EPTI think blizzard has been doing a great job with balance since the beta BUT this post is like "hey guys look we know the game is balance stop complaining" ~_~
Blizzard Blog: Balance Snapshot - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Marou
Germany1371 Posts
I think blizzard has been doing a great job with balance since the beta BUT this post is like "hey guys look we know the game is balance stop complaining" ~_~ | ||
|
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On September 23 2011 04:02 R0YAL wrote: Very very VERY yes. So many people blindy whine about imbalance based on matches between PLAYERS. Its not Zerg vs Protoss, its Huk vs Coca.. Since the players do not share 100% equal skill (plus even more variables that you need to factor in) you can not fairly compare the races on a balance perspective alone. It is much more complicated than that. EXACTLY! That's why we use big ass sample sizes in statistics. Not N=32. | ||
|
RandomAccount#106470
Lithuania1506 Posts
| ||
|
whatthefat
United States918 Posts
| ||
|
Psychlone
Canada90 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:43 happyness wrote: Sorry, but this is a really dumb post. Watch Alicia vs. Select in Code A. Now I'm glad Select won(foreigners fighting!), but Alicia's macro was much better in all three games. Because Select actually knows how to control his ghosts (unlike the majority of terrans) and use abusive tactics that protoss don't have at their disposal. Korean Terrans(and select) show how good the terran race can be. It's not the Korean protoss that suck shit, it's the foreigner terran. That series was the saddest thing I ever saw for Protoss (I'm Zerg). There was nothing poor Alicia could do. Select was good, but so was Alicia. It should have been a very close match, but Select just RoFLStomped him. Blizz thinks the Marauder is the problem. It's not. EMP is obviously the problem (and MULEs) Marauders just make it worse because you can't even flee from the fight you can't win. The imbalance is glaringly obvious, moreso than in the age of mass reapers TvZ. Why MULEs don't have a cooldown is beyond me. Zerg and Protoss mechanics are nowhere near as forgiving the MULE. You can't get back in a game you had lost because of Chrono Boost or Larva Inject/Creep tumors. | ||
|
Dragar
United Kingdom971 Posts
As for how Blizzard do the statistics, it probably needs someone versed in Beysian statistics to work out how the calculation is done and explain it on the forums. | ||
|
Brotocol
243 Posts
On September 23 2011 04:08 Huragius wrote: A Terran with a bicycle would beat a protoss with a motorbike in a race. Just say'in. And honestly, I'm not going to argue with constant LR thread whiners.Overall at current state of TL talking about balance is waste of time sadly I couldn't resist it this time. And if you think that Sage/MC/Hero is as good as MVP/Bomber/Polt or Nestea/DRG/Losira, then it is your problem that you are living in an illusionary world. But do you think ST_Virus, Noblesse and Sjow are better than MC, Sage and Hero? Polt said it best - there are many Terrans in Code S who don't deserve to be there. | ||
|
Logros
Netherlands9913 Posts
| ||
|
1st_Panzer_Div.
United States621 Posts
On September 23 2011 04:09 Psychlone wrote: That series was the saddest thing I ever saw for Protoss (I'm Zerg). There was nothing poor Alicia could do. Select was good, but so was Alicia. It should have been a very close match, but Select just RoFLStomped him. Blizz thinks the Marauder is the problem. It's not. EMP is obviously the problem (and MULEs) Marauders just make it worse because you can't even flee from the fight you can't win. The imbalance is glaringly obvious, moreso than in the age of mass reapers TvZ. Why MULEs don't have a cooldown is beyond me. Zerg and Protoss mechanics are nowhere near as forgiving the MULE. You can't get back in a game you had lost because of Chrono Boost or Larva Inject/Creep tumors. This is well thought out and I agree with everything you say here. | ||
|
willz22912
United States255 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:48 Teejing wrote: @ willz : you make it sound like the trend we have seen is less terrans in gsl code S. This is wrong. The trend is more and more terrans. Another point is that gsl maps are less terran favoured than blizzard maps. The only pro-balance faxt here is that 1.4 did indeed nerf terran and buff the other races. My main point was to show the flaws of the GSLs, but I'll go more into detail about the Terran problem. The trend has always been more Terrans in the GSL. Going from the very beginning, it was always 3-4 more Terrans than the next highest race in terms of #s, either due to more people liking Terran or racial imbalance. I'm stating that using the GSL by itself is flawed because of its tournament structure and the ease of staying in Code S. If you started with 12-14 Terrans but because of the structure you never lost any and slowly gained and gained and gained, wouldn't you end up with 20 Terrans eventually? The other thing is that T is generally accepted as being the best to hold of cheeses with, and that is a huge factor to consider due to the GSL and the bo1 situation in the ro32. Is it racial imbalance that one race is just simply better at being defensive and winning the most bo1s when that's the tournament format? Besides that, I'll show the Terran trend from the very beginning. GSL August 9 Protoss - 15 Terran - 8 Zerg GSL July 11 Protoss - 13 Terran - 8 Zerg GSL Super Tournament 16 Protoss - 29 Terran - 19 Zerg out of 64 players GSL May 12 Protoss - 13 Terran - 7 Zerg GSL March 6 Protoss - 12 Terran - 14 Zerg GSL January 9 Protoss - 14 Terran - 9 Zerg GSL Open S3 12 Protoss - 24 Terran - 27 Zerg out of 64 players GSL Open S2 20 Protoss - 29 Terran - 15 Zerg out of 64 players GSL Open S1 27 Protoss - 21 Terran - 16 Zerg out of 64 players. What do you deem an acceptable +/- for it not to be racially skewed? I'm willing to accept +/- 3 out of 32 total players. And it seems that yes, for the most part, there have always been slightly higher T numbers than the other two races, but by not that significant until GSL October. And I'm stating my theory that not just racial balance comes into play, but the GSL format for deciding who stays in and who goes out. If you wanted to cheese out Nestea or MC in a bo1 because you know they were very good players and probably better in the late game, is that the game's fault, the tournament's fault, or the player's fault? | ||
