|
On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:47 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:44 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:35 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:29 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:25 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:24 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:
[quote]So you don't care about balance. Got it.
The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s).
And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T.
Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game.
You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. Again with the strawman. Ive never said it should be balanced for all levels, im saying that it should be balanced for top ladder, since anyone who plays ranked aspires to get higher up on ladder and given that its impossible to balance it at all levels this is what has to be aimed at. So stop fucking putting words in my mouth. Ive already said that I dont mind seeing a 5-7% difference in race representation in the upper leagues, but to have 23% t in gm and 44% protoss and almost the same istuation being found in master; you seriously dont see any problem with that? Are you delusional? No, I have no problem with that. If you altered the game so that similar numbers were found in each leagues, you would mess up the top balance of play, which would lead to people switching to the "favored" race, which would create a similarly unequal situation. Except this time, the top level balance would be messed up along with the GM representation. Uneven representation + good top-level balance >>>> uneven representation + poor top-level balance. Except this isnt true, we already now the game has had periods with fairly equal distribution on ladder and very close to 50% winrates in tournaments. You simply make an anfounded assumption that if the game is balanced so that there is equal race-distribution in grandmaster then it must inevitably be imbalanced in the proscene. Why would that be? Because current proscene winrates are balanced. Therefore if you objectively buff T and/or nerf P, you would alter the balance at the top. Period. Players were far worse at the game and the map pool was far different when racial distributions were closer to even across-the-board. It is in no way safe to assume that as the game has gotten more figured out and developed that you can return to this state. Again not true at all. Introducing more earlygame options for terran wouldnt necessarily scew probalance at all but make more strats viable on ladder which would reflect positively on the race. You make completely unsound assumptions which are blatantly false. We already have the proof that the number of earlygame options a race has doesnt necessarily reflect their overall performance in the proscene, just look at protoss who has 20 allins who are all perfectly viable in grandmaster but only maybe 5 who are really viable when you play a top tier opponent. Im asking for the same for terran. Youre assuming more options means more powerful options. No... we need more options, neither of which needs to be more powerful than the current ones are. Hence it becomes a matter of scouting for the protoss, who now often doesnt even bother scouting while terran has to send an scv AND a reaper. How do you introduce those options in a way that doesn't disrupt current balance, though? The way I already told you, make strats that are viable but no more powerful than the current ones are. Introduce more options while not making them more powerful than the current ones are. Youre assuming more options means more "power", in which case youve proven my point since protoss has the most earlygame options BY FAR. You keep listing things you want done, but not how to do them. That's the entire point. Pay me a salary and I will. Yawn. Conversation over.
|
On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch.
The wins Terran got don't count because its to early after the patch. However, if you look at this tread on Aligulac, you will notice that that Terrans are losing as much as they did after the dreaded queen patch.
Its to early to tell.....but if you look at this overall trend.
Its to early.....but look at this overall trend.
wtf?!?!??!
On December 09 2013 08:49 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:46 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:43 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:38 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:37 ffadicted wrote:
Most ppl want higher skill ceiling in the game. With that will come inherent imbalances in the lower levels, and we just have to live with that imo. How making proxy oracle the most common strat on the ladder raising the skill ceiling ? Flavor of the month until everyone figures out how to deal with it and moves on? People won't, because proxy oracle is a non risk strat. It forces the terran to overreact and won't be ahead in eco + he can't be aggressive for a long period of time. What is really really funny here is that all the protoss are happy how the game is at the moment. Like you DON'T want a game balance at GM/Master level AND pro level. You are quite happy to have freewin on ladder while claiming "pro terrans win tourney lolol". Wtf. Its ok Faust852, you can keep complaining about Protoss and how BS. And other terrans will beat the protoss and get over their problems. Those who can, do. Those who can't, blame the game. You really are not the good person to tell me that, you are in platinium with I guess less than 100 games per season. How dare you tell me that, for real ? I try hard everygame to figure out how to beat protoss, it doesn't change that I have the right to complain at the same time about it. It's not you who have to play 12 TvP out of 15 games a day. It's getting ridiculous how weak of a troll you are.
