|
On November 07 2011 21:18 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 20:41 MilesTeg wrote:
You wouldn't say that if it were the other way around (Protoss hard to play on ladder but doing great in code S). Nice baseless assertion/ad hominem attack there, meant to discredit an argument without tackling it directly. Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 20:41 MilesTeg wrote:
At some point, they also have to think about the 99,99% of people who play this game. At the level you play at, balance doesn't mean shit. You can solve the balance problem by just playing more and getting better. I can guarantee that any problems you have in any match-up can be solved by something simple - if you were good enough that you didn't make stupid mistakes, you would be in GM/Code S too. Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 20:41 MilesTeg wrote:
If they buff Protoss further a lot of people, including myself, will start to get really angry. Oh no - we wouldn't want you to get offended, now? And I find it ignorant/heavily biased that you call it "further". Blizzard has been ridiculously inconsistent since release in buffing, say, Zerg, and nerfing, say, Protoss. Terran's nerfs have been minimal, while Protoss has had tons of important ones, crippling the race when there was no need to: David Kim was having an off day, it seems, and decided he didn't like playing vs Protoss.
What a ridiculous post.
-It's ignorant and biased to call the last patches buffs to Protoss? Ok, sorry, didn't realise...
-Balance doesn't mean shit at my level? How about the level of 99% of the people who play, from bronze to grand master? How about your level? Would it be fair that you can be in Master as Protoss with the same skill as a gold Zerg? Wouldn't that be the definition of a balance problem? EVERYONE makes mistakes, by your standard every pro Protoss should stop whining because if they play better they'll never lose. 1/1/1 should never win if the Protoss doesn't screw up, does it mean it was balanced?
-Don't say an assertion is baseless just because you didn't understand it correctly. Also you really shouldn't use words like ad hominem if you don't know what they mean.
-Maybe, just maybe, Protoss has been nerfed because they were way too powerful? That shit Protoss players were winning against good Zergs? Quite hilarious that you call me biased and then write this garbage on David Kim...
Rage less, think more before posting, thanks.
|
On November 08 2011 00:26 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 18:09 karlkarlson wrote:On November 07 2011 17:39 Topdoller wrote:On November 07 2011 17:06 Gheed wrote:On November 07 2011 17:00 Topdoller wrote:
I wish the mod would lock or delete this thread, for 3 reasons
1. All it does is promote balance whine and QQ.
2. It has nothing to do with the current state of the game. Tournaments don't play on the current ladder map pool, so the results dont reflect 99.9% of total games played
3. HOTS will be here soon 1. So come up with something constructive to say instead of whining yourself. 2. That is not the purpose of the information being presented. It is clearly intended only as a representation of professional level play, not ladder matches. Whether any meaningful conclusions can be drawn for it is debatable. 3. Soom(tm) edit: lol I am not whining , the game is balanced Oh good grief, no it's actually not. No one that knows anything is claiming that it's balancedAgain, please try to make your silly reasonless case to these pros:
IMMVP 'I think the 1-1-1 should make you be disqualified from GSL.' Basically he's saying that terrans are OP but what part of the 1-1-1 that is OP is left to the imagination.
PoltPrime 'Many of these terrans are in Code S because the race is OP so I will knock them out.' So here Polt Prime is saying that terran is easier to win with basically. You have an easier time beating protoss or zerg players as terran.
EGDeMuslim 'I can't believe that Blizzard isn't looking at the ghost. I mean they nerfed rax build time by 5 seconds but they didn't look at the ghost. Greg (IdrA) keeps telling me to use ghosts more, and I have. Now I know why he thinks they need to be changed.' So EGDeMuslim is kinda hinting at the fact that ghosts should be looked at by Blizzard. This was in SotG episode 50 or 51.
WhiteRa 'I think the ghost have too many good spells. I think they do too good with everything protoss make and I think they need to be looked at by Blizzard. Too many good spells.' So WhiteRa the guy that popularized the statement More GG More Skill is saying that he thinks ghosts are a bit too good at the moment.
Huk 'I wish I played Terran.' This was also in a SotG episode where HuK says that playing terran seems to be a bigger benefit than playing protoss. His reasonings for why terran is a better choice for pro players isn't given but he feels being terran would help him.
