|
On December 11 2013 00:54 -Celestial- wrote:
If you guys are seriously trying to argue that balance is:
1. Subjective in that people should be able to ignore the actual numbers and facts to claim that it isn't (i.e. people are saying that its balanced because the winrates on the highest level are balanced, but you want to say that its not because of...reasons apparently). - Faust852
and
2. Should not be done at the highest level (i.e. the best professional gamers in premier tournaments) but done on the whim of "average" players. - Snusmumriken
Then all I can say is that Starcraft 2 is a highly competitive esport in which it is vital that at the highest level everyone has an even chance. It seems like that it may not be the kind of game for you.
I have nothing more to say to you for today, especially with the slightly irritating ad hominems. Farewell.
Your assumption that having a game thats balanced at the top and balanced on ladder and midtier level would be mutually exclusive is completely nonsensical. Add more variety to terran earlygame and youll see a much better ladderrepresentation and as long as each option isnt too strong in itself then it will not have a huge impact on the top of the proscene where people know how to react perfectly to each build. Bear in mind that im not talking exact equal distribution in master and gm, Im simply saying that when we have 44% of one race and 23% of another, zero foreign terrans with any success whatsoever in hots, something is clearly wrong.
Otherwise why would protoss be able to have so many early game pressures and yet you claim the game is balanced. If so, then surely terran can have some earlygame options and the game will still remain balanced, no?
Protoss freeriders, thats what you lot are.
|
What it comes down to right now is that Terrans are Able to exploit a Single Timing according to what most protoss players are now doing.... Its a approx 5 minute timing even if that window was closed to 1 minute or even 15 Seconds of a timing The Terran top players would still be able to exploit that to get a 50% winrate.
Honestly I would really like to see what the winrates are for Key moments in the game in TvP..... I think that will show what exactly is being talked about..... Instead of Celestial going " You guys just need to man up and be as good as Taeja......"
What the winrate is between These timings:
0-9:30
9:30-14:00
14:00 - 18:00
18:00+
I think we would see an interesting picture painted....
|
On December 10 2013 22:46 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2013 22:30 TheDwf wrote:On December 10 2013 22:27 Orek wrote:So, is it impossible to know historical GM ladder race distribution? I know I can check current ones here: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/racehttp://kr.battle.net/sc2/ko/ladder/grandmaster/heart-of-the-swarm, but I can't check past distribution. I don't know how meaningful it is to discuss ladder distribution if we don't know how it has been aside from people's somewhat vague memory. Both "too many P in GM" and "P is natually better in bo1" arguments can be valid only if we have a reference point in the past. I mean, I personally think both are true, but neither can be even circumstantially proven without past data. There's some data about 2011 and early 2012 here, but after that it seems there's a blind spot. Zerg was probably the most represented race in GML worldwide at the end of 2012. Ah. Thank you. I just found an image I took for my research at the end of 2012 (2012 Season 5), when Zerg was considered most dominant. It included in top 45 T: 11 Z: 18 P: 16 + Show Spoiler +I guess it fill up a blank.
From my memory since seasons when diamond was wash highest legue , Protoss was always highest represented race in top league globally. It probably changed at the end of WoL when Zerg had higher representation. However i don't recall Z/P with above 40% representation in GM and Terran below 25%
|
On December 11 2013 00:54 -Celestial- wrote:
If you guys are seriously trying to argue that balance is:
1. Subjective in that people should be able to ignore the actual numbers and facts to claim that it isn't (i.e. people are saying that its balanced because the winrates on the highest level are balanced, but you want to say that its not because of...reasons apparently). - Faust852
and
2. Should not be done at the highest level (i.e. the best professional gamers in premier tournaments) but done on the whim of "average" players. - Snusmumriken
Then all I can say is that Starcraft 2 is a highly competitive esport in which it is vital that at the highest level everyone has an even chance. It seems like that it may not be the kind of game for you.
I have nothing more to say to you for today, especially with the slightly irritating ad hominems. Farewell.
The whole argument boils down to: Make the game easier for me. Forget the pros and the fact that they win games, I am having problems and that is what matters.
Its almost a valid complaint if you take it at face value. The complaint that I can't win and I don't know what I doing wrong is ok. Blaming the game is when it falls apart. But then the endless appeals to authority and claims of design + other bullshit just rob it of any merit.
|
IDK why everyone insists on insulting everyone else in this thread haha
Can balance discussion and race/race-choice insults not be mutually exclusive? lol
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 11 2013 01:00 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2013 00:54 -Celestial- wrote:
If you guys are seriously trying to argue that balance is:
1. Subjective in that people should be able to ignore the actual numbers and facts to claim that it isn't (i.e. people are saying that its balanced because the winrates on the highest level are balanced, but you want to say that its not because of...reasons apparently). - Faust852
and
2. Should not be done at the highest level (i.e. the best professional gamers in premier tournaments) but done on the whim of "average" players. - Snusmumriken
Then all I can say is that Starcraft 2 is a highly competitive esport in which it is vital that at the highest level everyone has an even chance. It seems like that it may not be the kind of game for you.