It doesn't matter what league I am in any game. On my worst day at anything, SC2, work, life, cooking, love, I don't have 10% of the whine you do. My comment has nothing to do with your skill at SC2 and everything to do with how much you blame perceived of imbalances for your losses.
|
On December 09 2013 08:52 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. lol this balance whining by Terran is not new, and the statistics show that all year long, it's been a balanced game. So if all the statistics are "irrelevant" (which is obviously a bullshit claim to make), then there's no evidence to support any of these whiny claims. Cool. Oh, the last week was tough for Terran because of the new patch? The first month of every balance patch offers a new change in the metagame that all races need to adjust to. That's part of the game.
Look at this http://aligulac.com/reports/balance/
See, after the queen buff, stats were still around 50% for 2 months. Are you saying TvZ was balanced after that patch ? It's the same now.
|
On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 06:54 Snusmumriken wrote:
The only clear measurement of imbalance on ladder would be unequal race-representation in the higher leagues. Which, to no ones surprise im sure, is just what we see. Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking shit about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed...
Call me when terran has 5 players in Code S and 1 in Ro16 lol
Starcraft will never reach levels of imbalance like the sad zealot GomTvT broodlord imbafestor times. And that's a damn good thing, we don't want to go there ever again for any race.
I don't think anyone is denying terran is clearly at a little disadvantage right now, but it's pretty obvious the people whining in this thread are over exagerating it a lot to validate their ladder losses which are likely due to trivial things like supply blocks, poor army control and sub-par macro. The changes needed to balance top level TvP are very small, like PO tweeks and small late game adjustments to terran's ability to fight back against combined splash damage.
|
On December 09 2013 08:53 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. The wins Terran got don't count because its to early after the patch. However, if you look at this tread on Aligulac, you will notice that that Terrans are losing as much as they did after the dreaded queen patch. Its to early to tell.....but if you look at this overall trend.
Its to early.....but look at this overall trend.wtf?!?!??!
You love to play with words to get to your point, sorry if i'm not as good as you with english. My point was that these stats took W/R ratio right after a patch, it's logical that it won't really change statistics. BUT IF YOU LOOK at the most recent stats, it looks like a trend is starting to appear.
|
On December 09 2013 08:54 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:[quote] Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking shit about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed... Call me when terran has 5 players in Code S and 1 in Ro16 lol Starcraft will never reach levels of imbalance like the sad zealot GomTvT broodlord imbafestor times. And that's a damn good thing, we don't want to go there ever again for any race. I don't think anyone is denying terran is clearly at a little disadvantage right now, but it's pretty obvious the people whining in this thread are over exagerating it a lot to validate their ladder losses which are likely due to trivial things like supply blocks, poor army control and sub-par macro. The changes needed to balance top level TvP are very small, like PO tweeks and small late game tweeks to terran's effectiveness
Lol "no ones is denying"? Have you read the thread at all? Tell Plansix and his platinum buddies that rofl.
Ive already stated again and again that introducing more options wouldnt necessarily scew balance in terrans favour no more than buffing a certain strat makes protoss overpowered in the proscene. Making more strats viable doesnt mean making a race more powerful as a whole at the very top-end of the spectrum because pro-players know exactly what to look for and how to respond. However it has a huge effect on ladder where no one practices 10 hours a day to make sure you get the perfect response to every attackoption down perfectly. Theres no coincidence that the amount of early game allins and being impervious to all earlygame attacks coincides with being heavily overrepresented in gm and master. Thats all im saying.
|
Thoughts from a Terran player - Around 1000 points on EU and AM.
The game must be both fun and balanced.
As a Terran player today when I play ladder I am at exactly 50% vs Protoss at EU, around 65% at AM.