IMNesTea 'Everyone knows that terran is much easier than zerg. If he didn't play terran he wouldn't have won so many championships. If I played terran I'd have won a lot more, if he played zerg I don't think he'd win.' This is NesTea talking about his teammate who after the match, looked depressed about winning.
FruitDealer 'You can't beat terran with this s*@$ race! This game is broken!' I hope you can figure out what he said. And maybe figure out why he said this.
oGsMC, 'Protoss is weak right now against terran.' Typically when one race is weaker than other we call that imbalanced. Maybe not though, maybe you can spin this.
Bisu 'Who would ever play that game? I hear it's terran favored. If protoss is so weak why even have them in the game? Just get rid of them. If I had to play it though, I would still pick protoss though.'
LiquidTLO 'Look how easy this race is. You build some rax and make marines. Don't stop making marines and keep pushing. It's not very hard. I stayed with terran because it's much easier.' I think he's saying it's easier to win with terran than zerg or protoss. Just a guess. He stated this on his stream one time.
IdrA and iNcontrol have said lots of things on terran being OP but you can disregard everything they said. IrdA is actually pretty smart and doesn't want to see things broken in this game. I think he needs to change his style a bit and that's why he loses, not his mechanics.
So I think you should tell all those pros, some of those quoted are also GSL champions, others have done well in MLG or other foregin tournaments.
I know, oGsMC, IMMVP, Polt, TLO, Idra, Huk, et .al should just "suck it up, and L2P", right? What a joke your argument is. pathetic. Lol, a lot of these quotes don't even say that Terran is imba. Your just interpreting it like that. Their balance has nothing to do with your balanced. At your bronze level, the game is balanced. So please, stop spreading this bullshit that somehow, game imbalance effects you.
Of course pro level imbalance affects us, because we are following the pro scene. SCII is a sport and we care about what our favourite athletes are doing, like in any other sport. If you don't care about the pro scene I don't understand why post or even bother to read a topic about win percentages in professional tournaments. You should instead go post in a topic about the strengths and weaknesses of one base play with no workers along with other bronze level players and leave the people that actually follow pro tournaments have opinions about the balance at these levels.
|
I don't even know where to start with this guy:
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
You're wrong. Almost everybody buying their product is a scrub. Also, at the highest levels of play, meta game counts for a lot more than how balanced the game is at the core.
...Whereas for lower league players, metagame counts for nothing and "true", hypothetical balance means nothing? Balance means nothing for lower leagues: if you get better, the balance issues you are experiencing become nothing and different ones emerge. Blizzard should clearly try to balance for the highest level of balance.
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
For instance, what if protoss players are doing poorly because playing protoss was easy as shit before people learned how to stop a lot of their gay stuff?
Then they would previously have had a higher than 50% winrate and it would be slowly averaging to 50%, dumbass. The only reason for it going lower than 50% would be that other races' players are somehow "better" on average - which there is no evidence AT ALL for, so stop talking bollocks. Also, nice "subtle" homophobia here.
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Top players never had to innovate or think outside the box if every game could be won with either 4gate, 6gate or stargate play. This is true for terran as well except they're still the best because even if you figure out what they're doing, it's still hard to stop most of their junk.
Baseless assertion, bullshit, yaddayaddayadda. None of this is supported by evidence, it's just some words you managed to spew while looking at statistics you clearly don't understand or else are heavily biased against.
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
The bottom line is even if zerg starts to win, it's only because we've been forced to explore every single aspect of every different tech given to us.
Zerg has had an over 50% winrate in PvZ since April. I'm sure that counts as "starts to win" to you. And what evidence have you shown there for Zerg having to explore every aspect while other races haven't? That's right, nada. Zilch.
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Seriously, what unit/strat hasn't zerg tried?
You really want to ask that? OK, how about mass Queen/Baneling vs Protoss with Ultra drops for harassment? See how little your question proves?
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Whereas you really don't see a lot of different stuff from protoss becuase you simply... don't need to.
On the contrary, Protoss were using their full techtree before most Zergs knew what Infestors were. HTs were regularly seen in Beta and just after release, and the "deathball" came into play months ago. Zergs only discovered their Infestor/BL combo a couple of months ago - in what way do you not see "different stuff" from Protoss. Again, talking out of your biased, ignorant ass.
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Well maybe now you do. maybe now you have to get creative and get a mothership or even carriers!
