|
On October 14 2011 23:49 GLLvz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 20:21 althaz wrote:On October 14 2011 01:22 Fleebu wrote: Maybe you should also look at the percentage of people in Korea who actually play Protoss... Protoss is the most played race on the Korean server. Terran is the most played by Pros. Not saying this means anything like Toss being underpowered or whatever, just pointing out some information for you data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" . If u say that, people could say "Hey, Terran 10 times easier to play?" Because More people become Pro with terran?
it is 10 times easier to play as long as you have decent apm.
|
On October 15 2011 03:42 Trowabarton756 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 23:49 GLLvz wrote:On October 14 2011 20:21 althaz wrote:On October 14 2011 01:22 Fleebu wrote: Maybe you should also look at the percentage of people in Korea who actually play Protoss... Protoss is the most played race on the Korean server. Terran is the most played by Pros. Not saying this means anything like Toss being underpowered or whatever, just pointing out some information for you data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" . If u say that, people could say "Hey, Terran 10 times easier to play?" Because More people become Pro with terran? it is 10 times easier to play as long as you have decent apm.
Exactly.
That's why Terran struggles in platinium and diamond where people generally know what to do (well, at least an approximation) but have very bad APM and overall mechanics. It requires more APM for Terran to execute their basics compared to Protoss (I believe). But when both have very high APM, Terran can spend them in a more useful fashion, whereas Protoss can only use them to defend agression and harass, which is, again, at Terran's own discretion.
|
On October 15 2011 03:36 InFi.asc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 03:28 StimedSheep wrote: This reminds me of the very beginning of Starcraft. For those who might remember when the game first came out there were periods of time where each race was trying to figure out ways to combat different attack styles. I remember people saying that 6 pools were overpowered and could not be beaten. Anyways relax and enjoy the game and try something crazy. = \ I'm really not playing anymore, just watching. I can't really enjoy it if the better player does not win. And sadly there have been some matches where i felt that is true. This is not the way an ESPORTs game should display itself data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt=""
Could you direct us to some replays perhaps where this happens? I can probably point out an obvious mistake in 99% of the games you see in any tournament that leads to a loss. It's not about who's "the better player overall" it's about who plays better at the time.
|
On October 14 2011 21:51 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 14:24 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 14 2011 12:55 The KY wrote:On October 14 2011 12:36 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 14 2011 12:04 Daralii wrote: Colossi and sentries exist to attempt to balance out the weakness of gateway units. It all goes back to the warp gate. Yes, but if we have to lose one of Colossi or Warp tech to get stronger Gateway units, then I'd easily choose to sacrifice Colossi. At least we could get Khaydarin Amulet back. May I be the first to say fuuuuck the Amulet. Kill a whole protoss army and then arrive at their base to 4 fully charged HTs with storm and 10 chargelots? Buff toss some other way please. In other words, you say that after defeating a Templar based Protoss army, you should be able to overrun their base No sir. It's not the spawning with storm that bothers me, it's the warping in with storm. So for example on Shakuras Plateau, the protoss natural, main, and far away third (assuming hypothetically they took the natural of the base parallel to theirs as their third) are all equally protected. Remove warp in from templar and reinstate KA, I'd be cool with. (How that would even work I dunno but talking hypothetical still).
Ah, I see. You are quite correct. However, while this does mean he can defend any of his bases, it doesn't allow him to defend multiple ones. So if he warped-in to defend an expansion, then his main or other expansions are empty. And if he split his warp-ins, he's vulnerable evrywhere - since Storms don't stack, without a sufficient Zealot buffer, you can simply overrun him. So while it does mean every one of his bases has an equal potential to be protected, they actually are not. And if he needs to wait to know which base you're attacking before he warps-in, he's delaying production and losing macro. Also, even if you cannot take him down, if you keep forcing Storms, you're draining him of gas and gaining a greater lead through attrition.