So for me, its hard to whine on the win ratios. But what I can balance on is how fun every TvP is for me. When I face Protoss I have to make my whole build around having six marines at the time the first Oracle can hit me. Anything else and I just have autoloss vs probably the most common build on ladder at the moment. That limits me to very few builds that is safe, good and reliable. As a Terran player, this ends up with me going the exactly same build, game after game, after game which in the long run makes the game extremly boring to play.
I do not feel like I can influence the pace of the game.
Every single desicion being made untill Medivacs are out are decided by the Protoss player. As a Terran player, I have no way what so ever of forcing a Protoss player into any direction. I have to scout, react and then defend whatever is thrown at me. If I scout nothing is thrown at me, I still have no way of doing any damage due to Photon Overcharge.
The gameplay in the current meta with Terran not being able to influence the pace of the game or force the Protoss player to react at makes it feel very boring to play and the whole idea with a Strategy game is lost for me. Sure its fun to scout, react and play a good game. However, it would be fun if I also could feel like what I did actually made a difference for the other player. As of now - Protoss players can do almost any build blind and just negate scouting at all.
This makes it easy for bad RTS players to play Protoss to a certain level on ladder.
As of now Protoss quite a few options in every matchup for All-Ins.
All of those all-ins are extremply powerful and forces to opponent to react.
I will use TvP as an example.
Blinkstalker All-in:
Forces the Terran player to give up the natural and the whole game comes down to just bunker placement, not slip on macro and hope to not get out of position. A Protoss player on ladder can force this situation EVERY single game against a Terran. Being hopeless at macro and having no sence for the game what so ever. Just do the all in and get good at it and you will win alot of ladder games.
The same is true for DT-rushes, Oracle-proxies (where a single Oracle sometimes just straight up wins the game if you miss a marine for a second or two).
The Protoss player here can force certain situations that neglet what for an example TvZ is all about - strong mechanics, micro in maxed out situations and desicion making, multitasking and all of this.
By just allining again, and again and again non of the many factors deciding who is a good RTS player (mechanics, macro, multitasking) is just negated and the game turns down to a single situation. The game becomes very limited. Your decisions becomes very limited.
Because of that you can actually be quite bad as a Protoss player, but still be very good on ladder. Protoss as a race has the ability to negate many of the things RTS is generally about.
|
On December 09 2013 08:56 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:53 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. The wins Terran got don't count because its to early after the patch. However, if you look at this tread on Aligulac, you will notice that that Terrans are losing as much as they did after the dreaded queen patch. Its to early to tell.....but if you look at this overall trend.
Its to early.....but look at this overall trend.wtf?!?!??! You love to play with words to get to your point, sorry if i'm not as good as you with english. My point was that these stats took W/R ratio right after a patch, it's logical that it won't really change statistics. BUT IF YOU LOOK at the most recent stats, it looks like a trend is starting to appear.
You stated that a bunch of terran wins in major events didn't matter because it was to early. Then you stated that a long term trend was appearing.
It is either to early or there is a long term trend. It can't be both. If you want to cite the long term trend, you need to accept the wins as by terrans in major events as evidence. You can't just cherry pick the information that supports your position.
(well you can cherry pick the information that supports your position, this is the internet after all)
|
On December 09 2013 08:54 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:[quote] Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking shit about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed... Call me when terran has 5 players in Code S and 1 in Ro16 lol Starcraft will never reach levels of imbalance like the sad zealot GomTvT broodlord imbafestor times. And that's a damn good thing, we don't want to go there ever again for any race. I don't think anyone is denying terran is clearly at a little disadvantage right now, but it's pretty obvious the people whining in this thread are over exagerating it a lot to validate their ladder losses which are likely due to trivial things like supply blocks, poor army control and sub-par macro. The changes needed to balance top level TvP are very small, like PO tweeks and small late game adjustments to terran's ability to fight back against combined splash damage.
