but he got owned by Leenock as well at MLG. Parting has had a nice run with his soul all-ins but they're getting figured out- it's a matter of time. Things are going to be really grim until HOTS gets out, calling it now. Rain lost because he played to greedily. Nothing to do with balance, Leenock scouted his greedy play and punished him for it. That's basically how PvZ works. The Protoss player either all-ins or tries to cut a corner while hoping that the Zerg player assumed they'd do the opposite. It's not fun and it's not particularly fair.
|
On November 07 2012 03:30 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 01:49 malaan wrote:On November 06 2012 22:18 tomatriedes wrote: Things are looking really bleak in PvZ now. MC loses to NA zergs, Seed and Squirtle are struggling with zerg, LIfe, Leenock, Symbol, Curious and Hyun are all looking practically invincible in the match up. Rain was the one bright spot but he got owned by Leenock as well at MLG. Parting has had a nice run with his soul all-ins but they're getting figured out- it's a matter of time. Things are going to be really grim until HOTS gets out, calling it now. Rain lost because he played to greedily. Nothing to do with balance, Leenock scouted his greedy play and punished him for it. That's basically how PvZ works. The Protoss player either all-ins or tries to cut a corner while hoping that the Zerg player assumed they'd do the opposite. It's not fun and it's not particularly fair.
But that's true even in mirror matchups....
|
On November 07 2012 03:31 neoghaleon55 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 03:30 Shiori wrote:On November 07 2012 01:49 malaan wrote:On November 06 2012 22:18 tomatriedes wrote: Things are looking really bleak in PvZ now. MC loses to NA zergs, Seed and Squirtle are struggling with zerg, LIfe, Leenock, Symbol, Curious and Hyun are all looking practically invincible in the match up. Rain was the one bright spot but he got owned by Leenock as well at MLG. Parting has had a nice run with his soul all-ins but they're getting figured out- it's a matter of time. Things are going to be really grim until HOTS gets out, calling it now. Rain lost because he played to greedily. Nothing to do with balance, Leenock scouted his greedy play and punished him for it. That's basically how PvZ works. The Protoss player either all-ins or tries to cut a corner while hoping that the Zerg player assumed they'd do the opposite. It's not fun and it's not particularly fair. But that's true even in mirror matchups.... Not in PvP. I can't speak to the other mirrors, but PvP is far from the coinflip people think it is.
|
On November 07 2012 03:31 neoghaleon55 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 03:30 Shiori wrote:On November 07 2012 01:49 malaan wrote:On November 06 2012 22:18 tomatriedes wrote: Things are looking really bleak in PvZ now. MC loses to NA zergs, Seed and Squirtle are struggling with zerg, LIfe, Leenock, Symbol, Curious and Hyun are all looking practically invincible in the match up. Rain was the one bright spot but he got owned by Leenock as well at MLG. Parting has had a nice run with his soul all-ins but they're getting figured out- it's a matter of time. Things are going to be really grim until HOTS gets out, calling it now. Rain lost because he played to greedily. Nothing to do with balance, Leenock scouted his greedy play and punished him for it. That's basically how PvZ works. The Protoss player either all-ins or tries to cut a corner while hoping that the Zerg player assumed they'd do the opposite. It's not fun and it's not particularly fair. But that's true even in mirror matchups....