I have nothing more to say to you for today, especially with the slightly irritating ad hominems. Farewell. Your assumption that having a game thats balanced at the top and balanced on ladder and midtier level would be mutually exclusive is completely nonsensical. Add more variety to terran earlygame and youll see a much better ladderrepresentation and as long as each option isnt too strong in itself then it will not have a huge impact on the top of the proscene where people know how to react perfectly to each build. Bear in mind that im not talking exact equal distribution in master and gm, Im simply saying that when we have 44% of one race and 23% of another, zero foreign terrans with any success whatsoever in hots, something is clearly wrong. Otherwise why would protoss be able to have so many early game pressures and yet you claim the game is balanced. If so, then surely terran can have some earlygame options and the game will still remain balanced, no? Protoss freeriders, thats what you lot are.
That's not how the game works.
If you simply add options to a race, that increases it's overall power in the matchup. This means the other race has to adjust and change it's builds to account for it, which weakens it's later game plays and destroys some of it's opening strategies entirely. Right now, the matchup is approximately balanced at the top level (2-3% in favor of toss as of the latest tournament data, easily within a margin of error for balanced). That means that with the current state of the game, terran wins around 50% of the time in the matchup. Can you imagine how badly toss would suck if you reversed who has the aggressive options in the early game? Toss would have to be totally defensive, have less tech, and enter the mid-game and then the late game in a worse position every single game (either that or do an all-in timing every single game).
Consider: if a protoss opens proxy oracle, proxy hellions or widow mines or even just a flat out widow mine/hellion drop will do a freaking metric ton of damage. However, those builds are shut down entirely by the standard protoss play of 1 gate FE into robo. If you get a one base build that flat out kills and defends a one base oracle opener (more options for you), the end result will be no more oracle openings ever, because they are unsafe. This might make you happy right now, but when you start forcing every protoss to go back to WoL turtle every single game, you're going to get frustrated again.
The problem most of you simply aren't considering is that adding options to one race takes them away from the other race. It was the addition of the mothership core that gave protoss options other than 1 gate FE into 3 gate into robo like they did every game in WoL. This is because of the vision it grants in small part, but has more to do with the defense ability allowing toss to survive more tech oriented builds. If you make it so terran aggression early on is successful, you are not just going to give terran aggression, but you are going to take away almost every protoss option.
It's not an easy problem to just solve, because you can't look at a single race in a vacuum: you have to consider the effects of a change on all 3 matchups.
Also: racial distribution on ladder =/= balance. In BW, it was widely recognized that the game was pretty close to balanced at the level where it mattered, but everyone would tell you that winning TvP at lower than the absolute top level was pretty damn hard.
As for balance: can't we stop blaming the game and accept that when we lose, it's because we screwed up? Until the data is released from pro gamers indicating that amazing terran players can't win tournaments anymore or terrans start going the way of protoss during the gomTvT era, claiming they are underpowered simply lacks conclusive data.
Most people in here complaining about something being over or under powered are simply looking for an excuse to avoid accepting the fact that they reason they lose is because of player error, and they aren't as good as they think they are.
|
On December 11 2013 01:47 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2013 01:00 Snusmumriken wrote:On December 11 2013 00:54 -Celestial- wrote:
If you guys are seriously trying to argue that balance is:
1. Subjective in that people should be able to ignore the actual numbers and facts to claim that it isn't (i.e. people are saying that its balanced because the winrates on the highest level are balanced, but you want to say that its not because of...reasons apparently). - Faust852
and
2. Should not be done at the highest level (i.e. the best professional gamers in premier tournaments) but done on the whim of "average" players. - Snusmumriken
Then all I can say is that Starcraft 2 is a highly competitive esport in which it is vital that at the highest level everyone has an even chance. It seems like that it may not be the kind of game for you.