Because Mothership/Carriers hasn't already been extensively tried in tourney play (Kiwi vs Stephano, MLG, HongUn's MLG PvZ, White-Ra's PvZ on Shakuras for months). [/sarcasm]
On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
or get really sick with your warp prism multitasking.
Yeah, Warp Prism harass is becoming more popular, but it is not purely because Protoss players finally found the extra fingers needed to micro it. There was a buff which made Warp Prism harassment more viable, and this encourages pro use.
It frustrates and shocks me that people even contend with the statistics about the highest level of play. I suppose it's far easier to follow your own pre-existing prejudices and biases than look at logic...
|
On November 08 2011 00:38 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:On November 07 2011 20:17 Sated wrote:On November 07 2011 17:39 Topdoller wrote:On November 07 2011 17:06 Gheed wrote:On November 07 2011 17:00 Topdoller wrote:
I wish the mod would lock or delete this thread, for 3 reasons
1. All it does is promote balance whine and QQ.
2. It has nothing to do with the current state of the game. Tournaments don't play on the current ladder map pool, so the results dont reflect 99.9% of total games played
3. HOTS will be here soon 1. So come up with something constructive to say instead of whining yourself. 2. That is not the purpose of the information being presented. It is clearly intended only as a representation of professional level play, not ladder matches. Whether any meaningful conclusions can be drawn for it is debatable. 3. Soom(tm) edit: lol I am not whining , the game is balanced Clearly not. Look at the graphs. The game should be balanced for the highest level of play, not scrubs like me. You're wrong. Almost everybody buying their product is a scrub. Also, at the highest levels of play, meta game counts for a lot more than how balanced the game is at the core. For instance, what if protoss players are doing poorly because playing protoss was easy as shit before people learned how to stop a lot of their gay stuff? Top players never had to innovate or think outside the box if every game could be won with either 4gate, 6gate or stargate play. This is true for terran as well except they're still the best because even if you figure out what they're doing, it's still hard to stop most of their junk. The bottom line is even if zerg starts to win, it's only because we've been forced to explore every single aspect of every different tech given to us. Seriously, what unit/strat hasn't zerg tried? Whereas you really don't see a lot of different stuff from protoss becuase you simply... don't need to. Well maybe now you do. maybe now you have to get creative and get a mothership or even carriers! or get really sick with your warp prism multitasking. Already answered this: For SC2 to be a legitimate ESPORT, the game has to be balanced at the tournament level. As for the stuff about Protoss players using "gay stuff", are you legitimately trying to say that the top Protoss players don't know what they're doing..? I don't think that's a good argument. EDIT: Also, get creative with "motherships or even carriers"? Those are units that are being removed from the game because Blizzard knows they suck. GG. =/
If you're balancing it for the pros, then it's not balanced. W/e though I'm not gonna try to explain/argue that.
What I'm saying is races get into a rut because EVERYBODY DOES THE SAME DAMN THING. You can say that means the pros "don't know what they're doing" but I'm not letting you put words in my mouth. If a race has options that are easily exploitable, then the people who do those things are going to be further behind in other aspects of the game... period. That's what I'm saying. If protoss was able to herp derp a move their way to a lot of wins for the first 8 months of the game or w/e, then they're going to be behind in everything else. That's pretty much a fact. And please re-read what I said once or twice before you post something like "LOL YOU SAID IT'S A FACT THAT PROTOSS PLAYERS R BAD LOLOLOL" or whatever.
|
Wow this game is relatively balanced.
Keep up the good work blizzie.
|
Its funny how all the good terrans have high tailed out of here and the only ones defending T are bronze-gold leaguers.
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder when blizzard will realize that terran win rate has never been below 50%
|
On November 08 2011 00:39 MilesTeg wrote:
What a ridiculous post.
-It's ignorant and biased to call the last patches buffs to Protoss? Ok, sorry, didn't realise...
The most recent patches have been a couple of buffs to Protoss, mixed with a few nerfs. These are somehow intended to compensate for the absurd and constant nerfs since release.
You act like Protoss has been consistently buffed since released, and are approaching a point where they are really imba. Nothing could be further from the truth. Go and look at the patches for the past year and then post them here and complain about P constantly getting buffed. Nah, I didn't think so.