Not quite. Protoss in PvZ have to either be super greedy or prepare to do an all-in. There is no middle ground. Now that zergs know how to deal with vortex they have a huge advantage late game, and because of that they know toss doesn't have many options so they can throw all sorts of different builds at them. Toss is going to continually do worse against zerg and I don't see them getting out of it unless some balance change is made
|
On November 06 2012 05:35 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 00:41 Wingblade wrote:On November 05 2012 19:12 SlixSC wrote:On November 05 2012 17:32 Acritter wrote:On November 05 2012 14:38 SlixSC wrote:On November 05 2012 14:15 Acritter wrote:On November 05 2012 12:34 Filter wrote:On November 05 2012 12:13 Wingblade wrote:On November 05 2012 12:01 Chaggi wrote:On November 05 2012 11:52 Wingblade wrote: [quote]
Please stop complaining about PvT lategame. I saw that engagement. Taeja lost 16 ghosts right at the start and Rain still got storms off. Plus, Terran has had better win rate vs P in August, throughout WCS continental tournaments, and at MLG this weekend. This is stupid. Anyone who pulls out win rates and calls something balanced doesn't understand what people are complaining about. PvZ might have a close to 50% win rate but it doesn't matter cause it's not a balanced late game composition. Even Grubby said so on the front page during an interview in this last MLG, look at how people win, if all Protoss does is all in, and they win 90% of the time, while if Zerg gets their late game bl/infestor comp and they win 90% of the time, how does that make for a fun game? (and this is balance aside) Just like TvP, it's not too bad to kill a Protoss sub 4 bases, but after the 4th and 5th base comes up, it gets much harder for the Terran. Just cause you can be like but look Taeja did something wrong doesn't mean it's actually not that hard, but it's cause of some mistake. But it was. And that's not true at all. By that point in the game Terran can trade scvs for more army because they can mine minerals with MULEs as long as they build extra OCs. And how is using winrates less evidence than some dude pulling one engagement out of thin air and claiming balance based on that. I can show you a lategame engagement from one of my games where the Terran doesn't attempt any semblance of micro, misses EMPs and sits in storms and claim Terran lategame is imba against Protoss. That doesn't mean im right. If Colossus are in the picture you actually can't show that engagement, it doesn't exist. The problem is a lot of things frustrate the players ie. you, me and the pros because they is no response available at all for you to defend against some things in the game. Terran doesn't have a response to a mass Protoss late game warp in, it's not a gradual loss you just get smashed and it's frustrating as hell. The same thing applies to Toss players when they get steamrolled by marines, if your higher tech units are taken out there is nothing you can do but get absolutely rolled by 40 marines with stim. The same thing applies with infestor broodlord, you do everything you can to stop it but at some point a fungal lands and you may as well take your hands off the keyboard. There is no response left, it's over. The less control you have over something the more frustrating it tends to become. Mistakes should be punished, but at the same time you should feel like your opponent did something good to punish your mistake. Having your entire army mowed down because you couldn't snipe off 10 ht AND emp the Archons AND control your vikings perfectly is very frustrating. At what point did the protoss player do anything in that particular battle to outplay or outthink you? the simple answer is he didn't, he landed 1-2 storms and a-moved his army. The loss of control in those situations is why Terran players bitch so much about lategame TvP, and why many of us simply don't play that much. When a Zerg gets crushed by an immortal all in it's the same story, the Protoss player might have hit all his timings perfectly but the Zerg is totally helpless and relies on the Toss player making a mistake. Same thing with lategame PvZ, trying to get your mothership into position only to have your opponent spreading his stuff out properly means you're screwed and the game is completely out of your control, again frustrating. Removing and balancing things that are extremely frustrating is very important, it really doesn't matter if the matchup is overall very balanced if certain situations make you want to alt-f4 your game and play something else. Terran Orbital Economy lategame is quite possibly the strongest lategame, except possibly Infestor/Broodlord, simply because the Terran's army size can be 40-50 greater than the opponent. The issue has always been for Terran to reach that lategame. It's comparable to how the Protoss midgame is much weaker than the Terran midgame, and the challenge for the Protoss player is to get to the lategame without the Terran winning. There are already Terran players experimenting with this style: Kas, for example. I think it would be much wiser to wait and see how the professionals manage to play this out. Right now, the win rates are stable, so it's not like Terran is under some massive threat like Protoss was during sAviOr's reign. Any advantage that Protoss has before 10 minutes and after 16 minutes is clearly mitigated by the Terran advantage between those two milestones. All in all? No concerns about the matchup. Just want to let it play out. Please link to win rates. To speak bluntly, win rates are posted on the general forum every month. If you are too disconnected with the scene and with the