|
On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller?
I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter.
I think the main problem with Protoss is the Warpgate. Because of Warpgates Zealots and Stalkers have to be weaker than Terran and Zerg tier 1 units. On the flipside Protoss has the strongest timing attacks because Warpgate neutralises defenders advantage. Furthermore units such as Colossus has to be buffed to make up for weakened Stalkers and Zealots. This is a problem because tier 3 units of each race, Thors, Brood Lord, Battlecruisers, because strong but slow units responds very poorly to micro. I believe that QXC discussed the problem with trading speed for brute force at one point.
|
On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter.
Well, they did discuss it. And there were some (statistically very insignificant) stats around which showed something like 58% winrate in the proleague Bo1s and 50% in the allkill rounds. Which implies that Protoss is very capable of fighting in BoX format and rather overpowered in Bo1, if we can take anything from it (which I doubt).
Protoss "stuggling" in the GSL (2/8 and 1/4 is not that bad) is probably due to them starting already underrepresented into Code S, due really struggling winratewise in both matchups at the end of WoL at Code A/S/U&D (Z-T-P: 14-11-7, at the beginning of the season).
All of that aside, I'd like to see one or two buffs or changes to midtech Protoss units. Reason is that Protoss is simply lacking steady midgame tools for harassment. They have some early-midgame all or nothing stuff and warpins/warpprisms become extremly powerful in the lategame/endgame. But somewhere in between, ZvP/TvP is a complete "whack-a-mole"-fest, which leads to boring turtleplay and techrushes/big armyreliance of Protoss.
|
On the topic of Protoss late-game harass buffs, what about adding Mass Recall to the Oracle with a Fleet Beacon upgrade? Combine Revelation and Envision into one spell (something like Revelation, but also affects cloaked units in the area and reveals them for the duration? idk), maybe up the cost of the oracle to 200 gas or something, then make it cost something like 150 energy with a reasonably small radius so you can't just warp all over the place with just like 2-3 oracles.
This would enable a variety of harass options that Protoss lacks and give them the ability to split up their army and actually gain something from it. There's no way it would come out early due to the Fleet Beacon, and at 150 or 200 gas per, I don't see Protosses getting more than 2-3 Oracles since any more than that would be useless between the early Pulsar Beam worker harassment and late-game Recalling.
Thoughts?
|
On June 03 2013 04:45 jacson1253 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2011 07:18 Fig wrote:
Yeah I have wondered about this for a long time myself. It seems like all the micro is in the terran's hands during the late game. Which admittedly makes it hard for the terran player, but it is nice to know that they do have the tools to win even engagements if they have strong enough micro. I wish there was more micro potential for toss to even it out.
One big example of this is the ghost design.
EMP = 10 range
Snipe = 10 range
Now we look at the HT
Storm = 9 range
Feedback = 9 range
This shows that if both players have the same skills, the terran player will get off an EMP before a storm can occur. But this puts a lot of pressure on the terran to land them. If instead each spell had 9 range, then the toss would be required to micro just as much, making the engagement much more interesting and fair for all levels. I agree to be fair they should have the same range. Shocked they haven't changed that already.
Except, it wouldn't be "fair" if they have the same range because ghosts are supposed to be the anti-caster (at least thats the role Blizzard has pidgeon holed them into). If they can be killed by another caster before they can even get two snipes of then there is no need to even make ghosts. Not to mention that to even get an EMP or snipe off you have to lead with the ghosts, making them much more vulnerable.
|
Is it me, or everytime a terran opens Hellbat drops, he :
- Is safe against most zerg all-ins (ling/banes 1/1, roach/ling/bane...)
- Wont be behind the zerg in term of economy
- Wont be really behind in upgrades (like 20-30 seconds)
For only 1 hellbat drop, (and its common follow ups), the terran will force the zerg to :
Have 1 spores per bases (75+50) * 3 = 375 minerals, 3 drones
And, if the zerg wants to be sure to be safe, 1 spine per base : (100+50)*3 = 475 minerals, 3 drones
It also forces the zerg to build a RW if he wants to defend it cost-effectively.
As an opening, hellbats drops are just freaking strong. It forces the zerg to play the way the terran wants him to play. And there is almost no way to punish it, even if the zerg doesnt take any damages.
