|
On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER
Except that protoss was never the weakest race at the level you were playing. Whatever weakness the race has at top Korean level was compensated by the ease of play. Look at this list in 2011 (premier/major...) and tell me that foreign protosses didn't win more than foreign terrans.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
|
Whoa, of course I am going to include Korean results. Last I checked, they are the leaders in the sport. I don't care what you claim about "ease of play" which is highly subjective anyway, fact is, at the top level of play, Terran's have had substantial periods of dominance.
|
On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ?
I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play.
|
On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance
this is exactely whats happening right now. we have about equal numbers, and terran players are demoted to lower leagues compared to protoss and zerg player at the same level of skill. (i'm talking about prolevel play aswell as grandmaster to high master demotes, just to clarify. this is true for lower leagues aswell, not making an impact on balance though)
and of course win rates do not reflect gamebalance when there are way less players of a specific race left over since only the best will stay on top, thus balance out win rates again. that's the whole flaw of this system, official ladder winrates will never reflect imbalance, since better (in this case) terrans will face lesser protoss or zerg players and prolly keep the 50/50 ratio over long periods of time.
on the highest level of competition this is way easier to notice, when some terran hero rolls over an average protoss or zerg player but fails to be on par with the truly top players.
|
Yeay, another long-winded argument amounting to l2p. What if I don't want to play, and I want to spectate?
|
On May 12 2014 14:45 Ghanburighan wrote:
Yeay, another long-winded argument amounting to l2p. What if I don't want to play, and I want to spectate?
I agree that where necessary changes should be made to improve balance. I just think its a tricky thing to do and its never perfect. With that in mind, players who are striving to be competitive and improve their play should not focus on balance, as it is counterproductive to individual improvement. With regards to the game as a spectator sport, certain changes must be made, it is important that all races are well represented wherever possible in order to make it a good spectator sport. On that point I agree with you.
|
On May 12 2014 10:52 HuHEN wrote:
Whoa, of course I am going to include Korean results. Last I checked, they are the leaders in the sport. I don't care what you claim about "ease of play" which is highly subjective anyway, fact is, at the top level of play, Terran's have had substantial periods of dominance.
But you were telling your own stories about how you overcome imbalance against your race. That's like saying a silver terran overcome terran weakness and get promoted to gold.
|
On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:
[quote]
I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play.
Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating.
|
I don't think you can use low level play as an example of balance or imbalance. There are many levels at which things are imbalanced. At the lowest level, every Protoss dies to Zerglings. Because they don't know how to scout, or react, or even how to wall. At a certain level, every Terran dies to Protoss because they don't know how to counter certain cheeses or effectively fight Colossus. It's only when you get to the top top that you can find out what is balanced and what isn't.
At the Platinum level, all the Terrans "with better mechanics" than the Protoss they're playing have bad macro. They spend too much time dropping and get supply blocked and neglect to build units. I've seen so many examples of guys (on this forum) whining about how imba Protoss is when clearly they've been outmacroed.
I have been main racing Protoss since the dawn of time and I've never looked as 'balance' as the reason why I was losing or winning. And I think I'm a much better player (of all three races) now because of it.
|
On May 12 2014 15:00 HuHEN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 14:45 Ghanburighan wrote:
Yeay, another long-winded argument amounting to l2p. What if I don't want to play, and I want to spectate? I agree that where necessary changes should be made to improve balance. I just think its a tricky thing to do and its never perfect. With that in mind, players who are striving to be competitive and improve their play should not focus on balance, as it is counterproductive to individual improvement. With regards to the game as a spectator sport, certain changes must be made, it is important that all races are well represented wherever possible in order to make it a good spectator sport. On that point I agree with you.
I disagree with this statement, "players who are striving to be competitive and improve their play should not focus on balance, as it is counterproductive to individual improvement." It is one thing to try to overcome adversity through imbalance, but typically there is "light at the end of the tunnel" with the optimistic approach Blizz design will fix the problem. In this case, it has been this way for 8+ months. From a pro/high player standpoint many players have fallen off the grid and we continuously see abysmal tournament results from Terran- with only the same handful of players hanging around. There has been enough time to "figure things out" and it is clear the race is underperforming. Why would anyone want to subject themselves to hitting a brick wall over-and-over again. It's not like I can "improve" in making 4+ bunkers and pulling all scvs any better to defend a blink all-in. Or make a turret any more efficient in my mineral line for an Oracle flying around the map at the speed of light, picking off scvs on the sides of minerals (outside of turret range). Or tactically stutter step past Photon Overcharge. Players have been cut from teams over these problems (most recently Kas) who is very vocal with the problem(s). So this is why you have seen many players switch races (maybe not pro), or just retire.
|
On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:
[quote]
OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you.