community to know where to find those easily, then perhaps you shouldn't be posting in this thread. Oh, I thought you actually had evidence. Last month's TvZ win rate in Korea was 36% for Terran as posted earlier in this thread. I really don't see how the win rates are stable in that respect, that's why I asked you for evidence. I don't like it when people make up their own facts. Congratulations, you just used winrates for TvZ to attempt to argue about TvP. Are you serious? Terran had a 53 percent winrate against Protoss in August(which is the last available winrate chart) Terrans had a 53 percent winrate against Protoss in all of the WCS continental finals tournaments compiled together. At MLG, Terran went 26-20 against Protoss. Oh and btw, there were 0 Protoss in top 4. First of all, I wasn't discussing balance at all. I made no comments on balance at all, I was simply pointing out a factual error in someone's post. Show nested quote +Terran had a 53 percent winrate against Protoss in August(which is the last available winrate chart) This isn't really true, the last available win rates for TvP are last month's win rate where Protoss had a 52% win rate vs. Terran. This was posted a few pages ago in this very thread. Show nested quote +Terrans had a 53 percent winrate against Protoss in all of the WCS continental finals tournaments compiled together. I don't see how this would prove that there is some sort of imbalance in TvP (a 53% win rate really doesn't imply that at all), but again, please provide actual evidence for the win rates you are posting here. Simply naming a number isn't sufficient enough evidence, you at the very least have to give us a source. Show nested quote +At MLG, Terran went 26-20 against Protoss. Oh and btw, there were 0 Protoss in top 4. Now you are just cherry - picking stats to prove a point I'm not arguing against. I never said TvP is imbalanced and I really don't think 46 games prove imbalance one way or the other. "Oh and there were 0 Protoss in the top 4". Really? How did you set the standard for which "top x" matters? 0 Protoss in the Top 4, but 2 Protoss in the Top 6, but only the top 4 matters? I hope you understand that this is confirmation bias and cherry-picking evidence to an extreme. Show nested quote + yeah and those so called "Korean winrates" on the battle.net forums were so few games, that if some players were cut, it would completle screw the "stats". (like if you cut Life's GSL games, TvZ is 47:53, stuff like that).
I think there is something intellectually dishonest about what you just said and I think you're going to end up paying a price for that. While it is true that 80 games do not prove imbalance, I think you will find that this cuts both ways and it doesn't make the statement "the win rates are stable" any more true. Unless what you mean by stable is "Terran having consistently bad win rates in TvZ" then no, the win rates are not stable. I'm not saying you said that, but you and many others didn't seem to have a problem with someone asserting that "the win rates are stable", thus using win rates to prove the game is balanced (which is not only factually incorrect but also purely subjective) but you very much so have a problem with someone pointing out that this person is wrong and that win rates are in fact not stable. And again I never made any comments about balance at all, so please stop with the strawman "...but in TvP" - arguments.
So the entire argument up until this point has been about TvP balance, and suddenly, you come in, start representing win rates for the matchup no one is debating. Why are you commenting on this if your not talking about what's actually being discussed here? I'm not strawmanning, this discussion is about Terran vs. Protoss. There's no point in responding to you if your suddenly trying to change the topic.
I never even stated that TvP lategame is Terran favored. The matchup is balanced. I was responding to the guy who claimed the matchup is Protoss favored in the lategame.
If your not actually talking about what is being discussed, then go away. It doesn't make any sense for you to talk about TvZ winrates, if the matchup in question is TvP. Go away, no one was even debating TvP with you.
|
On November 07 2012 03:34 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 03:31 neoghaleon55 wrote:On November 07 2012 03:30 Shiori wrote:On November 07 2012 01:49 malaan wrote:On November 06 2012 22:18 tomatriedes wrote: Things are looking really bleak in PvZ now. MC loses to NA zergs, Seed and Squirtle are struggling with zerg, LIfe, Leenock, Symbol, Curious and Hyun are all looking practically invincible in the match up. Rain was the one bright spot but he got owned by Leenock as well at MLG. Parting has had a nice run with his soul all-ins but they're getting figured out- it's a matter of time. Things are going to be really grim until HOTS gets out, calling it now. Rain lost because he played to greedily. Nothing to do with balance, Leenock scouted his greedy play and punished him for it. That's basically how PvZ works. The Protoss player either all-ins or tries to cut a corner while hoping that the Zerg player assumed they'd do the opposite. It's not fun and it's not particularly fair. But that's true even in mirror matchups.... Not in PvP. I can't speak to the other mirrors, but PvP is far from the coinflip people think it is.
People generally don't understand how the race works -.-.
People talking about an infestor mix are missing the bigger issue of bliz giving zerg 3 free bases in ZvP/T. The nerfing to death of protoss harass and lack of subtlety in TvZ tweaking ends up where the zerg is always a few minutes ahead of the other races with tech.