I never ever ask for a complet protoss review, I just want a game that's more fair at every level, as you said, MSC tweeks, oracle ? That's all. It's only Plansix that try to make me looks like a bad whinny guy while he doesn't give a single argument ever.
|
On December 09 2013 08:54 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:[quote] Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking !@#$%^&* about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed... Call me when terran has 5 players in Code S and 1 in Ro16 lol Starcraft will never reach levels of imbalance like the sad zealot GomTvT broodlord imbafestor times. And that's a !@#$%^&* good thing, we don't want to go there ever again for any race. I don't think anyone is denying terran is clearly at a little disadvantage right now, but it's pretty obvious the people whining in this thread are over exagerating it a lot to validate their ladder losses which are likely due to trivial things like supply blocks, poor army control and sub-par macro. The changes needed to balance top level TvP are very small, like PO tweeks and small late game adjustments to terran's ability to fight back against combined splash damage.
Really?
I don't think so if you look (properly) at Aliguacs stats. The stats showed us that there were much much fewer terran games being reported - the most likely explanation for that is that you simply have to be a better player to play terran at competitive level than for the other races. This means that the W/R you see on Aliguac are bias'ed as they involve superior terran players against inferior zergs and protoss's.
The ladder btw tells us the exact same story.
Gom TvT is nothing compared to this, as terran was only dominant in code S during that period which easily could be attrituted to non balance factors (for instance variance and a lag-effect).
Today, we have significant statistical evidence telling us that terran is significantly underpowered. I believe whine is justified.
|
On December 09 2013 09:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:56 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:53 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. The wins Terran got don't count because its to early after the patch. However, if you look at this tread on Aligulac, you will notice that that Terrans are losing as much as they did after the dreaded queen patch. Its to early to tell.....but if you look at this overall trend.
Its to early.....but look at this overall trend.wtf?!?!??! You love to play with words to get to your point, sorry if i'm not as good as you with english. My point was that these stats took W/R ratio right after a patch, it's logical that it won't really change statistics. BUT IF YOU LOOK at the most recent stats, it looks like a trend is starting to appear. You stated that a bunch of terran wins in major events didn't matter because it was to early. Then you stated that a long term trend was appearing. It is either to early or there is a long term trend. It can't be both. If you want to cite the long term trend, you need to accept the wins as by terrans in major events as evidence. You can't just cherry pick the information that supports your position. (well you can cherry pick the information that supports your position, this is the internet after all)
Quote me where I said "LONG" trend. I just said a trend, and you can see a trend even in its early state. wtf is your point.
|
On December 09 2013 08:52 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:44 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:35 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:29 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:25 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:24 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Snusmumriken wrote:
[quote]
Again with the strawman. Ive never said it should be balanced for all levels, im saying that it should be balanced for top ladder, since anyone who plays ranked aspires to get higher up on ladder and given that its impossible to balance it at all levels this is what has to be aimed at. So stop fucking putting words in my mouth. Ive already said that I dont mind seeing a 5-7% difference in race representation in the upper leagues, but to have 23% t in gm and 44% protoss and almost the same istuation being found in master; you seriously dont see any problem with that? Are you delusional? No, I have no problem with that. If you altered the game so that similar numbers were found in each leagues, you would mess up the top balance of play, which would lead to people switching to the "favored" race, which would create a similarly unequal situation. Except this time, the top level balance would be messed up along with the GM representation. Uneven representation + good top-level balance >>>> uneven representation + poor top-level balance. Except this isnt true, we already now the game has had periods with fairly equal distribution on ladder and very close to 50% winrates in tournaments. You simply make an anfounded assumption that if the game is balanced so that there is equal race-distribution in grandmaster then it must inevitably be imbalanced in the proscene. Why would that be? Because current proscene