|
On August 28 2013 00:04 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2013 23:40 LSN wrote:
troll is what you are, at least you appear like a troll after anything I write with having zero arguments but writing troll stuff. Naruto is arguing with wrong arguments, better face it.
It is just plain wrong that balance only affects the very highest levels of play and nothing else.
Also it is damn right that MMR equals winrates in lower leagues, so he got no point there.
And if you like, feel free to disprove that playing marine/mine rally is way easier/less punishing than playing against it (on. e.g low master level). I am strongly convinced it is because a single minor mistake frequently costs Zergs the game while terran is in permanent attack mode and after a mistake he can just fall back for half a minute to continue then. Terran can come back, zerg can't, and so on. I totally disagree, one bad engagment from the terran can be game changing in tvz, because once the zerg is in your production, it's basically lose even if the terran is ahead. And terrans can come back, yes, but only if the zerg throws its avantage.
A bit one-sided, because the Zerg can make bad engagements that change the result/advantage of the game pretty easily too. Widow Mines are able to get off extremely lucky hits.
People dont like to understand my posts and they "jerk off" about the examples I give without recognizing that these examples are just a startup idea to make them think differently. The last few posts have simply been an attempt to "enlighten Zerg players" into accepting the fact that killing mining bases wont limit a Terran that much due to the MULE and the core unit of the Marine. Keep on whining NarutO, I wont stop posting and so far no one has even tried proving me wrong about the "Marine vs Stalkers" unit density design problem (and others). Try to prove me wrong and I might have to change my opinion ...
|
On August 28 2013 00:23 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 00:22 LSN wrote:
Man I dont know what you are talking about. The way how the MMR works makes every matchup look kind of balanced in the lower ranks when looking at the overall statistics, understand it or not. I dont care what your winrates are and it is not important. The MMR doesn't consider race in the winrate, that's my point, so the balance-design is totally not linked to MMR.
source?
I am quite sure it does. But feel free to provide me any source that proves/explains that it doesnt.
From what I know blizzard doesnt reveal any detail information about wow the MMR works so no safe information about this can be available!
@rabiator
his post was a reply to what I wrote.
The difference of the position both Z and T are in that the T is the attacker and the Z the defender (always). An attacker doesnt lose a game instantly when the attack fails, of course he can afterwards if he forgot to reproduce. The defender instead always loses instantly when losing the defense. I think this should be obvious.
Of course a terran can lose games when he continues to attack without doing sufficient damage and the Z army is getting stronger until it finally can finally fight back. Usually a zerg cant cause backup mines cant be cleared up fast enaugh and 15+ marines per cycle and surviving medivacs allow the terran to fend of any Z counter attack if the Z is not in a very ahead position already.
|
It's so annoying when people (overstatement?) ask for information that was presented in the previous post.
I repeat, under thy bridge, you troll!
|
I didn't even read about your marine/stalker stuff, sorry to say. Every player that says that Terran is a lot easier on the lower-levels should simply try playing Terran. While minehits can be devastating, minehits on pro level are devastating because they are often times controlled / focused. Mines are volatile and unreliable, they don't magically connect to the biggest baneling clumb.
On a lower-level with proper macro, I dare to say that the fights generally favor Zerg, while macro overall generally does favor Terran. Muta/Ling/Bane is very mechanically demanding especially with injects and as lots of Zergs don't like to get a macrohatch, they bank minerals because they cannot support it. So problems are completely different from the problems SoulKey has.
I made suggestions about changing mines, yet you keep saying I am biased. I am not, I simply disagree that the mines to increase Terrans winrate on any level by a large margin, because I don't see it happening.
|
On August 28 2013 00:28 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 00:23 Faust852 wrote:On August 28 2013 00:22 LSN wrote:
Man I dont know what you are talking about. The way how the MMR works makes every matchup look kind of balanced in the lower ranks when looking at the overall statistics, understand it or not. I dont care what your winrates are and it is not important. The MMR doesn't consider race in the winrate, that's my point, so the balance-design is totally not linked to MMR. source? I am quite sure it does. But feel free to provide me any source that proves/explains that it doesnt.
You're the one that should give me a source of what you are claming because it has never been said anywhere.
I win/lose as much points from protoss or any other race with the same MMR.
|
On August 28 2013 00:35 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 00:28 LSN wrote:On August 28 2013 00:23 Faust852 wrote:On August 28 2013 00:22 LSN wrote:
Man I dont know what you are talking about. The way how the MMR works makes every matchup look kind of balanced in the lower ranks when looking at the overall statistics, understand it or not. I dont care what your winrates are and it is not important. The MMR doesn't consider race in the winrate, that's my point, so the balance-design is totally not linked to MMR. source? I am quite sure it does. But feel free to provide me any source that proves/explains that it doesnt. You're the one that should give me a source of what you are claming because it has never been said anywhere. I win/lose as much points from protoss or any other race with the same MMR.