On October 14 2011 21:51 The KY wrote:Also I like that to storm drop mineral lines you have to use a warp prism and risk getting caught and losing the templar inside. With warp in storm all you risk is a warp prism and you get to warp in templar anywhere on the map.
That is true and I agree, though I do believe the advantages outweigh inconveniences such as this.
On October 14 2011 21:51 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +the victorious Protoss army won't be able to overrun your base if they win the battle because their damage-dealers, the High Templar, have expended themselves to win the battle. Chargelots are pretty good. If you've killed all their medivacs lategame it's very hard as terran to mass another army because the protoss just throws upgraded chargelots at them, you are forced to stim and kite like hell, it takes up a lot of your apm, stim costs you health, sometimes you don't have an airport runway to kite down. Basically small numbers of MM vs chargelots is fucking hard work. Throw a colossus in to force vikings and you're onto a winner.
But if you have a wall-in or Planetary Fortress, you can regather your forces around them, Zealots cannot attack you without Templar support or taking an overwhelming amount of damage. And you can lift-off Orbital Commands while waiting for your army to get refilled.
Well, unless they have a Colossus, in which case, yes, they do have an overwhelming advantage. But I agree that Khaydarin Amulet and Colossi are too powerful, I just think the Colossus is the one that needs to go.
On October 15 2011 03:28 StimedSheep wrote: This reminds me of the very beginning of Starcraft. For those who might remember when the game first came out there were periods of time where each race was trying to figure out ways to combat different attack styles. I remember people saying that 6 pools were overpowered and could not be beaten. Anyways relax and enjoy the game and try something crazy. = \
I thought 4-pools were overpowered and could not be beaten, hence why they changed the mineral cost to 200 rather than 150.
|
Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you,
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 15 2011 04:02 pure_protoss wrote: Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you,
Wouldn't a TvT have a 50% winrate for terran? All mirror matches have a 50% win rate for that race. The only relevant question is the PvT, PvZ and TvZ matchups.
|
On October 15 2011 04:02 pure_protoss wrote: Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you,
yes and that's why the TvZ and TvP graphs show these numbers, too! Right?!
You really think mirror matches are included?
you better be trolling mon
|
On October 15 2011 04:10 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:02 pure_protoss wrote: Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you, Wouldn't a TvT have a 50% winrate for terran? All mirror matches have a 50% win rate for that race. The only relevant question is the PvT, PvZ and TvZ matchups.
nha....since there will be 100% sure a terran as a winner....I am pretty sure these graphs are only looking at the results of games and does not take into account the loss of the players. However I might be wrong I am not the one who did the graph...but still...there is a good chance it might be rigged.
|
On October 15 2011 04:02 pure_protoss wrote: Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you,
I really hope this is a troll post.. TvT = 100% win rate for terran? uhh
|
On October 15 2011 04:12 InFi.asc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:02 pure_protoss wrote: Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you, yes and that's why the TvZ and TvP graphs show these numbers, too! Right?! You really think mirror matches are included? you better be trolling mon
im talking about the win percentage by race graph not the matchup one!
|
There is a site where you can see brood war player's and sc2 players win rate graphs, but i cant for the life of it remember it, or find it with google. Does anyone got a link for that?
|
On October 15 2011 04:14 pure_protoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:12 InFi.asc wrote:On October 15 2011 04:02 pure_protoss wrote: Hey guyz....I just want to give my little opinion on the subject....
As a PROTOSS player as stated in my name, I do agree that terran needs a nerf and protoss definatly needs a huge buff to be on par with terran early game and zerg late game.
HOWEVER!
Those graphs in the OP means absolutely NOTHING! Yes terran will have a super high winrate % simply because there is so much TvT at the moment in the gsl....Which means that for about half of the matches of terrans, they have 100% winrate (which is logic in TvT except for a draw match that never happened in the GSL as far as I can remember). And since there is so less protoss in the gsl, there wont be many PvP's so there is not much 100% win rate matchup for them. Therefore the graphs are rigged.... The only curve that might be accurate would be the curve of zergs however even them would be on the protoss side in this story I believe.