winrates are balanced. Therefore if you objectively buff T and/or nerf P, you would alter the balance at the top. Period. Players were far worse at the game and the map pool was far different when racial distributions were closer to even across-the-board. It is in no way safe to assume that as the game has gotten more figured out and developed that you can return to this state. Again not true at all. Introducing more earlygame options for terran wouldnt necessarily scew probalance at all but make more strats viable on ladder which would reflect positively on the race. You make completely unsound assumptions which are blatantly false. We already have the proof that the number of earlygame options a race has doesnt necessarily reflect their overall performance in the proscene, just look at protoss who has 20 allins who are all perfectly viable in grandmaster but only maybe 5 who are really viable when you play a top tier opponent. Im asking for the same for terran. Youre assuming more options means more powerful options. No... we need more options, neither of which needs to be more powerful than the current ones are. Hence it becomes a matter of scouting for the protoss, who now often doesnt even bother scouting while terran has to send an scv AND a reaper. How do you introduce those options in a way that doesn't disrupt current balance, though? The way I already told you, make strats that are viable but no more powerful than the current ones are. Introduce more options while not making them more powerful than the current ones are. Youre assuming more options means more "power", in which case youve proven my point since protoss has the most earlygame options BY FAR. You keep listing things you want done, but not how to do them. That's the entire point. Pay me a salary and I will. Yawn. Conversation over.
cheap cop-out for "I know im wrong"
|
On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 06:54 Snusmumriken wrote:
The only clear measurement of imbalance on ladder would be unequal race-representation in the higher leagues. Which, to no ones surprise im sure, is just what we see. Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking shit about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed...
1. The winrates are supposed to approach 50% because that reflects a balanced game. Your infatuation with having the same number of players from each race has clearly made you lose sight of what balancing a game means. That's why, when the balance stats are released every month or so, they tell us the win percentage. Because that matters. Why you would prefer Terrans to start losing *as long as the majority of players were Terran* is beyond me. I (and most people, we've seen) would prefer a game balanced around the quality of each match-up, rather than the quantity of each match-up. But you're more than welcome to have a different philosophy... I just don't think a successful e-sport can be built around that.
2. And now the Terrans have a 50% winrate, so clearly at least some of those nerfs were justified. The Sad Zealot club was made when there was an enormous lack of Protoss success, and the winrates reflected Protosses getting their asses kicked and Terrans dominating (as you freely admit). The reverse is not true right now. Comparing that to now, when Terrans are winning just as much as Protoss and Zerg, completely invalidates your argument. You don't get a Sad Marine club when your win percentage only drops down to 50% lol.
|
On December 09 2013 09:02 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 09:00 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:56 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:53 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. The wins Terran got don't count because its to early after the patch. However, if you look at this tread on Aligulac, you will notice that that Terrans are losing as much as they did after the dreaded queen patch. Its to early to tell.....but if you look at this overall trend.
Its to early.....but look at this overall trend.wtf?!?!??! You love to play with words to get to your point, sorry if i'm not as good as you with english. My point was that these stats took W/R ratio right after a patch, it's logical that it won't really change statistics. BUT IF YOU LOOK at the most recent stats, it looks like a trend is starting to appear. You stated that a bunch of terran wins in major events didn't matter because it was to early. Then you stated that a long term trend was appearing. It is either to early or there is a long term trend. It can't be both. If you want to cite the long term trend, you need to accept the wins as by terrans in major events as evidence. You can't just cherry pick the information that supports your position. (well you can cherry pick the information that supports your position, this is the internet after all) Quote me where I said "LONG" trend. I just said a trend, and you can see a trend even in it's early state. wtf is your point.
Then its not to early for the terran wins to be accepted that professional players have adapted to the patch and are able to beat protoss. Trends are something some that develop over time. It can't be to early and also have things develop over time.