Ladder points aren't the same as MMR, but you are right that LSN needs to source his claims too
|
On August 28 2013 00:38 MstrJinbo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 00:35 Faust852 wrote:On August 28 2013 00:28 LSN wrote:On August 28 2013 00:23 Faust852 wrote:On August 28 2013 00:22 LSN wrote:
Man I dont know what you are talking about. The way how the MMR works makes every matchup look kind of balanced in the lower ranks when looking at the overall statistics, understand it or not. I dont care what your winrates are and it is not important. The MMR doesn't consider race in the winrate, that's my point, so the balance-design is totally not linked to MMR. source? I am quite sure it does. But feel free to provide me any source that proves/explains that it doesnt. You're the one that should give me a source of what you are claming because it has never been said anywhere. I win/lose as much points from protoss or any other race with the same MMR. Ladder points aren't the same as MMR, but you are right that LSN needs to source his claims too
"Even matches" of course, so similar MMR. Eventhough we can more or less consider that ladder points with 0 bonus pool and a good amount of games are a nice method to compare level.
|
On August 28 2013 00:25 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2013 00:04 Faust852 wrote:On August 27 2013 23:40 LSN wrote:
troll is what you are, at least you appear like a troll after anything I write with having zero arguments but writing troll stuff. Naruto is arguing with wrong arguments, better face it.
It is just plain wrong that balance only affects the very highest levels of play and nothing else.
Also it is damn right that MMR equals winrates in lower leagues, so he got no point there.
And if you like, feel free to disprove that playing marine/mine rally is way easier/less punishing than playing against it (on. e.g low master level). I am strongly convinced it is because a single minor mistake frequently costs Zergs the game while terran is in permanent attack mode and after a mistake he can just fall back for half a minute to continue then. Terran can come back, zerg can't, and so on. I totally disagree, one bad engagment from the terran can be game changing in tvz, because once the zerg is in your production, it's basically lose even if the terran is ahead. And terrans can come back, yes, but only if the zerg throws its avantage. A bit one-sided, because the Zerg can make bad engagements that change the result/advantage of the game pretty easily too. Widow Mines are able to get off extremely lucky hits. People dont like to understand my posts and they "jerk off" about the examples I give without recognizing that these examples are just a startup idea to make them think differently. The last few posts have simply been an attempt to "enlighten Zerg players" into accepting the fact that killing mining bases wont limit a Terran that much due to the MULE and the core unit of the Marine. Keep on whining NarutO, I wont stop posting and so far no one has even tried proving me wrong about the "Marine vs Stalkers" unit density design problem (and others). Try to prove me wrong and I might have to change my opinion ...
we have answered you tonnes of times, marine vs stalker or the so called unit density problem is not a problem at all.
Stalkers are meant to scale poorly and they are meant to use as a support unit to fight off the vikings and sniping ghosts.
your enlighten post is just silly, everyone knows getting into the production facilities is awesome. Reason why zerg don't do it?
You don't do baneling ling run by into their main because you need a tonnes of banelings to kill off the wall offs.
You can't get into the production facilities other than doing your crazy strategies like roach drops.
Life does it by winning once nice engagement and counter attack to the production facilities. That's why zerg fight headon, not doing the enlightening strategy theory crafting posts. (roach drop requires: burrow movement upgrade, roaches (gas), roach movement speed (gas), overlord speed (gas), overlord drop (gas). where are you getting all the gas and how to stop bio mine pushes?)
|
1. Personal experience:
Well I remember from my own hots experience after the ZvZ spore buff and me being totally inactive for about 4 weeks. When I came back I lost about all ZvZs that I played because playes had already adapted and I had not.
So after about 0:10 in ZvZ I was suddenly facing platin/diamond opponents in ZvZ while still having medium master opponents in the other matchups.
2. Blizzard says they can fix/clean race statistics. They provide winrates pure and cleaned, you can research this.
How could they clean racial winrates (before/after MMR) if the MMR didnt take into account races when determining your opponent? Blizzard couldnt do this then.
|
Once again you argue with assumptions. Provide a source for your claims, otherwise no one will take your seriously (ever).
|
Someone of your intelligence should recognize that it is pretty much matter of fact, that if blizzard can provide race winrates before and after mmr then the mmr must take races into account.
It is common sense. So the other guy should provide something. I wonder why you ask me for more prove while my counter part has risen this statement without providing any informations.
|
Play your first match as Terran after you only played Zerg so far. You will have the same MMR and even after 10 games and 10 defeats, you will face slightly worse opponents/a lot worse opponents depending on the streak. Switch back to Zerg, you will still get worse opponents, because you are on a losing streak.