I have nothing more to say to you for today, especially with the slightly irritating ad hominems. Farewell. Your assumption that having a game thats balanced at the top and balanced on ladder and midtier level would be mutually exclusive is completely nonsensical. Add more variety to terran earlygame and youll see a much better ladderrepresentation and as long as each option isnt too strong in itself then it will not have a huge impact on the top of the proscene where people know how to react perfectly to each build. Bear in mind that im not talking exact equal distribution in master and gm, Im simply saying that when we have 44% of one race and 23% of another, zero foreign terrans with any success whatsoever in hots, something is clearly wrong. Otherwise why would protoss be able to have so many early game pressures and yet you claim the game is balanced. If so, then surely terran can have some earlygame options and the game will still remain balanced, no? Protoss freeriders, thats what you lot are. That's not how the game works. If you simply add options to a race, that increases it's overall power in the matchup. This means the other race has to adjust and change it's builds to account for it, which weakens it's later game plays and destroys some of it's opening strategies entirely. Right now, the matchup is approximately balanced at the top level (2-3% in favor of toss as of the latest tournament data, easily within a margin of error for balanced). That means that with the current state of the game, terran wins around 50% of the time in the matchup. Can you imagine how badly toss would suck if you reversed who has the aggressive options in the early game? Toss would have to be totally defensive, have less tech, and enter the mid-game and then the late game in a worse position every single game (either that or do an all-in timing every single game). Consider: if a protoss opens proxy oracle, proxy hellions or widow mines or even just a flat out widow mine/hellion drop will do a freaking metric ton of damage. However, those builds are shut down entirely by the standard protoss play of 1 gate FE into robo. If you get a one base build that flat out kills and defends a one base oracle opener (more options for you), the end result will be no more oracle openings ever, because they are unsafe. This might make you happy right now, but when you start forcing every protoss to go back to WoL turtle every single game, you're going to get frustrated again. The problem most of you simply aren't considering is that adding options to one race takes them away from the other race. It was the addition of the mothership core that gave protoss options other than 1 gate FE into 3 gate into robo like they did every game in WoL. This is because of the vision it grants in small part, but has more to do with the defense ability allowing toss to survive more tech oriented builds. If you make it so terran aggression early on is successful, you are not just going to give terran aggression, but you are going to take away almost every protoss option. It's not an easy problem to just solve, because you can't look at a single race in a vacuum: you have to consider the effects of a change on all 3 matchups.
Not true at all. What ive suggested again and again is nerfing the msc so that nexus cannon has slightly less range and so that the visibility around msc is a bit less. That way opening blink actually has some risk, and that way tankpushes can be at least somewhat viable. Please explain how that would make protoss at dear-level weaker, or give protoss less options. You assume that more options necessarily means less options for other races, something which isnt at all true. Im saying we should add more options earlygame for terran, or make some options for protoss harder to execute. There are many ways of doing this, only some of which would make protoss weaker at the top. One thing we SHOULDNT do is give added incentive for proxying shit all over the map, which is just what the latest patch did.
My solution:
make msc have slightly less visibility range
make nexus cannon have slightly less range
make armories cheaper
remove biotag from hellbat
make transformation upgrade cheaper
That would be a start
And as to accepting losses, its strange that me and so many other terrans have absolutely no problem accepting losing to zergs, but somehow *magically* when we lose to yet another proxy oracle, or proxy blink, or proxy dt, or proxy robo immortal push, or proxy robo colossi stalker warpprism, or dt drops, or some other warp prism bullshit, or just contained till theyre ahead anyways, all while we have LITERALLY 2 builds we can do, both of which are defensive... we get frustrated. How curious, I wonder why... Then we go to sc2ranks and see that gm and master is completely dominated by protoss, then we watch tournaments and see that all foreign terrans are completely irrelevant, then we go to teamliquid and are met by complete denial by every protoss out there... oh I wonder why we get frustrated... whoever solves this *mystery* is surely a genius.
|
Guys how do you think removing the combat shields upgrade and making marines 55 hp default would affect the game?
I skimmed through the thread a little bit and most of the terran players seem to complain about lack of terran early game options and the abundance of protoss all-ins which makes the early game very frustrating to play. Would this change give marines a better chance at fending off oracles or make it easier for terrans to punish protoss greed and give terrans an extra 100 gas to spend elsewhere? And since modern maps are bigger I don't think it would break the game or anything.
I'm plat eu zerg so you should probably take my suggestions with a grain of salt of though.
|
I think it would be ok for TvP but NOT for TvZ. TvZ would be a nightmare for Z at that point.... There would be some serious 2 Raxing OPness going on that could not be stopped no matter what zerg did.... LOL
|
On December 11 2013 02:08 il_Cattivo wrote:
Guys how do you think removing the combat shields upgrade and making marines 55 hp default would affect the game?