That's the point of my comment. You threw out data you didn't agree with and then pulled some data out that you liked. Thats not how proving things works. You can't just throw out the wins from terrans because you feel like it.
|
On December 09 2013 09:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:[quote] Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking shit about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed... 1. The winrates are supposed to approach 50% because that reflects a balanced game. Your infatuation with having the same number of players from each race has clearly made you lose sight of what balancing a game means. That's why, when the balance stats are released every month or so, they tell us the win percentage. Because that matters. Why you would prefer Terrans to start losing *as long as the majority of players were Terran* is beyond me. I (and most people, we've seen) would prefer a game balanced around the quality of each match-up, rather than the quantity of each match-up. But you're more than welcome to have a different philosophy... I just don't think a successful e-sport can be built around that. 2. And now the Terrans have a 50% winrate, so clearly at least some of those nerfs were justified. The Sad Zealot club was made when there was an enormous lack of Protoss success, and the winrates reflected Protosses getting their asses kicked and Terrans dominating (as you freely admit). The reverse is not true right now. Comparing that to now, when Terrans are winning just as much as Protoss and Zerg, completely invalidates your argument. You don't get a Sad Marine club when your win percentage only drops down to 50% lol.
If there was only 1 terran in GM and he manage to keep 50% WR in TvP, would you say that it's perfectly normal ? It's the same right now but without the exageration.
|
On December 09 2013 09:05 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:48 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:21 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 08:17 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:05 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:56 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:51 RampancyTW wrote:On December 09 2013 07:45 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 09 2013 07:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:[quote] Unless, of course, there were other reasons why people would pick one race over the other besides "This race lets me win the most". But I suppose master level players can't play for fun, right? And choosing a race that you deem more interesting would be out of the picture too? Over-representation of Race X =/= Overpowered Race X. Race X would be overpowered if it consistently beats Race Y a significant percentage time more, and at the peak levels of play where there is less variation and fundamental confounding variables. Which is something we do not see ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 ). Data is a beautiful thing. Except its already been demonstrated that terran is underrepresented in the higher leagues whilst being fairly equal in overall representation. Youre not fooling anyone. So what happens if you tweak balance to improve representation in GM and top Terran winrates vP and vZ skyrocket to 60% percent? Just leave it as-is because GM is balanced? Eventually players would start switch to T because of the imbalance at the top level, regardless of GM representation, and so the pendulum would swing towards Terran over-representation. Unequal representation can be a symptom of an imbalanced game, but if things are balanced at the top level, it means pretty much nothing. I dont give a fucking shit about the pro scene. I didnt pay for this game for pros to play a balanced game, I payed for it so that I could play a balanced and FUN game. Given that protoss has literally 20 earlygame options where terran has literally 2 doesnt make for an enjoyable experience, and anyone with a brain realizes that. Were already seeing pros switching to protoss and foreign terrans having zero impact, but surely that is just a coincidence just like its a coincidence that gm is 44% protoss and 23% terran. So you don't care about balance. Got it. The skill levels of you and everybody else will always constantly be in flux. It's pretty much impossible to make things balanced at all skill levels of play, so having three different races with different strengths and weaknesses will create many, many different thresholds for one race being easier or harder or better or worse or whatever than the other(s). And what about the Protosses that play against T players in GM with good winrates vP? If you nerf P/buff T, you screw over P players that have to play against those already good T. Your desires are inherently selfish. Balancing for any level of play other than the top will create imbalances at the top level, and additionally create a bunch of players with a different set of problems than you that now have an unfair game. You don't want Blizzard to make things better for the game, you want them to make things better for you. The sooner you admit it and acknowledge it, the sooner you can stop whining here. The game can be balance a different skill level of play. See March 2012 where everything was 50% at pro, and no one cried about GM or Master. Then patchqueen came. See October 2013, stats were close to 50% at pro level, GM was closer to 30% for T, and noone cried. Than PatchOracleNerfMine came. Indeed. Theres this random assumption that you EITHER balance at Taeja and Dear level OR that you have 