Only because Blizzard can provide statistics , doesn't mean the system they use to get it is applied when playing the game.
|
On August 28 2013 00:48 LSN wrote:
1. Personal experience:
Well I remember from my own hots experience after the ZvZ spore buff and me being totally inactive for about 4 weeks. When I came back I lost about all ZvZs that I played because playes had already adapted and I had not.
So after about 0:10 in ZvZ I was suddenly facing platin/diamond opponents in ZvZ while still having medium master opponents in the other matchups.
2. Blizzard says they can fix/clean race statistics. They provide winrates pure and cleaned, you can research this.
How could they clean racial winrates (before/after MMR) if the MMR didnt take into account races when determining your opponent? Blizzard couldnt do this then.
How many games, 10 ? Lmao, I had 500+ games this season, and I can relate to a friend of mine with over 2500 games last season.
As you said, you are innactive as a player, so what you say in this thread is irrelevant because of your lack of practice.
Edit : What said NarutO is even a better example than me. It just prove everything i said.
|
On August 28 2013 00:55 NarutO wrote:
Play your first match as Terran after you only played Zerg so far. You will have the same MMR and even after 10 games and 10 defeats, you will face slightly worse opponents/a lot worse opponents depending on the streak. Switch back to Zerg, you will still get worse opponents, because you are on a losing streak.
Only because Blizzard can provide statistics , doesn't mean the system they use to get it is applied when playing the game.
Well what you say is right. I still believe that opponents races are taken into account in MMR. I cant explain what happens if you switch the own race. I believe it makes sense to build an MMR with giving every player a seperate MMR against each of the 3 races that combines to a total player MMR.
But as blizzard doesnt provide any detail information about it and my counter part's arguement about this is "I played 500 games this season" it makes no sense to continue this little debate, I am quite sorry :p
edit: @faust no naruto proved nothing. Naruto explained rudimentary why it doesnt have to be the way I think it is, nothing else.
|
Quite an easy way to fly when proved wrong...
|
On August 28 2013 01:06 Faust852 wrote:
Quite an easy way to fly when proved wrong...
Fight-or-flight response, can never go wrong with survival instinct!
|
Some terran bro solidarity, even tho one is not knowing what the other is talking about. Great comedy!
The Dwf you please feel free to explain the MMR to me. While I gave arguments why I think it is a certain way, all you provided nothing else than saying "it doesnt have to be this way". Congrats.
Anyway you probably misunderstand me. I am not saying there are completely seperate mmrs for any matchups what is obviously not. What I say is that within a certain range that you are in the MMR can vary against the 3 different races. So if you start losing against one race many games and keep good winrates against another, the MMR gives you exactly against the race you have unsufficient winrates against worse opponents first. The total average then is lowered too of course.
|
|
|
On August 28 2013 00:31 NarutO wrote:
I didn't even read about your marine/stalker stuff, sorry to say. Every player that says that Terran is a lot easier on the lower-levels should simply try playing Terran. While minehits can be devastating, minehits on pro level are devastating because they are often times controlled / focused. Mines are volatile and unreliable, they don't magically connect to the biggest baneling clumb.
On a lower-level with proper macro, I dare to say that the fights generally favor Zerg, while macro overall generally does favor Terran. Muta/Ling/Bane is very mechanically demanding especially with injects and as lots of Zergs don't like to get a macrohatch, they bank minerals because they cannot support it. So problems are completely different from the problems SoulKey has.
I made suggestions about changing mines, yet you keep saying I am biased. I am not, I simply disagree that the mines to increase Terrans winrate on any level by a large margin, because I don't see it happening.
The fact that you don't see that Widow Mine increases terrans winrate on the highest level could come from the fact that you are biased. There was a time where you said it was only Innovation and Flash that could perform this play style and make it looked imbalanced, but it wasn't as it was just these two players being way superior to any players they faced. The fact is that more and more tip top terrans from korea are getting close to figuring how to play biomines almost as good as Innovation, while not a single solution from zerg has ever been found, because I feel pretty safe now to say that there is none. I find it crazy to hear from some player saying some stuff like "well, it's easy, you just have to cut 3 mutas and transition to Hive, pfffff stupids zerg", as no one, from Soulkey to Jaedong, with all the coach they have and the 12 hours practice per day, has never thought/tested that?
To be honest I don't care at all if there is just a tiny little patch to WM if that's all it's needed to resolve this balance issue, even if will still sucks as much against bio mines as I do right know, I just want to see a nice, balanced match up again because ZvT usually sucks to watch right now.
|
it is not in the text. But please would you be so kind to quote the for this little debate important passage?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