On November 08 2011 00:39 MilesTeg wrote:
-Balance doesn't mean shit at my level? How about the level of 99% of the people who play, from bronze to grand master? How about your level?
If you aren't a pro, balance means very little to you. If you are below high Masters, you clearly aren't that good anyway (I'm not good at all) and if you really care about the game balance at your level and your win/loss ratio, you should be getting better instead of talking about it on the forums. I care about the balance at the level I watch and try to enjoy: not my personal nooby level.
On November 08 2011 00:39 MilesTeg wrote:
Would it be fair that you can be in Master as Protoss with the same skill as a gold Zerg? Wouldn't that be the definition of a balance problem?
It would, but it would be a balance problem for lower leagues (the leagues I play in): an irrelevant one. As I posted above, who cares if mass Void Ray is too good in Bronze? You can get your act together and fix those simple mistakes and those balance problems become irrelevant.
On November 08 2011 00:39 MilesTeg wrote:
EVERYONE makes mistakes, by your standard every pro Protoss should stop whining because if they play better they'll never lose. 1/1/1 should never win if the Protoss doesn't screw up, does it mean it was balanced?
Straw man argument - I never said "if you make any mistakes at all, balance doesn't affect your level". I said that if your play still has massive flaws in it, balance is irrelevant. You can easily get better and then the alleged balance problems at your level are just gone.
On November 08 2011 00:39 MilesTeg wrote:
-Don't say an assertion is baseless just because you didn't understand it correctly. Also you really shouldn't use words like ad hominem if you don't know what they mean.
Again, instead of addressing my argument directly you throw some straw up in the air and tell me I don't know what words mean.
You said:
On November 07 2011 20:41 MilesTeg wrote:
You wouldn't say that if it were the other way around (Protoss hard to play on ladder but doing great in code S).
How do you know what I would say if I was someone else, or playing a different race? That is clearly a baseless assertion and attacks me personally (implying I am unprincipled and selfish) unless you can somehow see into my mind without having a clue who I am.
This argument is in no way sophisticated - why would I misunderstand it? Is this beyond me?
On November 07 2011 20:41 MilesTeg wrote:
-Maybe, just maybe, Protoss has been nerfed because they were way too powerful? That shit Protoss players were winning against good Zergs? Quite hilarious that you call me biased and then write this garbage on David Kim...
If Protoss were way too powerful, surely the winrate would have on average been far above 50% at some point on the graph? But no. The highest moving average PvZ had is about 53% on the graph - and then Zerg recieved some massive buffs in the form of Infestor, Protoss recieved some massive nerfs in the form of WG research nerf. At the moment, Zerg is winning a moving average of about 57% - what does that say to you?
If Protoss had previously been broken/horrifically overpowered and is now balanced, the average would move to around 50% rather than dropping lower and lower continually in both PvT and PvZ.
And in case you didn't get it, I was joking about David Kim. I don't seriously think he just went on the ladder one day and decided to nerf Protoss. I think what really happened was a series of uninformed, inconsistent and unintelligent balance decisions that ruined most PvX match-ups.
Johnny Bronze-thought-process Miles-Teg should stop confusing reality with his own prejudices and come up with either an original criticism of the graph's conclusion or stop posting altogether on balance threads.
|
Wow, ZvP is more favored to Z then it was to P during the deathball vs. roach-hydra-corruptor era.
|
I DONT KNOW WHAT WERE YELLING ABOUT
|
On November 08 2011 00:47 SeaSwift wrote:
...Whereas for lower league players, metagame counts for nothing and "true", hypothetical balance means nothing? Balance means nothing for lower leagues: if you get better, the balance issues you are experiencing become nothing and different ones emerge. Blizzard should clearly try to balance for the highest level of balance.
What it means is pros know more about the races they don't play than people in lower leagues. So in lower leagues things like blind aggression are usually more rewarding than playing defensive or reactive.
On November 08 2011 00:47 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
For instance, what if protoss players are doing poorly because playing protoss was easy as shit before people learned how to stop a lot of their gay stuff? Then they would previously have had a higher than 50% winrate and it would be slowly averaging to 50%, dumbass. The only reason for it going lower than 50% would be that other races' players are somehow "better" on average - which there is no evidence AT ALL for, so stop talking bollocks. Also, nice "subtle" homophobia here.