33% of each race in Grandmaster and that there cant be anything in between. Theres CLEARLY a problem with protoss earlygame options, which, while not necessarily affecting Taeja and the likes on a good day, has a hugely detrimental effect on tvp for anyone below 250apm. And to see protoss come in here and pretend that nothing is amiss when we see such a huge discrepancy between the races when it comes to viable strats is the biggest joke of it all. If Grandmaster was made up of 44% terran and 23% protoss wed never hear the fucking end of it. So stop being such fucking hypocrites. Why would I care what the race distribution of GM was as long as each race was winning an even percentage of the time? Perhaps I'd have fewer role models to emulate or watch, but there's still a few hundred Terrans in GM, and not all top players play GM anyway. You ranting about things and justifying them by saying "Well if the tables were turned, you would rant too" doesn't actually validate your claims, because there's no evidence that we would be complaining about how not having fun = imbalanced, or how having a hundred fewer players of Race X means that Race X is necessarily being discriminated against. It's fine that you care more about the balance of the racial distribution than you do the results of the games, but holy cow, looking at these last few posts of yours... you're really, really angry :/ 1. Winrates on ladder are meant to approximate 50%. That tells us nothing 2. Someone has forgotten the sad zealot fanclub. Protoss players whined about terran being op all the fucking time back in the day, and they were right it was op and terran was nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed again. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed. And nerfed... 1. The winrates are supposed to approach 50% because that reflects a balanced game. Your infatuation with having the same number of players from each race has clearly made you lose sight of what balancing a game means. That's why, when the balance stats are released every month or so, they tell us the win percentage. Because that matters. Why you would prefer Terrans to start losing *as long as the majority of players were Terran* is beyond me. I (and most people, we've seen) would prefer a game balanced around the quality of each match-up, rather than the quantity of each match-up. But you're more than welcome to have a different philosophy... I just don't think a successful e-sport can be built around that. 2. And now the Terrans have a 50% winrate, so clearly at least some of those nerfs were justified. The Sad Zealot club was made when there was an enormous lack of Protoss success, and the winrates reflected Protosses getting their asses kicked and Terrans dominating (as you freely admit). The reverse is not true right now. Comparing that to now, when Terrans are winning just as much as Protoss and Zerg, completely invalidates your argument. You don't get a Sad Marine club when your win percentage only drops down to 50% lol.
No, the winrates approach 50% on ladder because thats how the laddersystem is built up. Which surely you know so I assume you misunderstood what I said. That is precisely the problem, terran and protoss are roughly equal in overall playerbase yet protoss makes up 44% of grandmaster and terran 23%. What arent you getting? There cant be a quality of matchup when one race has 20 allins that are easy to execture and simply end the game if not defended properly, BUT at the same time are easily to transition out of and usually end you up a little behind at worst. The rest has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote. You have a painstaking habit of misrepresenting what other people say.
Just read the post by Glorfindel!, I am with him a 100%
|
On December 09 2013 09:06 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 09:02 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 09:00 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:56 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:53 Plansix wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. The wins Terran got don't count because its to early after the patch. However, if you look at this tread on Aligulac, you will notice that that Terrans are losing as much as they did after the dreaded queen patch. Its to early to tell.....but if you look at this overall trend.
Its to early.....but look at this overall trend.wtf?!?!??! You love to play with words to get to your point, sorry if i'm not as good as you with english. My point was that these stats took W/R ratio right after a patch, it's logical that it won't really change statistics. BUT IF YOU LOOK at the most recent stats, it looks like a trend is starting to appear. You stated that a bunch of terran wins in major events didn't matter because it was to early. Then you stated that a long term trend was appearing. It is either to early or there is a long term trend. It can't be both. If you want to cite the long term trend, you need to accept the wins as by terrans in major events as evidence. You can't just cherry pick the information that supports your position. (well you can cherry pick the information that supports your position, this is the internet after all) Quote me where I said "LONG" trend. I just said a trend, and you can see a trend even in it's early state. wtf is your point. Then its not to early for the terran wins to be accepted that professional players have adapted to the patch and are able to beat protoss. That's the point of my comment. You threw out data you didn't agree with and then pulled some data out that you liked.