Thank you, yes and that's why the TvZ and TvP graphs show these numbers, too! Right?! You really think mirror matches are included? you better be trolling mon im talking about the win percentage by race graph not the matchup one!
i know, now read my post again and look who created this thread
|
The winrates in GSL for Terran and Zerg seem about as even as one can expect. It's really just that Protoss has been wafting down in winrates since March, which could just be a temporary thing as strategies get worked out but it's disheartening nonetheless.
|
|
Well how long is temporary? It's been like that since March. It's kind of weird when you see how fast Zerg got buffed back in the day when it was supposed to do badly or how was amulet was nerfed once believed Protoss is too strong late game.
On October 15 2011 03:54 sereniity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 03:36 InFi.asc wrote:On October 15 2011 03:28 StimedSheep wrote: This reminds me of the very beginning of Starcraft. For those who might remember when the game first came out there were periods of time where each race was trying to figure out ways to combat different attack styles. I remember people saying that 6 pools were overpowered and could not be beaten. Anyways relax and enjoy the game and try something crazy. = \ I'm really not playing anymore, just watching. I can't really enjoy it if the better player does not win. And sadly there have been some matches where i felt that is true. This is not the way an ESPORTs game should display itself data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt="" Could you direct us to some replays perhaps where this happens? I can probably point out an obvious mistake in 99% of the games you see in any tournament that leads to a loss. It's not about who's "the better player overall" it's about who plays better at the time.
Of the top of my head there are some MC vs Puma games from NASL or IEM ( I think ), like where MC caught every drop and was miles ahead and then just lost.
Puma vs Hero at IPL wasn't that obvious as other games but I think Hero should have done better, he played outstandingly well.
|
Although these graphs confirm what most of the community already knows, to me it really didn't seem that bad. It looks like as the metagame shifts a certain race becomes stronger. The most concerning thing for me with even during a peak in protoss metagame and a wane in terran metagame terrans were still coming out with the higher win percentage. Whether this is a fluke or a sign of actual imbalance is up for debate, but I personally think more data is necessary before drawing any firm conclusions from this data.
|
On October 14 2011 13:10 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 13:05 The KY wrote:On October 14 2011 13:01 Fig wrote:On October 14 2011 12:55 The KY wrote:On October 14 2011 12:36 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 14 2011 12:04 Daralii wrote: Colossi and sentries exist to attempt to balance out the weakness of gateway units. It all goes back to the warp gate. Yes, but if we have to lose one of Colossi or Warp tech to get stronger Gateway units, then I'd easily choose to sacrifice Colossi. At least we could get Khaydarin Amulet back. May I be the first to say fuuuuck the Amulet. Kill a whole protoss army and then arrive at their base to 4 fully charged HTs with storm and 10 chargelots? Buff toss some other way please. I'm sorry that you just want to win in one huge blob vs blob battle that lasts less than 5 seconds. Those are so fun to watch. Heaven forbid that the toss have a chance at getting back in the game. ...what are you talking about? If you kill the opponents whole army and keep your own, you should have an advantage. KA didn't allow that. KA was OP. It got removed. No discussion needed - it's gone and isn't coming back and I am happy about that. If you are behind and you want to get back in the game, you have to outplay your opponent. T click isn't outplaying your opponent. Before I get some bullshit reply about how Terran can do this and that - I play terran and toss and I think terran is a bit OP. KA was still dumb. Then do you also think the planetary fortress should be removed? Does the same thing as KA except you only have to pay the 150 gas once. Planetaries exist because Terran can't warp-in or nydus or create combat units out of a CC or make any other static anti-ground defensive structures that don't require using up supply. Take away the Planetary and you take away Terran's only option for holding off an attack or harass until sufficient forces arrive from elsewhere on the map to defend it. A Planetary also doesn't have nearly the destructive ability of a warp-in round of storm-ready templars.