LOL What? Why would it slowly be averaging to 50? How can you expect people to practice basic mechanics in a haphazard game if they usually win on 2 or 3 bases with their first push, or at least do enough dmg to where they have a huge lead? That's my entire point is that with all-ins and timing attacks in general, you learn less overall about the game because you win or loss right there. So when you have a race that THRIVES on 2 base timing attacks, how could you expect them to NOT fall behind in overall skill? And protoss and terran have a lot more all-ins/timing attacks than zerg does. get it? Also, I think you noticing a commonly used word like gay or fag or whatever is much more unusual than me using it. But w/e nice argument, you really smart. You really smart man 
you Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Top players never had to innovate or think outside the box if every game could be won with either 4gate, 6gate or stargate play. This is true for terran as well except they're still the best because even if you figure out what they're doing, it's still hard to stop most of their junk. Baseless assertion, bullshit, yaddayaddayadda. None of this is supported by evidence, it's just some words you managed to spew while looking at statistics you clearly don't understand or else are heavily biased against. Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
The bottom line is even if zerg starts to win, it's only because we've been forced to explore every single aspect of every different tech given to us. Zerg has had an over 50% winrate in PvZ since April. I'm sure that counts as "starts to win" to you. And what evidence have you shown there for Zerg having to explore every aspect while other races haven't? That's right, nada. Zilch.
I find it absolutely hilarious that later on in your post you talk about me not using logic. Admittedly that's ALL I'm using, smart guy. I don't have statistics because what I'm talking about can't be quantified. That doesn't mean it's not true. In fact the idea that it can't be quantified is probably why nobody talks about it. Because there are too many people like you that just plug your ears and say things like YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT! WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE?!?!
Like are you serious? Are you really going to argue that
a) protoss is the king of timing attacks
b) if you win most of your games (or more than other races) by using timing attacks or all-ins, then you're simply NOT GOING TO PRACTICE OTHER THINGS ABOUT THE GAME because you're too busy learning your timing attack. So once that particular attack gets figured out, you're done for. Look at MC, people figured him out and now he's losing. Oh, that's right... protoss is underpowered now.... got it. That's why he's losing. I'm so silly sometimes.
you Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Seriously, what unit/strat hasn't zerg tried? You really want to ask that? OK, how about mass Queen/Baneling vs Protoss with Ultra drops for harassment? See how little your question proves?
No but every individual aspect of that has been and is tried all the time. We don't have entire units that go completely unused.
you Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Whereas you really don't see a lot of different stuff from protoss becuase you simply... don't need to. On the contrary, Protoss were using their full techtree before most Zergs knew what Infestors were. HTs were regularly seen in Beta and just after release, and the "deathball" came into play months ago. Zergs only discovered their Infestor/BL combo a couple of months ago - in what way do you not see "different stuff" from Protoss. Again, talking out of your biased, ignorant ass.
No, it was before infestors were usuable, not before we knew what they were. Don't worry, now that they're not again, protoss players can go back to the cruncher style... and they are.
you Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
Well maybe now you do. maybe now you have to get creative and get a mothership or even carriers! Because Mothership/Carriers hasn't already been extensively tried in tourney play (Kiwi vs Stephano, MLG, HongUn's MLG PvZ, White-Ra's PvZ on Shakuras for months). [/sarcasm]
LOL it has and it works quite often! At the very least those aspects of their play are almost always cost effective, even if they end up losing the game. And what if those things were used by everybody to the point where there were stream lined builds for everybody to copy?
you Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:
or get really sick with your warp prism multitasking.
Yeah, Warp Prism harass is becoming more popular, but it is not purely because Protoss players finally found the extra fingers needed to micro it. There was a buff which made Warp Prism harassment more viable, and this encourages pro use.
See this is a PERFECT example of why I'm right. Even now with the warp prism buff, the warp prism often gets the job done without even being hit!! You think they needed a buff, but in reality they can win a shit ton of games vs zerg (at least) without ever even being under fire. This is a prime example of what I mean when I say people don't experiment.
|
That TvZ graph is downright depressing lol.
|
On November 07 2011 20:41 MilesTeg wrote:
-Balance doesn't mean shit at my level? How about the level of 99% of the people who play, from bronze to grand master? How about your level? Would it be fair that you can be in Master as Protoss with the same skill as a gold Zerg? Wouldn't that be the definition of a balance problem? EVERYONE makes mistakes, by your standard every pro Protoss should stop whining because if they play better they'll never lose. 1/1/1 should never win if the Protoss doesn't screw up, does it mean it was balanced?