By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days.
As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure.
Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating.
To be honest, as a Silver level terran it is pretty frustrating to get steamrolled by a Protoss who a-moves into your army why you have to micro your heart out just to survive.
And no, I can't be bothered to 'get better'. I have more important things to do right now than practice a video game. Protoss is a lot more forgiving and easier to play with at lower levels of play than Terran in HOTS.
|
On May 13 2014 06:56 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:
[quote]
Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67.
Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates.
as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating. To be honest, as a Silver level terran it is pretty frustrating to get steamrolled by a Protoss who a-moves into your army why you have to micro your heart out just to survive. And no, I can't be bothered to 'get better'. I have more important things to do right now than practice a video game. Protoss is a lot more forgiving and easier to play with at lower levels of play than Terran in HOTS.
Would you enjoy this game more if it was balanced to bronze or balanced to the GSL?
Think hard before answering.
|
On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:
[quote]
OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you.
By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days.
As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure.
Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating.
Honestly I think Sc2 is more fun being in master league than being a weaker casual (say in gold league for instance). I think unless your really trying to improve, playing in gold league must be really frustrating, because you simply can't execute the things you watch the pro's do, and you make so many errors all the time, which must be super frustrating. I think as a master player, your play resembles pro level a lot more, which IMO makes it more fun to play for fun (without playing to improve).
Like I have some games where I just feel like I manage everything well, micro, macro multitasking and it just feels super awesome. But goldleagugers are never gonna have those types of games. They will always just feel terrible, becasue they watch the pro plays and understand how lacking their own mechanics are.
I actually remember getting gradually more addicting the better I got at Sc2 (back when I started out in WOL).
|
On May 13 2014 07:35 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:
[quote]
Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67.
Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates.
as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating. Honestly I think Sc2 is more fun being in master league than being a weaker casual (say in gold league for instance). I think unless your really trying to improve, playing in gold league must be really frustrating, because you simply can't execute the things you watch the pro's do, and you make so many errors all the time, which must be super frustrating. I think as a master player, your play resembles pro level a lot more, which IMO makes it more fun to play for fun (without playing to improve). Like I have some games where I just feel like I manage everything well, micro, macro multitasking and it just feels super awesome. But goldleagugers are never gonna have those types of games. They will always just feel terrible, becasue they watch the pro plays and understand how lacking their own mechanics are. I actually remember getting gradually more addicting the better I got at Sc2 (back when I started out in WOL).
Perception is a bitch.
I remember the first time I downloaded Sc2gears and only then realizing that my TvZ was my best matchup around 80+% despite my thinking I was horrible at the matchup.
It turned out that I simply hated and was uber frustrated with the matchup that despite my winning the majority of the time I thought it was my worse matchup. And then I realized that my TvT was a saddening 50~% winrate despite my thinking that it was my best matchup (BW experience I told myself) but it turned out I kept telling myself that certain losses "didn't count" and not realizing that those losses took up a majority of my losses at the time.
But yes, I do remember that feeling of pride in one's work ethic at the time. The feeling of manliness you get from working hard on something and having it pay off. And do know the crippling feeling of plateauing.
|
On May 13 2014 06:56 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:
[quote]
Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67.
Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates.
as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating. To be honest, as a Silver level terran it is pretty frustrating to get steamrolled by a Protoss who a-moves into your army why you have to micro your heart out just to survive. And no, I can't be bothered to 'get better'. I have more important things to do right now than practice a video game. Protoss is a lot more forgiving and easier to play with at lower levels of play than Terran in HOTS.
So you want to play a game like sc2 while not having time to play enough to get out of silver (1 game every 2 days? I've reached master with roughly 1 or2 games a day) AND while having fun? Ok.
|
On May 13 2014 09:24 Karpfen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2014 06:56 maartendq wrote:On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:
[quote]
as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance.
the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B.
if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt.
it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated.
one word on the topic itsself.
terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc).
that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order)
I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating. To be honest, as a Silver level terran it is pretty frustrating to get steamrolled by a Protoss who a-moves into your army why you have to micro your heart out just to survive. And no, I can't be bothered to 'get better'. I have more important things to do right now than practice a video game. Protoss is a lot more forgiving and easier to play with at lower levels of play than Terran in HOTS. So you want to play a game like sc2 while not having time to play enough to get out of silver (1 game every 2 days? I've reached master with roughly 1 or2 games a day) AND while having fun? Ok.