As I said earlier, check Aligulac stats from the patch queen, stats were about 50% for 2 month after the patch. Then it gradually go down to 45%- without any change from Blizzard afterward. Here the the way it works is even faster : It stays at 50% for a few weeks, then protoss see :"oh wait, oracle pretty cool now" and start doing it much more. Now stats tend to favor protoss, and it will continue until Blizzard change something or Terran found something viable.
|
On December 09 2013 08:53 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:52 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. lol this balance whining by Terran is not new, and the statistics show that all year long, it's been a balanced game. So if all the statistics are "irrelevant" (which is obviously a bullshit claim to make), then there's no evidence to support any of these whiny claims. Cool. Oh, the last week was tough for Terran because of the new patch? The first month of every balance patch offers a new change in the metagame that all races need to adjust to. That's part of the game. Look at this http://aligulac.com/reports/balance/See, after the queen buff, stats were still around 50% for 2 months. Are you saying TvZ was balanced after that patch ? It's the same now.
if they were at 50%, yes it would mean that we would have had to assume that it was balanced (if hose winrates were our only way to judge balance).
but you are misstaking 1.4.3 for the queenpatch, which it was not. The patch with the queen range change was done in may. in aligulac the winrates dropped in may and stayed low apart from August.
|
On December 09 2013 09:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2013 08:53 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:52 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:47 Faust852 wrote:On December 09 2013 08:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 09 2013 08:33 Maismz wrote:
And if bad player, we'll call them P for exemple, have 50% winrate vs good player, i'll randomly call them Z or T, is the game balanced ? I don't think winrate mean anything, but from what i feel after watching a lot of tournaments lately, P is ruining the game atm, and the race being op give win of good player like parting, rain or any other smart and good toss less meaning. First of all, the tournament results are balanced. Data: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=437836 Second, if two players (who have played many, many games against each other) have about a 50/50 winrate against each other, all that says is that their next series is likely to be a close one. It may not be, but that's the best you can extrapolate from their results. It doesn't say that their races are imbalanced. On a related note, it's impossible to extrapolate the results of an entire race based on the success of one pro-gamer. All three races have a bunch of top tier players. Here are a few, in no particular order: Terran: Taeja, Innovation, MMA, Maru, Polt, Bomber. Zerg: Soulkey, Scarlett, Life, Jaedong Protoss: Soulkey, sOs, Dear, Rain As I said earlier, these stats are irrelevent because it's just too early to tell. Look at the last 2 weeks. And see how the trend tend toward imbalance. Check Aligulac's balance curve. Terran is at its lowest point since Queen patch. lol this balance whining by Terran is not new, and the statistics show that all year long, it's been a balanced game. So if all the statistics are "irrelevant" (which is obviously a bullshit claim to make), then there's no evidence to support any of these whiny claims. Cool. Oh, the last week was tough for Terran because of the new patch? The first month of every balance patch offers a new change in the metagame that all races need to adjust to. That's part of the game. Look at this http://aligulac.com/reports/balance/See, after the queen buff, stats were still around 50% for 2 months. Are you saying TvZ was balanced after that patch ? It's the same now. if they were at 50%, yes it would mean that we would have had to assume that it was balanced (if hose winrates were our only way to judge balance). but you are misstaking 1.4.3 for the queenpatch, which it was not. The patch with the queen range change was done in may. in aligulac the winrates dropped in may and stayed low apart from August.
Is it ? My bad. I'll have to wait for next month stats then to see how the game evolves.
But still, this is a great exemple that Blizzard shouldn't fix what is not broken.
|
My ladder games are important, I tell you. IMPORTANT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