|
DamnCats
United States1472 Posts
| ||
|
ManOnBoy
37 Posts
so blizzard saw an almost 60% win P v Z and their solution is to.... NERF INFESTOR'S NP? is this a JOKE? | ||
|
iamke55
United States2806 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:35 tyrless wrote: I hope you weren't attached to your left nut because you just lost it  Should probably take the other nut too for even suggesting that what race I play is relevant to the facts. As for methodology for interpreting GSL stats in the context of game balance, it's not really my job to educate you of basic statistics, your local community college can probably help with that.Since you've got such an arrogant attitude, you must be really confident that you're right, right? Prove it. Calculate the probability of there being at least 20 Terrans in Code S assuming the game is balanced, and show why this statistic is a "meaningless number" as you call it. Should be no problem for you since you are so well educated in basic statiscal analysis! Oh and it's a 30 day ban if you're unable to do it after posting with such a condescending tone. | ||
|
pwadoc
271 Posts
| ||
|
ImmortalTofu
United States1254 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:45 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: I'll give you a stick, and I'll drive an M2 Bradley. Then I'll say you did poorly not because you had a stick against an IFV, but because you're not skilled. Hahah, beautiful On September 23 2011 04:16 iamke55 wrote: Since you've got such an arrogant attitude, you must be really confident that you're right, right? Prove it. Calculate the probability of there being at least 20 Terrans in Code S assuming the game is balanced, and show why this statistic is a "meaningless number" as you call it. Should be no problem for you since you are so well educated in basic statiscal analysis! Oh and it's a 30 day ban if you're unable to do it after posting with such a condescending tone. Thanks iamke, for kicking the arrogant people off of this forum. I'm truly interested in his results... | ||
|
tztztz
Germany314 Posts
On September 23 2011 04:17 pwadoc wrote: Why the fuck doesn't blizzard just explain the math? maybe because it's complicated as hell? | ||
|
MarkIV
12 Posts
The other way i enjoy SC is watching high level tournaments. I find mirror match ups to be much less entertaining that vs race ones. I guess what I'm saying is balance the game at the highest level so i can see a 33/33/33 gsl because the mmr system will take care of shit at my level. | ||
|
Ripper41
284 Posts
if terran were OP the players would be matched vs better opponents and still have only 50% win rate. I would think these numbers would only be indicative of some sort of circular imbalance where a race wins most matches against one race and loses to another. | ||
|
joyeaux
United States169 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:48 MisterFred wrote: Lower than high masters - don't make me laugh. MMR should keep everything near 50%. Not necessarily true. imagine a patch under which terran soundly beat zerg 70%/30%, protoss soundly beat terran 70%/30%, and zerg soundly beat protoss 70%/30%. Assuming equal race distribution, people with equal MMRs in lower league would be noticing the match-up imbalances. Of course, MMR will cover up imbalances (below GM) once you have two races balanced and one race better or worse, or if you have a race that's at a disadvantage in all of it's match-ups (excluding mirrors), and another race clearly at an advantage in all of it's match-ups (again, excluding mirrors). Nevertheless, you are correct in assuming that the GM numbers alone (without masters watering them down) would be pretty bad. | ||
|
Namu
United States826 Posts
On September 23 2011 04:09 Psychlone wrote: That series was the saddest thing I ever saw for Protoss (I'm Zerg). There was nothing poor Alicia could do. Select was good, but so was Alicia. It should have been a very close match, but Select just RoFLStomped him. Blizz thinks the Marauder is the problem. It's not. EMP is obviously the problem (and MULEs) Marauders just make it worse because you can't even flee from the fight you can't win. The imbalance is glaringly obvious, moreso than in the age of mass reapers TvZ. Why MULEs don't have a cooldown is beyond me. Zerg and Protoss mechanics are nowhere near as forgiving the MULE. You can't get back in a game you had lost because of Chrono Boost or Larva Inject/Creep tumors. lol.. even koreans (who HATE terran generally, in playxp) couldn't defend for alicia because he played terribly. I have no idea why you guys think alicia played well that series. He threw the first game away by upgrading storm like 3 minutes late (which he tweeted about), and second game he didn't prepare for drops, had basically 0 stalkers, and ended the game with close to 3000 minerals in bank. All alicia had to do to prevent those type of drop play was to have stalkers in his main base. Once you get thrown off by a medivac drop, subsequent drops will throw you off balance more and more so the initial drop defense is the most important. Select played well but alicia played pretty badly in the series.. However, I think TvP is imbalanced right now due to 1/1/1, and ghosts (once you get like 8+ ghosts). The reason 1/1/1 is too strong is because when toss lacks t3 units (i.e. colossus, ht) marine tank banshee combo is too cost efficient with good micro. IMO they need to buff high templar movement speed, tweak ghost cost maybe (not sure about this one), and make banshees cost more gas (125 maybe?). | ||
| ||
, but still it says something!) but it's definitely not useless. It's been going on for months now and this is just the result of it. Also you could present your ideas on how these numbers are void, I'd like to hear it.