I skimmed through the thread a little bit and most of the terran players seem to complain about lack of terran early game options and the abundance of protoss all-ins which makes the early game very frustrating to play. Would this change give marines a better chance at fending off oracles or make it easier for terrans to punish protoss greed and give terrans an extra 100 gas to spend elsewhere? And since modern maps are bigger I don't think it would break the game or anything.
I'm plat eu zerg so you should probably take my suggestions with a grain of salt of though.
The nature of Terran makes it really impossible to give them a good early game option, because with Terran pretty much any strat that's a good early game option becomes a grossly overpowered cheese when it's combined with pulling all the SCVs.
|
Northern Ireland26063 Posts
I agree with most of the Terran complaints re the current state of TvP tbh.
And yes, there are tinfoil hat wearers, but truth of the matter is I can see WHY Terrans think David Kim has some agenda against the race.
Terrans were doing pretty damn well at the kind of level we're talking about (GM - average foreign pro) when the game was less figured out, and hellbats were being abused. Now, I don't necessarily think the hellbat abuse was a good thing at all, however that drop build was essentially patched out of existence.
Meanwhile, the Protoss had an already strong build that IMO is gimmicky, namely proxy oracles that just received a buff for no apparent reason, and the litany of problems the MSC causes for early game TvP still remain.
|
On December 11 2013 02:08 il_Cattivo wrote:
Guys how do you think removing the combat shields upgrade and making marines 55 hp default would affect the game?
I skimmed through the thread a little bit and most of the terran players seem to complain about lack of terran early game options and the abundance of protoss all-ins which makes the early game very frustrating to play. Would this change give marines a better chance at fending off oracles or make it easier for terrans to punish protoss greed and give terrans an extra 100 gas to spend elsewhere? And since modern maps are bigger I don't think it would break the game or anything.
I'm plat eu zerg so you should probably take my suggestions with a grain of salt of though.
Regardless of balance implications, removing upgrades from the game is terrible design. It dumbs down unit relationships, makes the game simpler for the upgrader, removes oportunities for the opponent to react to this tech path, ie by sniping tech labs.
Not even mech fans liked siege mode being free, and mech fans were desperate forany bones to be thrown their way. It just makes the game worse.
|
On December 11 2013 01:54 Snusmumriken wrote:And as to accepting losses, its strange that me and so many other terrans have absolutely no problem accepting losing to zergs, but somehow *magically* when we lose to yet another proxy oracle, or proxy blink, or proxy dt, or proxy robo immortal push, or proxy robo colossi stalker warpprism, or dt drops, or some other warp prism bullshit, or just contained till theyre ahead anyways, we get frustrated. How curious, I wonder why...
You have a bad mindset for playing the game in that case, or perhaps that is your weak matchup. Simple as that. That's how I feel when I lose PvZ on big open maps or against mass muta/corruptor (and I am sure many other Protoss are the same way), but you don't see me calling for wholesale nerfs to Zerg. I just accept that I am not good at the matchup and try and improve. Unless you are tip top GM you have room to improve. Even then you still can improve.
Still want the speed buff for oracle removed though. That thing ruined PvP. I will say that until it is done.
|
I still get upset about the hellbat nerf.... It was simply the fact that they didn't like it in TvT..... I thought that was a stupid idea to nerf it ... How do you balance a race against itself? Based off of openers? well there is plenty of things you could open with to block this 1/1/1 being one of them with good mine placemtn you could even pick off the med and it completely nullified the attack haahaha So i just don't understand that at all....
I still believe they did it because they thought innovation was a bad player and because he was unbeatable at that time they wanted him to lose so they nerfed the hellbat....
|
On December 11 2013 02:16 Ben... wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2013 01:54 Snusmumriken wrote:And as to accepting losses, its strange that me and so many other terrans have absolutely no problem accepting losing to zergs, but somehow *magically* when we lose to yet another proxy oracle, or proxy blink, or proxy dt, or proxy robo immortal push, or proxy robo colossi stalker warpprism, or dt drops, or some other warp prism bullshit, or just contained till theyre ahead anyways, we get frustrated. How curious, I wonder why... You have a bad mindset for playing the game in that case, or perhaps that is your weak matchup. Simple as that. That's how I feel when I lose PvZ on big open maps or against mass muta/corruptor (and I am sure many other Protoss are the same way), but you don't see me calling for wholesale nerfs to Zerg. I just accept that I am not good at the matchup and try and improve. Unless you are tip top GM you have room to improve. Even then you still can improve. Still want the speed buff for oracle removed though. That thing ruined PvP. I will say that until it is done.