Because of the mules and then 3CC, + the workers pulling on the zerg side, terran is always even or ahead in economy EVEN if the zerg does the perfect defense.
Later in the game, Hellbats are too strong against lings. Ok, the zerg can go roach/hydra... But then, the terran just mass marauders + concussive shell with his hellbats, and your roaches are fighting hellbats in range of them. And there, roach/hydra dies.
This is without talking about the hellbat drops onto the zerg army...
Maybe I miss a point ?
|
On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. I think the main problem with Protoss is the Warpgate. Because of Warpgates Zealots and Stalkers have to be weaker than Terran and Zerg tier 1 units. On the flipside Protoss has the strongest timing attacks because Warpgate neutralises defenders advantage. Furthermore units such as Colossus has to be buffed to make up for weakened Stalkers and Zealots. This is a problem because tier 3 units of each race, Thors, Brood Lord, Battlecruisers, because strong but slow units responds very poorly to micro. I believe that QXC discussed the problem with trading speed for brute force at one point.
This post... so much deja vu.
On June 03 2013 05:57 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. Well, they did discuss it. And there were some (statistically very insignificant) stats around which showed something like 58% winrate in the proleague Bo1s and 50% in the allkill rounds. Which implies that Protoss is very capable of fighting in BoX format and rather overpowered in Bo1, if we can take anything from it (which I doubt). Protoss "stuggling" in the GSL (2/8 and 1/4 is not that bad) is probably due to them starting already underrepresented into Code S, due really struggling winratewise in both matchups at the end of WoL at Code A/S/U&D (Z-T-P: 14-11-7, at the beginning of the season). All of that aside, I'd like to see one or two buffs or changes to midtech Protoss units. Reason is that Protoss is simply lacking steady midgame tools for harassment. They have some early-midgame all or nothing stuff and warpins/warpprisms become extremly powerful in the lategame/endgame. But somewhere in between, ZvP/TvP is a complete "whack-a-mole"-fest, which leads to boring turtleplay and techrushes/big armyreliance of Protoss.
Ofc Protoss is always.. just low on the GSL players. If we wait it out, the situation will resolve itself right? It seems pretty self-evident that the race was pre-gimped in alpha. We are left with this very lopsided army that is a bit boringly dependent on tech to deal with almost anything. I think that explains a lot of the confused whining about how strong toss late game was since it is very much a timing thing in PvT. Either way I think it's obvious something is off about the race by looking at how Rain and PartinG have to play. The race is too fragile but then has way too many binary moments when it has the tech.
The big problem is that Toss can be pretty unsatisfying to watch win sometimes. Personally, there are precious, precious few moments of really exciting micro in sc2 compared to bw. Too many moments where one player can micro an edge and the other just takes it by throwing money/ tech at the problem. Buff toss in the wrong way and you get very management focused games that need both players to be on their edge to be interesting. The prism may open up more immortal shennanigans or something and be the micro we need. Unfortunately everything is going to be judged against Reaver/shuttle play.
|
On June 06 2013 15:09 Insoleet wrote:
Is it me, or everytime a terran opens Hellbat drops, he :
- Is safe against most zerg all-ins (ling/banes 1/1, roach/ling/bane...)
- Wont be behind the zerg in term of economy
- Wont be really behind in upgrades (like 20-30 seconds)
For only 1 hellbat drop, (and its common follow ups), the terran will force the zerg to :
Have 1 spores per bases (75+50) * 3 = 375 minerals, 3 drones
And, if the zerg wants to be sure to be safe, 1 spine per base : (100+50)*3 = 475 minerals, 3 drones
It also forces the zerg to build a RW if he wants to defend it cost-effectively.
As an opening, hellbats drops are just freaking strong. It forces the zerg to play the way the terran wants him to play. And there is almost no way to punish it, even if the zerg doesnt take any damages.
Because of the mules and then 3CC, + the workers pulling on the zerg side, terran is always even or ahead in economy EVEN if the zerg does the perfect defense.
Later in the game, Hellbats are too strong against lings. Ok, the zerg can go roach/hydra... But then, the terran just mass marauders + concussive shell with his hellbats, and your roaches are fighting hellbats in range of them. And there, roach/hydra dies.
