|
On October 15 2011 04:52 Cain0 wrote: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)
sooo true! I got a friend of mine who keeps playing versus pros and GMs and he keeps saying that they are all bad and that he is almost always winning versus them (he is playing terran). However, he is always cheesing or always uses pressure builds that is soooo strong from terrans...I just wish the game was balanced so I could rape him in a straight best of 5  I have a high master too with 1300 points but I find it just aweful that he can win soooo easily versus pros and im almost 100% sure hes a worst player than me...I hate it fml loll
|
On October 15 2011 03:57 Fanatic-Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 21:51 The KY wrote: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. Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 21:51 The KY wrote: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. 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 thought 4-pools were overpowered and could not be beaten, hence why they changed the mineral cost to 200 rather than 150.
Mutas on Dire were more powerful imho. So the addition of corsairs was a "brilliant" implementation in bw.
|
On October 15 2011 05:01 pure_protoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:52 Cain0 wrote: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) sooo true! I got a friend of mine who keeps playing versus pros and GMs and he keeps saying that they are all bad and that he is almost always winning versus them (he is playing terran). However, he is always cheesing or always uses pressure builds that is soooo strong from terrans...I just wish the game was balanced so I could rape him in a straight best of 5 I have a high master too with 1300 points but I find it just aweful that he can win soooo easily versus pros and im almost 100% sure hes a worst player than me...I hate it fml loll
1300 masters is not exactly close to GM level (unless you have like 200~ bonus pool saved?).
He's just better than you if he's playing those GMs/pros and you're not. It's not just the race.
|
On October 15 2011 05:05 SniXSniPe wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 05:01 pure_protoss wrote:On October 15 2011 04:52 Cain0 wrote: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) sooo true! I got a friend of mine who keeps playing versus pros and GMs and he keeps saying that they are all bad and that he is almost always winning versus them (he is playing terran). However, he is always cheesing or always uses pressure builds that is soooo strong from terrans...I just wish the game was balanced so I could rape him in a straight best of 5 I have a high master too with 1300 points but I find it just aweful that he can win soooo easily versus pros and im almost 100% sure hes a worst player than me...I hate it fml loll 1300 masters is not exactly close to GM level (unless you have like 200~ bonus pool saved?).
Please keep this discussion GSL or at least pro level related, thank !
|
They need to give the races different attributes in different matchups so that they can balance each matchup independently of the others.
MIrror-matches: same as live
PvZ: Decrease hallucination research time and cost. Return WG to pre-nerf research time.
PvT: EMP nerf. Return WG to pre-nerf research time.
TvZ: Same as live except NP gets range 9 back.
Yay, now you can balance each matchup without screwing up the others. It makes the problem much less complex.
|
On October 15 2011 05:27 galivet wrote:
They need to give the races different attributes in different matchups so that they can balance each matchup independently of the others.
MIrror-matches: same as live
PvZ: Decrease hallucination research time and cost. Return WG to pre-nerf research time.
PvT: EMP nerf. Return WG to pre-nerf research time.
TvZ: Same as live except NP gets range 9 back.
Yay, now you can balance each matchup without screwing up the others. It makes the problem much less complex.
I think that Protoss warpgate time isnt going to help. There is a severe design flaw at hand in ZvP.
As P, you either FFE and lock yourself inside your base whilst zerg macro goes out of control or 3 Gate Expo where you cant get your nexus up because of harassing lings.
|
On October 15 2011 05:34 Cain0 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 05:27 galivet wrote:
They need to give the races different attributes in different matchups so that they can balance each matchup independently of the others.
MIrror-matches: same as live
PvZ: Decrease hallucination research time and cost. Return WG to pre-nerf research time.
PvT: EMP nerf. Return WG to pre-nerf research time.
TvZ: Same as live except NP gets range 9 back.
Yay, now you can balance each matchup without screwing up the others. It makes the problem much less complex. I think that Protoss warpgate time isnt going to help. There is a severe design flaw at hand in ZvP. As P, you either FFE and lock yourself inside your base whilst zerg macro goes out of control or 3 Gate Expo where you cant get your nexus up because of harassing lings.
Well I intended those changes to "fix" points in the charts where GSL protoss seemed to start suffering. I don't actually know how to balance the game, but it seems like there was a point in the past where it was better balanced than it is today, and then blizzard nerfed WG research time and it started the protoss downward spiral. The WG research time nerf was only supposed to effect PvP. So, if we allow the matchups to be balanced independently of one another then we can still keep slower WG in PvP but let it resume its previous research speed in the other matchups.
It's just a set of config settings that are set according to the matchup being played. vOv
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 15 2011 04:13 pure_protoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:10 Whitewing 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, 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.
By that logic, there's also a 100% guarantee that there's a terran loser. It averages out to 50%.
|
On October 15 2011 04:13 pure_protoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2011 04:10 Whitewing 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, 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.
Some major misunderstanding of basic mathematics there, buddy. Terran winrate just means taking all terran results and getting a % out of it. If all terrans go combined 24-24 in a GSL, winrate will be 50%. If two terrans face each other, net results of that one game for Terran will be 1-1 also 50%.
|
On October 14 2011 02:23 Sanchonator wrote:guys... dw - look at the graph.. protoss peaks when MC wins, and its heading back up - MC is going to win the next gsl and protoss will be saved. (winning his seed from MLG ofc) we can wish cant we? 
oh shit...
its happening
|
On October 14 2011 01:31 windsupernova wrote:
Just what i was saying. TvZ is fine. P is doing badly in both of its MUs atm.
Does this include GSTL? Or are you only including GSL Sponsor tournaments?
But then off course Zergs are going to ignore that Terran against Zerg is fine and jump on the T OP bandwagon.
No, we don't QQ and whine about balance anymore (Like Protoss players do all the fucking time)
|
It's always fun how people make conclusions out of these graphs. If you read all those comments you can make the next conclusions:
- terran is imba and needs a nerf
- zerg is fine
- toss is up and needs a buff
Then you look at the results of tourneys from this week:
+ Show Spoiler +IEM: 3 z, 1 p in top 4. MLG: pvp finals in a tourney with topterrans like bomber, boxer, puma, thestc, mkp and polt
About EU and NA terrans:
+ Show Spoiler +Look at all the tourneys (like MLG, valancia, IEM), and see how almost every EU and NA terran gets destroyed. There are 2 EU / NA terrans doing "okay": select and thorzain. Imagina a terran nerf guys...
|
On October 14 2011 03:17 dschneid wrote:
There's a huge lack of stats knowledge here and it's sad that these graphs get put on display when people don't know how to read them. For people who said sample size doesn't matter because these are win percentages, it doesn't matter that percentages are normalized for sample size, sample size still effects how much weight outliers hold as well as the general significance of the number.
Put some confidence intervals around these, make note of possible selection bias, and tell me the overall sample sizes (a few hundred at best? That's not that much in the realm of stats)...
Bottom line you can only make a few inferences from these but no sound conclusions.
I second the request for confidence intervals. Might as well list the variances in the spreadsheet too.
Caveat: doing this still doesn't allow us to draw any valid conclusions from the graphs.
But I will still have fun looking at them. :-)
And wow at the vicious responses to dschneid's post. It was a reasonable request.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