|
On October 15 2011 04:24 InFi.asc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 03:54 sereniity wrote:On October 15 2011 03:36 InFi.asc wrote:On October 15 2011 03:28 StimedSheep wrote: This reminds me of the very beginning of Starcraft. For those who might remember when the game first came out there were periods of time where each race was trying to figure out ways to combat different attack styles. I remember people saying that 6 pools were overpowered and could not be beaten. Anyways relax and enjoy the game and try something crazy. = \ I'm really not playing anymore, just watching. I can't really enjoy it if the better player does not win. And sadly there have been some matches where i felt that is true. This is not the way an ESPORTs game should display itself data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt="" Could you direct us to some replays perhaps where this happens? I can probably point out an obvious mistake in 99% of the games you see in any tournament that leads to a loss. It's not about who's "the better player overall" it's about who plays better at the time. Of the top of my head there are some MC vs Puma games from NASL or IEM ( I think ), like where MC caught every drop and was miles ahead and then just lost. Puma vs Hero at IPL wasn't that obvious as other games but I think Hero should have done better, he played outstandingly well.
Agreed. Anyone who watched the MC vs Puma at IEM and thought Puma deserved those wins was either kidding themselves (read: heavily biased) or hadn't watched Starcraft before. I don't understand why there is still a discussion about whether PvT is imbalanced or not: the discussion right now should be what can be done to solve the problem.
|
On October 14 2011 01:23 ChroMaTe_ wrote: Thus why I switched to Terran.
What will you do when Terran run into a tough time? Switch to Z or P and start over? You've got to love the race you play, not play it because its the most powerful one. For example, I love playing zerg because I love to QQ when I lose. "I just spent fucking ages spreading that creep and you walk in here and kill it off in 2 seconds, fuck you".
I really feel sorry for toss's recently though, there is so much shit going their way. I wish all 3 races were balanced. (Actually Id rather P and Z had a 60% win ratio vs T for 3 months so T players knows how it feels)
|
On October 15 2011 04:47 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:24 InFi.asc wrote:On October 15 2011 03:54 sereniity wrote:On October 15 2011 03:36 InFi.asc wrote:On October 15 2011 03:28 StimedSheep wrote: This reminds me of the very beginning of Starcraft. For those who might remember when the game first came out there were periods of time where each race was trying to figure out ways to combat different attack styles. I remember people saying that 6 pools were overpowered and could not be beaten. Anyways relax and enjoy the game and try something crazy. = \ I'm really not playing anymore, just watching. I can't really enjoy it if the better player does not win. And sadly there have been some matches where i felt that is true. This is not the way an ESPORTs game should display itself data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt="" Could you direct us to some replays perhaps where this happens? I can probably point out an obvious mistake in 99% of the games you see in any tournament that leads to a loss. It's not about who's "the better player overall" it's about who plays better at the time. Of the top of my head there are some MC vs Puma games from NASL or IEM ( I think ), like where MC caught every drop and was miles ahead and then just lost. Puma vs Hero at IPL wasn't that obvious as other games but I think Hero should have done better, he played outstandingly well. Agreed. Anyone who watched the MC vs Puma at IEM and thought Puma deserved those wins was either kidding themselves (read: heavily biased) or hadn't watched Starcraft before. I don't understand why there is still a discussion about whether PvT is imbalanced or not: the discussion right now should be what can be done to solve the problem.
Completely agree. And further, how to they change the MU without affecting ZvT at all, which has evolved into something that is really great to watch.
I'd actually be curious to see what it would be if they added 20 seconds build time to hatcheries. It should slow down the insane macro advantage that the crazy quick 3 base zerg can do in PvZ. It would actually also help reduce cannon/bunker rush effectiveness, as the T/P has to commit more/longer to the rush, and the zerg has more time to just cancel it and 1 base all-in for a free win.
|
|
|
|