This is without talking about the hellbat drops onto the zerg army...
Maybe I miss a point ?
no, just all your points are plain wrong.
terran going hellbat drops is very vulnerable to any kind of baneling agression and you see over and over again in pro games.
terran is also behind in eco, if the drop doesn't do a lot of dmg. (watch pro games and workertabs)
And upgrades: depends on when zerg decides to start his upgrades. If zerg goes for pressure too, upgrades are late here too, so they usually even out. If zerg just macroes up, he is ahead by nearly one round of upgrades.
Your QQ about terran comes 2 months too late. We have june now and there aren't any signs anymore of terran being OP.
|
On June 06 2013 17:03 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. I think the main problem with Protoss is the Warpgate. Because of Warpgates Zealots and Stalkers have to be weaker than Terran and Zerg tier 1 units. On the flipside Protoss has the strongest timing attacks because Warpgate neutralises defenders advantage. Furthermore units such as Colossus has to be buffed to make up for weakened Stalkers and Zealots. This is a problem because tier 3 units of each race, Thors, Brood Lord, Battlecruisers, because strong but slow units responds very poorly to micro. I believe that QXC discussed the problem with trading speed for brute force at one point. This post... so much deja vu. Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 05:57 Big J wrote:On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. Well, they did discuss it. And there were some (statistically very insignificant) stats around which showed something like 58% winrate in the proleague Bo1s and 50% in the allkill rounds. Which implies that Protoss is very capable of fighting in BoX format and rather overpowered in Bo1, if we can take anything from it (which I doubt). Protoss "stuggling" in the GSL (2/8 and 1/4 is not that bad) is probably due to them starting already underrepresented into Code S, due really struggling winratewise in both matchups at the end of WoL at Code A/S/U&D (Z-T-P: 14-11-7, at the beginning of the season). All of that aside, I'd like to see one or two buffs or changes to midtech Protoss units. Reason is that Protoss is simply lacking steady midgame tools for harassment. They have some early-midgame all or nothing stuff and warpins/warpprisms become extremly powerful in the lategame/endgame. But somewhere in between, ZvP/TvP is a complete "whack-a-mole"-fest, which leads to boring turtleplay and techrushes/big armyreliance of Protoss. Ofc Protoss is always.. just low on the GSL players. If we wait it out, the situation will resolve itself right? .
Well you have more in premier league than Terran, so it's already resolved itself.
|
Austria24422 Posts
On June 06 2013 20:19 AxionSteel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 17:03 Sabu113 wrote:On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. I think the main problem with Protoss is the Warpgate. Because of Warpgates Zealots and Stalkers have to be weaker than Terran and Zerg tier 1 units. On the flipside Protoss has the strongest timing attacks because Warpgate neutralises defenders advantage. Furthermore units such as Colossus has to be buffed to make up for weakened Stalkers and Zealots. This is a problem because tier 3 units of each race, Thors, Brood Lord, Battlecruisers, because strong but slow units responds very poorly to micro. I believe that QXC discussed the problem with trading speed for brute force at one point. This post... so much deja vu. On June 03 2013 05:57 Big J wrote:On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. Well, they did discuss it. And there were some (statistically very insignificant) stats around which showed something like 58% winrate in the proleague Bo1s and 50% in the allkill rounds. Which implies that Protoss is very capable of fighting in BoX format and rather overpowered in Bo1, if we can take anything from it (which I doubt). Protoss "stuggling" in the GSL (2/8 and 1/4 is not that bad) is probably due to them starting already underrepresented into Code S, due really struggling winratewise in both matchups at the end of WoL at Code A/S/U&D (Z-T-P: 14-11-7, at the beginning of the season). All of that aside, I'd like to see one or two buffs or changes to midtech Protoss units. Reason is that Protoss is simply lacking steady midgame tools for harassment. They have some early-midgame all or nothing stuff and warpins/warpprisms become extremly powerful in the lategame/endgame. But somewhere in between, ZvP/TvP is a complete "whack-a-mole"-fest, which leads to boring turtleplay and techrushes/big armyreliance of Protoss. Ofc Protoss is always.. just low on the GSL players. If we wait it out, the situation will resolve itself right? . Well you have more in premier league than Terran, so it's already resolved itself.