Not with terran right?
Terran is a too mechanical race from my experience, which means it simply benefits a lot more from mass gaming.
|
On May 13 2014 09:41 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2014 09:24 Karpfen wrote:On May 13 2014 06:56 maartendq wrote:On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:
[quote]
I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance
lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating. To be honest, as a Silver level terran it is pretty frustrating to get steamrolled by a Protoss who a-moves into your army why you have to micro your heart out just to survive. And no, I can't be bothered to 'get better'. I have more important things to do right now than practice a video game. Protoss is a lot more forgiving and easier to play with at lower levels of play than Terran in HOTS. So you want to play a game like sc2 while not having time to play enough to get out of silver (1 game every 2 days? I've reached master with roughly 1 or2 games a day) AND while having fun? Ok. Not with terran right? Terran is a too mechanical race from my experience, which means it simply benefits a lot more from mass gaming.
I don't know man, I only played a few games a week for years, and mainly customs games with friends, and that's how I got into master. I think watching replays, VOD and tournament is better than just spamming the ladder. But you're right, I'm not that much of a mechanical player, I rely more on build order, mind game and decision making than pure mechanic.
But I really think that you need to be consistant in your play, always a few games a day, and looking for the reason you lose, etc, not just being a robot.
|
On May 13 2014 09:46 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2014 09:41 Hider wrote:On May 13 2014 09:24 Karpfen wrote:On May 13 2014 06:56 maartendq wrote:On May 13 2014 06:26 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 10:59 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 07:54 Faust852 wrote:On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:
[quote]
lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ? I do believe that the balance needs to be improved, I also believe that many players use balance as an excuse to not improve their own play. Topmaster/gm is what you reach at your full potential when you are an amateur and have studies/other hobbies beside SC2. And that where the game is the most frustrating. To be honest, as a Silver level terran it is pretty frustrating to get steamrolled by a Protoss who a-moves into your army why you have to micro your heart out just to survive. And no, I can't be bothered to 'get better'. I have more important things to do right now than practice a video game. Protoss is a lot more forgiving and easier to play with at lower levels of play than Terran in HOTS. So you want to play a game like sc2 while not having time to play enough to get out of silver (1 game every 2 days? I've reached master with roughly 1 or2 games a day) AND while having fun? Ok. Not with terran right? Terran is a too mechanical race from my experience, which means it simply benefits a lot more from mass gaming. I don't know man, I only played a few games a week for years, and mainly customs games with friends, and that's how I got into master. I think watching replays, VOD and tournament is better than just spamming the ladder. But you're right, I'm not that much of a mechanical player, I rely more on build order, mind game and decision making than pure mechanic. But I really think that you need to be consistant in your play, always a few games a day, and looking for the reason you lose, etc, not just being a robot.
How do you mindgame as terran and win due to build orders at master league as terran?
|
On May 04 2014 05:30 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2014 05:28 Whitewing wrote:
Again, you should have a huge upgrade advantage and should just be able to roll him over with a later bio/mine push. If Protoss goes fast 3rd into mass blink stalker into charge/storm and manages to hold, he just plain outplayed the terran.
I'd like to see a protoss try that against a player like Maru and see how that works out. Unfortunately, you're not likely to see that kind of build against a player as good as Maru. http://bit.ly/1mjztcoYou were saying?
As disgusting that protoss play might be (3rd base off of one stalker and one sentry, what a balance), Maru played like an idiot there.
|
"As disgusting that protoss play might be (3rd base off of one stalker and one sentry, what a balance), Maru played like an idiot there."
I had to lol at this statement.
Zest placed down the 3rd Nexus while having one stalker, sentry. oracle and MSC, for a total of 400 gas in units (and 425 minerals), not to mention he already had a designated tech route out (Stargate) at least 2 minutes before the 3rd.
Maru dropped his Factory moments before the 3rd Nexus went down, while having 16 marines out ( 800 minerals).
Say what you want, but the fact that Terran have a linear attainment of their tech with much less gas spent on actual units in the early-mid games means they should never fall behind on either tech or the possibility to expand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