The worst part about this thead and the complaints is how frequently you could have made the same statement more than half a year ago.
|
Not commenting on anything specifically -- especially with the small sample sizes -- but I just did a bit of data sorting and here's what I have from the current season of Code S with two groups left to play:
Individual games
PvT: 10-5 (66.7%) PvZ: 5-10 (33.3%) TvZ: 7-15 (46.7%)
Overall, individual games
Protoss: 15-15 (50%) Terran: 12-25 (32.4%) Zerg: 25-12 (67.6%)
2 Protoss players have advanced (Parting, Creator), while 5 have dropped. 4 terran players have advanced while 6 have dropped. 6 zerg players have advanced while 1 has dropped.
Percentage of advancement
Protoss: 2/12 (16.7%) Terran: 4/12 (33.3%) Zerg: 6/12 (50%)
Percentage of dropping out
Protoss: 5/12 (41.7%) Terran: 6/12 (50%) Zerg: 1/12 (8.3%)
Interesting food for thought. Not that it is definitive of anything in the least.
|
On November 07 2012 08:00 Crashburn wrote: Not commenting on anything specifically -- especially with the small sample sizes -- but I just did a bit of data sorting and here's what I have from the current season of Code S with two groups left to play:
Individual games
PvT: 10-5 (66.7%) PvZ: 5-10 (33.3%) TvZ: 7-15 (46.7%)
Overall, individual games
Protoss: 15-15 (50%) Terran: 12-25 (32.4%) Zerg: 25-12 (67.6%)
2 Protoss players have advanced (Parting, Creator), while 5 have dropped. 4 terran players have advanced while 6 have dropped. 6 zerg players have advanced while 1 has dropped.
Percentage of advancement
Protoss: 2/12 (16.7%) Terran: 4/12 (33.3%) Zerg: 6/12 (50%)
Percentage of dropping out
Protoss: 5/12 (41.7%) Terran: 6/12 (50%) Zerg: 1/12 (8.3%)
Interesting food for thought. Not that it is definitive of anything in the least. TvZ should be 31.8%
Otherwise, this just reinforces the general feeling most people have right now. Zerg is doing really well, Protoss isn't doing doing that great, and Terran is doing awful (but nobody wants to hear Terran complain any more).
|
On November 07 2012 08:10 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 08:00 Crashburn wrote: Not commenting on anything specifically -- especially with the small sample sizes -- but I just did a bit of data sorting and here's what I have from the current season of Code S with two groups left to play:
Individual games
PvT: 10-5 (66.7%) PvZ: 5-10 (33.3%) TvZ: 7-15 (46.7%)
Overall, individual games
Protoss: 15-15 (50%) Terran: 12-25 (32.4%) Zerg: 25-12 (67.6%)
2 Protoss players have advanced (Parting, Creator), while 5 have dropped. 4 terran players have advanced while 6 have dropped. 6 zerg players have advanced while 1 has dropped.
Percentage of advancement
Protoss: 2/12 (16.7%) Terran: 4/12 (33.3%) Zerg: 6/12 (50%)
Percentage of dropping out
Protoss: 5/12 (41.7%) Terran: 6/12 (50%) Zerg: 1/12 (8.3%)
Interesting food for thought. Not that it is definitive of anything in the least. TvZ should be 31.8% Otherwise, this just reinforces the general feeling most people have right now. Zerg is doing really well, Protoss isn't doing doing that great, and Terran is doing awful (but nobody wants to hear Terran complain any more).
Thanks for catching that mistake. But yeah, it lines up with my preconceived notions at least. I've been increasingly bored watching Starcraft 2 lately. I just do it more out of habit lately. I dunno how much more BL/infestor vs. mothership I can take.
|
@Crashburn, it's not definitive at all. Way too small a sample size.
As of Sept 22nd,
All leagues North America Europe Korea PvT 53% 54% 49% PvZ 47% 48% 49% TvZ 50% 52% 49% Master + GM only North America Europe Korea PvT 48% 49% 43% PvZ 57% 57% 48% TvZ 59% 57% 52%
Now let's make a new game. It will be an RTS just like StarCraft, however the development team will simply have to make 3 (different) races with entirely new units. When the game is released, two years later it must have a win-ratio similar to that above.
Blizzard made a game in which the differentiation of win-rates is at most 10%, and with a mean at around 5% differential.