So when terran was the most represented race in Code S towards the end of WoL everything was ok right?
|
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
|
Austria24422 Posts
On June 06 2013 20:54 AxionSteel wrote:
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
I'm not disagreeing that protoss is doing well atm, I just really really dislike the argument of just looking at representation.
|
On June 06 2013 21:17 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:54 AxionSteel wrote:
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
I'm not disagreeing that protoss is doing well atm, I just really really dislike the argument of just looking at representation.
You are talking about representation to state that you don't like talking about representation? Well done :D
|
On June 06 2013 17:03 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. I think the main problem with Protoss is the Warpgate. Because of Warpgates Zealots and Stalkers have to be weaker than Terran and Zerg tier 1 units. On the flipside Protoss has the strongest timing attacks because Warpgate neutralises defenders advantage. Furthermore units such as Colossus has to be buffed to make up for weakened Stalkers and Zealots. This is a problem because tier 3 units of each race, Thors, Brood Lord, Battlecruisers, because strong but slow units responds very poorly to micro. I believe that QXC discussed the problem with trading speed for brute force at one point. This post... so much deja vu. Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 05:57 Big J wrote:On June 03 2013 05:31 Prog455 wrote:On June 02 2013 06:19 BeyondCtrL wrote:
Looking at recent and near past results one sees a distinct abscense of Protoss presence in pro level tournaments.
Since HotS, despite popular outcry of Zerg being UP at start, Zerg has been sweeping all the big tournaments in almost all stages, with no real changes.
Do you guys think that since Protoss relies on gimmicky/timing based plays their chances of winning longer series, i.e bo5/bo7, become smaller? I have no doubt that Protoss is struggling in GSL for this very reason. They even discussed it in Meta and came to the same conclusion. Naniwa did very well in DH, but he went into the tournament with a TON of new build orders that people did not know how to counter. Well, they did discuss it. And there were some (statistically very insignificant) stats around which showed something like 58% winrate in the proleague Bo1s and 50% in the allkill rounds. Which implies that Protoss is very capable of fighting in BoX format and rather overpowered in Bo1, if we can take anything from it (which I doubt). Protoss "stuggling" in the GSL (2/8 and 1/4 is not that bad) is probably due to them starting already underrepresented into Code S, due really struggling winratewise in both matchups at the end of WoL at Code A/S/U&D (Z-T-P: 14-11-7, at the beginning of the season). All of that aside, I'd like to see one or two buffs or changes to midtech Protoss units. Reason is that Protoss is simply lacking steady midgame tools for harassment. They have some early-midgame all or nothing stuff and warpins/warpprisms become extremly powerful in the lategame/endgame. But somewhere in between, ZvP/TvP is a complete "whack-a-mole"-fest, which leads to boring turtleplay and techrushes/big armyreliance of Protoss. Ofc Protoss is always.. just low on the GSL players. If we wait it out, the situation will resolve itself right? It seems pretty self-evident that the race was pre-gimped in alpha. We are left with this very lopsided army that is a bit boringly dependent on tech to deal with almost anything. I think that explains a lot of the confused whining about how strong toss late game was since it is very much a timing thing in PvT. Either way I think it's obvious something is off about the race by looking at how Rain and PartinG have to play. The race is too fragile but then has way too many binary moments when it has the tech. The big problem is that Toss can be pretty unsatisfying to watch win sometimes. Personally, there are precious, precious few moments of really exciting micro in sc2 compared to bw. Too many moments where one player can micro an edge and the other just takes it by throwing money/ tech at the problem. Buff toss in the wrong way and you get very management focused games that need both players to be on their edge to be interesting. The prism may open up more immortal shennanigans or something and be the micro we need. Unfortunately everything is going to be judged against Reaver/shuttle play.