Are you for real? PvZ is protoss favoured right now AND your race completely dominate master and gm. No fucking shit sherlock youre not calling for a nerf of zerg. Please dont project your illogical reasoning on me.
|
On December 11 2013 02:19 Pirfiktshon wrote:
I still get upset about the hellbat nerf.... It was simply the fact that they didn't like it in TvT..... I thought that was a stupid idea to nerf it ... How do you balance a race against itself? Based off of openers? well there is plenty of things you could open with to block this 1/1/1 being one of them with good mine placemtn you could even pick off the med and it completely nullified the attack haahaha So i just don't understand that at all....
I still believe they did it because they thought innovation was a bad player and because he was unbeatable at that time they wanted him to lose so they nerfed the hellbat....
Well the hellbat drops were getting out of control; As a terran I'm glad they nerfed it.
However I don't understand why they nerfed the WM, now we see zerg A-moving armies again up until top GM. It was good to see some kind of zergling split....
As to why they buffed the oracle, this is very strange because it promoted all-in play more than "lategame" play but eh who knows....
|
Northern Ireland26063 Posts
It makes no sense. Revelation not being removed by burrowing and unburrowing makes sense in terms of encouraging folks to explore it more late game. Movement speed buffs not so much :s
It still controls quite buggily, as Lalush showed with his recent vid on air unit microability.
|
On December 11 2013 02:19 Pirfiktshon wrote:
I still get upset about the hellbat nerf.... It was simply the fact that they didn't like it in TvT..... I thought that was a stupid idea to nerf it ... How do you balance a race against itself? Based off of openers? well there is plenty of things you could open with to block this 1/1/1 being one of them with good mine placemtn you could even pick off the med and it completely nullified the attack haahaha So i just don't understand that at all....
I still believe they did it because they thought innovation was a bad player and because he was unbeatable at that time they wanted him to lose so they nerfed the hellbat....
Uhuh.
Innovation was so great because he was one of those godlike terran players who are naturally better than everyone else. Not because the race was completely imbalanced.
I wonder how much of this is down to terrans being spoilt with easy wins both in WoL and in early HoTS and winrates reverting to the mean.
The other half is fairly legit complaints about the MsC that I called in beta, but really at a 51% winrate it's just WoL in reverse. Not much sympathy about Dear detractors either after he played some insane tournaments. And well it isn't stopping Taeja and co.Not half as desperate as its made out to be.
|
On December 11 2013 02:29 Snusmumriken wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2013 02:16 Ben... wrote:On December 11 2013 01:54 Snusmumriken wrote:And as to accepting losses, its strange that me and so many other terrans have absolutely no problem accepting losing to zergs, but somehow *magically* when we lose to yet another proxy oracle, or proxy blink, or proxy dt, or proxy robo immortal push, or proxy robo colossi stalker warpprism, or dt drops, or some other warp prism bullshit, or just contained till theyre ahead anyways, we get frustrated. How curious, I wonder why... You have a bad mindset for playing the game in that case, or perhaps that is your weak matchup. Simple as that. That's how I feel when I lose PvZ on big open maps or against mass muta/corruptor (and I am sure many other Protoss are the same way), but you don't see me calling for wholesale nerfs to Zerg. I just accept that I am not good at the matchup and try and improve. Unless you are tip top GM you have room to improve. Even then you still can improve. Still want the speed buff for oracle removed though. That thing ruined PvP. I will say that until it is done. Are you for real? PvZ is protoss favoured right now AND your race completely dominate master and gm. No fucking shit sherlock youre not calling for a nerf of zerg. Please dont project your illogical reasoning on me.
Everyone has a weak matchup. Mine has always been PvZ. In contrast my PvP has always been incredibly strong.
By that logic you can't complain either because TvP is balanced at the top (top meaning Pro level, because that is where balance is and should be judged from. Not ladder heroes).
You need to chill out. You're now at the point of personally insulting people for playing Protoss. If you are this upset you should take a break from the forum, and possibly the game. It is not healthy to be this angry.
|
Uhuh.
Innovation was so great because he was one of those godlike terran players who are naturally better than everyone else. Not because the race was completely imbalanced.
I wonder how much of this is down to terrans being spoilt with easy wins both in WoL and in early HoTS and winrates reverting to the mean.
The other half is fairly legit complaints about the MsC that I called in beta, but really at a 51% winrate it's just WoL in reverse. Not much sympathy about Dear detractors either after he played some insane tournaments. And well it isn't stopping Taeja and co.Not half as desperate as its made out to be.
That is my point.... The race wasn't imbalanced yet they still did the nerf as to be a Pot shot at Innovation who was dominating the scene because he was an amazing player....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Kn9HDWE.png)