That's REALLY fucking good. That is pretty hard to do and you need some serious thought to make a game come together like that. Blizzard is doing their job very well. Go Blizzard!!! :D
|
I would love to see how the TvZ numbers look if you take away all games where the terran wins before hive tech. The queen patch has caused 80% of the terrans in our clan to switch race or quit the game alltogether. No sensible person could play TvZ and say that the matchup is fine right now. It might be balanced if neither player makes any mistakes, the issue lies in that the zerg can make 20 times as many mistakes as the terran and be perfectly fucking fine where as the game is instantly over the second the terran makes one mistake.
I don't know how many more games I can take where the zerg throws away-infestors for free, I get countless drone kills, deny expansions while fending off harass and run by's with no losses and the game still effectively resets to even or zerg favored the second the hive units start pouring out.
|
On November 07 2012 11:43 President Dead wrote: @Crashburn, it's not definitive at all. Way too small a sample size.
Which is what I said, repeatedly.
|
We are thinking of making interceptors immune to Infestor's fungal growth.
Hey David Kim must be reading this thread- he's copying my idea!
|
On November 07 2012 12:37 tomatriedes wrote:Hey David Kim must be reading this thread- he's copying my idea! data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt="" Only interceptors immune? Thats lame!
On November 07 2012 11:43 President Dead wrote: Now let's make a new game. It will be an RTS just like StarCraft, however the development team will simply have to make 3 (different) races with entirely new units. When the game is released, two years later it must have a win-ratio similar to that above.
Blizzard made a game in which the differentiation of win-rates is at most 10%, and with a mean at around 5% differential.
That's REALLY fucking good. That is pretty hard to do and you need some serious thought to make a game come together like that. Blizzard is doing their job very well. Go Blizzard!!! :D Since you are sooo in love with statistics and thus math you could perhaps explain to me the wisdom of making a game ...
... where the infantry units CAN BE clumped up so tightly together that any attack which affects an area is going to kill a lot if it deals enough damage to kill a single unit ... and thus has to be nerfed into near-uselessness. AoE attacks are one way to make the game interesting and certain units rely upon that, but if their attacks are only "mildly tingling" they cease to be dangerous.
... where the three races have production speed boosts which kick in at different times and thus give the race a clear advantage once it does.
How are such games going to be FUN? You can make a game "balanced" on the outside by adding crutches like Fungal and Forcefield (and Concussive Shells), but that balance stands on a knife's edge.
|
On November 07 2012 11:43 President Dead wrote: @Crashburn, it's not definitive at all. Way too small a sample size.
As of Sept 22nd,
All leagues North America Europe Korea PvT 53% 54% 49% PvZ 47% 48% 49% TvZ 50% 52% 49% Master + GM only North America Europe Korea PvT 48% 49% 43% PvZ 57% 57% 48% TvZ 59% 57% 52%
Now let's make a new game. It will be an RTS just like StarCraft, however the development team will simply have to make 3 (different) races with entirely new units. When the game is released, two years later it must have a win-ratio similar to that above.
Blizzard made a game in which the differentiation of win-rates is at most 10%, and with a mean at around 5% differential.
That's REALLY fucking good. That is pretty hard to do and you need some serious thought to make a game come together like that. Blizzard is doing their job very well. Go Blizzard!!! :D
You just quoted winrates from september of 2011. Its not hard to make winrates close to 50% when ladder system is implemented. Also these are "adjusted" winrates whatever that means.
|
Disclaimer: I spectate a lot more than I play Starcraft 2 these days, when I do play I mostly play random, so this is where my perspective is derived from. I studied games at university, but I don't claim to know better than the developers at Blizzard, these are just a couple of suggestions that I feel may improve the dynamics of ZvX.
Problem: Both Terran and Protoss are having a lot of difficulties dealing with late game Zerg compositions involving Infestors and Broodlords, regardless of which player seemed to have an advantage up to this point, I consider this to be an issue that affects spectators as well as players as many people have been venting their frustrations with regards to it.
I am proposing a two-part solution but I am going to separate it to deal with each individually.
Solution Part 1: Change Fungal Growth to a slow instead of stun. While I realise I am nowhere near the first person to suggest this I feel it is the best solution. I would really love to see this it least tried in the PTR just to see how it would play out, somewhere from 50-80% movement reduction seems reasonable to me.