Oh come on, that's not what I was saying. This was the first WCS(GSL) after the launch of HotS. The race distribution was a result of WoL and HotS already completly changed the game and we haven't seen the result this far in the WCS(GSL) distribution. Unless we look at the next WCS(OSL). There we already have +3 Protoss, compared to the last season.
|
Austria24422 Posts
On June 06 2013 21:33 scypio wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 21:17 DarkLordOlli wrote:On June 06 2013 20:54 AxionSteel wrote:
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
I'm not disagreeing that protoss is doing well atm, I just really really dislike the argument of just looking at representation. You are talking about representation to state that you don't like talking about representation? Well done :D
Obviously you didn't understand my argument.
|
The first reliable representation stat of HotS is the one for WCS season 2, since season 1 had a 100% WoL qualification process. So let's look about the distribution of WCS Korea season 2 (OSL):
Protoss (10) Terran (8) Zerg (14)
This should take the last powder out of the guns from people claiming Terran is OP. And about being fragile: Especially in HotS, terran seem to be the race, that's most vulnerable to allin / hyperagressive early/mid game play. that might be the case why we see so few terrans at the top right now, despite the game being overall pretty balanced.
|
Poland485 Posts
On June 06 2013 21:36 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 21:33 scypio wrote:On June 06 2013 21:17 DarkLordOlli wrote:On June 06 2013 20:54 AxionSteel wrote:
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
I'm not disagreeing that protoss is doing well atm, I just really really dislike the argument of just looking at representation. You are talking about representation to state that you don't like talking about representation? Well done :D Obviously you didn't understand my argument.
Outside of pure numbers important is trend. In 2012 terran has still high representation but was trending down (from 20 slots at peak to 11 at end of the WoL ). Now Terran has its lowest representation in history and Protoss has its highest. So i dont think that Protoss is struggling in Korea especially considering how Proleague looks like.
|
Austria24422 Posts
On June 07 2013 01:27 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 21:36 DarkLordOlli wrote:On June 06 2013 21:33 scypio wrote:On June 06 2013 21:17 DarkLordOlli wrote:On June 06 2013 20:54 AxionSteel wrote:
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
I'm not disagreeing that protoss is doing well atm, I just really really dislike the argument of just looking at representation. You are talking about representation to state that you don't like talking about representation? Well done :D Obviously you didn't understand my argument. Outside of pure numbers important is trend. In 2012 terran has still high representation but was trending down (from 20 slots at peak to 11 at end of the WoL ). Now Terran has its lowest representation in history and Protoss has its highest. So i dont think that Protoss is struggling in Korea especially considering how Proleague looks like.
On June 06 2013 21:17 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 20:54 AxionSteel wrote:
Terran was already on the decline then, Protoss is on the way up here. They already dominate the pro league, and their numbers are signficantly improving in Code S as well.
I'm not disagreeing that protoss is doing well atm, I just really really dislike the argument of just looking at representation.
What's most important when talking about balance is balance. Representation, winrates and trends don't tell the story of what race is strong during what phases of the game, why, what unit compositions may be too strong, etc.
Protoss had a close to 50% winrate in PvZ at the end of WoL yet BL/infestor was broken and unbeatable.
|
The map pool in Tourneys and the map pool in ladder is not always the same 0_0, My point being yes we are seeing a bit of difference from ladder to tourneys as far as ratios and stats but i think maps play a role in the overall numbers as much as anything else, im not saying all can be fixed by better map pools but i do like the look of season 4's map pool because it seems a little more (dare i say) balanced. Anyway thats my thoughts and outside of that well..... kill hellbats xD
|
On June 07 2013 01:31 DarkLordOlli wrote:
What's most important when talking about balance is balance. Representation, winrates and trends don't tell the story of what race is strong during what phases of the game, why, what unit compositions may be too strong, etc.
Protoss had a close to 50% winrate in PvZ at the end of WoL yet BL/infestor was broken and unbeatable.
Ok, what is this unbeatable composition? Is there anything that is remotely comparable to BL/Infestor of WoL?
|
Austria24422 Posts
On June 07 2013 01:41 scypio wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2013 01:31 DarkLordOlli wrote:
What's most important when talking about balance is balance. Representation, winrates and trends don't tell the story of what race is strong during what phases of the game, why, what unit compositions may be too strong, etc.
Protoss had a close to 50% winrate in PvZ at the end of WoL yet BL/infestor was broken and unbeatable. Ok, what is this unbeatable composition? Is there anything that is remotely comparable to BL/Infestor of WoL?
... did I say that there was? I simply used BL/infestor as an example of how representation, winrates etc. don't indicate balance. It's like you're trying to misunderstand me.
I'm not trying to start a balance argument, lol. I'm just telling people what arguments they should be careful of when talking balance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