Reasoning: Firstly, I think it makes more sense, especially for air units, if it is going to prevent air units from moving, shouldn't they be unable to stay in the air and fall to the ground? More importantly, I feel it would both be more fair and more interesting to watch. Rather than negate available micro of units that are effected, they would just have reduced micro capacity, with support they could still be chased down, without support the Infestors could still escape and chain Fungals would still be possible, but wouldn't be guaranteed and would require more skill if the units try to target down the Infestors.
Side Effects: The side effects for this change are quite broad and would depend on the percentage of slow, which would have to be tested and set to an appropriate level but for the most part I believe they would be positive. In theory (in my mind at least) Infestors would retain their current utility in most situations albeit with a bit less effectiveness. For example: Infestors would still be useful at deterring Phoenix or Muta's but chain fungals would not guarantee death for all those caught, Infestors would still be good at delaying or slowing down pushes but they could not stop them completely in their tracks without sufficient support.
Solution Part 2: Change Broodlings spawned from Broodlords so that they do not restrict the pathing of units. This could be achieved either by having the Broodlings hover around their target (since they fly along with the Broodlords to begin with it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch) or by making Broodlings able to be pushed around like ally units.
Reasoning: I find Broodlords capacity to restrict movement both frustrating to deal with as a player and it's really not spectator friendly (IMO). I feel that Broodlords are already quite powerful without forcing opponents to fight the AI while attempting to combat them.
Side Effects: The main side effect, and the one I am aiming for, is that units fighting Broodlords will have freedom to move, this, coupled with a Fungal that slows instead of stuns, would give Terran and Protoss armies a lot more maneuverability when engaging a Broodlord/Infestor based army. I really think that Zerg late game would still be quite powerful, but the other races would be able to engage more favourably and react in the midst of battle. Zerg players would still be able to negate enemy movements with Zergling surrounds, but at least they would be expending Minerals and Supply rather than free Broodlings. One of the negative side effects for Zerg would be that unsupported Broodlords would be more vulnerable, but they are already quite vulnerable as it is so I don't see it as a huge issue.
These are two options I would really like to see tried, preferably both at the same time because we all know the Broodlord/Infestor combination is powerful and it should be for how expensive it is and how long it takes to get, so I suggest not nerfing it's raw power, but allowing the other races more freedom in trying to combat it.
|
On November 07 2012 16:19 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2012 11:43 President Dead wrote: @Crashburn, it's not definitive at all. Way too small a sample size.
As of Sept 22nd,
All leagues North America Europe Korea PvT 53% 54% 49% PvZ 47% 48% 49% TvZ 50% 52% 49% Master + GM only North America Europe Korea PvT 48% 49% 43% PvZ 57% 57% 48% TvZ 59% 57% 52%
Now let's make a new game. It will be an RTS just like StarCraft, however the development team will simply have to make 3 (different) races with entirely new units. When the game is released, two years later it must have a win-ratio similar to that above.
Blizzard made a game in which the differentiation of win-rates is at most 10%, and with a mean at around 5% differential.
That's REALLY fucking good. That is pretty hard to do and you need some serious thought to make a game come together like that. Blizzard is doing their job very well. Go Blizzard!!! :D
You just quoted winrates from september of 2011. Its not hard to make winrates close to 50% when ladder system is implemented. Also these are "adjusted" winrates whatever that means.
100% what you said. LOL. Queen patch and usage of Infestors changed significantly from last year buddy. Also, Blizz forcing 50% balance rate thru ladder doesnt mean shit. One race might be OP but I will still manage 50/50 win ratio if I keep playing on ladder because Blizz will match me with lower players.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/3551858/StarCraft_II_Balance_Snapshot_-9_22_2011 AKA. Blizz stats in 2011.
|
A think that a lot of people can't see something , a huge problem except the late game in tvz is ... the lack to be able to scout. We've seen plenty of games where terran goes really greedy , zerg doesn't go all in and the games turn out great even in the late game because the terran has a great economy. As zerg you can see if the terran has an expand , if he goes heavy tech , see his front army , but as terran unless you use every scan you have to scout the zerg you will never know if he pushed the all in button.
|
"Until zerg is winning everything we see no reason to make broodlord/infestor weaker"
I am so disapointed data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt=""
I honestly didn't think any changes would happen until HOTS though, not enough man-power to maintain both games.
|
Grammar mistakes, will re-post.
|
|
|
|