Rage less, think more before posting, thanks.
Oh god.. the 99% being brought up, should i be expecting some type of Occupy Ladder movement coming?
as for you saying that 1/1/1 should never win, you couldnt be more wrong. have you heard casters say how good this is? it barely takes any skill to win. they just park tanks outside your natural or main and just get vision with air units and you cant kill them becasue of tank support... you have no idea what you are talking about.
|
It's ridiculous that so many people look at these stats, and go "it's not 50% for everything, fucking imbalanced!", I think it's more interesting to look at them and see who's doing well in accordance with the stats. Going "Zerg have a higher winrate, zerg OP" etc, isn't an intelligent interpretation. Something as simple as a new build, a new playstyle, or even one zerg player doing extremely well could affect these stats.
|
On November 08 2011 00:58 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:50 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 00:38 Sated wrote:On November 08 2011 00:29 Holophonist wrote:On November 07 2011 20:17 Sated wrote:On November 07 2011 17:39 Topdoller wrote:On November 07 2011 17:06 Gheed wrote:On November 07 2011 17:00 Topdoller wrote:
I wish the mod would lock or delete this thread, for 3 reasons
1. All it does is promote balance whine and QQ.
2. It has nothing to do with the current state of the game. Tournaments don't play on the current ladder map pool, so the results dont reflect 99.9% of total games played
3. HOTS will be here soon 1. So come up with something constructive to say instead of whining yourself. 2. That is not the purpose of the information being presented. It is clearly intended only as a representation of professional level play, not ladder matches. Whether any meaningful conclusions can be drawn for it is debatable. 3. Soom(tm) edit: lol I am not whining , the game is balanced Clearly not. Look at the graphs. The game should be balanced for the highest level of play, not scrubs like me. You're wrong. Almost everybody buying their product is a scrub. Also, at the highest levels of play, meta game counts for a lot more than how balanced the game is at the core. For instance, what if protoss players are doing poorly because playing protoss was easy as shit before people learned how to stop a lot of their gay stuff? Top players never had to innovate or think outside the box if every game could be won with either 4gate, 6gate or stargate play. This is true for terran as well except they're still the best because even if you figure out what they're doing, it's still hard to stop most of their junk. The bottom line is even if zerg starts to win, it's only because we've been forced to explore every single aspect of every different tech given to us. Seriously, what unit/strat hasn't zerg tried? Whereas you really don't see a lot of different stuff from protoss becuase you simply... don't need to. Well maybe now you do. maybe now you have to get creative and get a mothership or even carriers! or get really sick with your warp prism multitasking. Already answered this: For SC2 to be a legitimate ESPORT, the game has to be balanced at the tournament level. As for the stuff about Protoss players using "gay stuff", are you legitimately trying to say that the top Protoss players don't know what they're doing..? I don't think that's a good argument. EDIT: Also, get creative with "motherships or even carriers"? Those are units that are being removed from the game because Blizzard knows they suck. GG. =/ If you're balancing it for the pros, then it's not balanced. W/e though I'm not gonna try to explain/argue that. What I'm saying is races get into a rut because EVERYBODY DOES THE SAME DAMN THING. You can say that means the pros "don't know what they're doing" but I'm not letting you put words in my mouth. If a race has options that are easily exploitable, then the people who do those things are going to be further behind in other aspects of the game... period. That's what I'm saying. If protoss was able to herp derp a move their way to a lot of wins for the first 8 months of the game or w/e, then they're going to be behind in everything else. That's pretty much a fact. And please re-read what I said once or twice before you post something like "LOL YOU SAID IT'S A FACT THAT PROTOSS PLAYERS R BAD LOLOLOL" or whatever. You've just said Protoss players could A-move for months, implying that Protoss players are bad (even at the highest level). I'm not putting words into your mouth, I'm simply stating the obvious implication you are making with such a sentence. This assertion is silly for a number of reasons. First of all, you have no evidence for a statement like "[Protoss players] a move their way to a lot of wins". I could say something equally silly like, "All Zerg players do is build Roaches, Roaches are IMBA!", because that has just about as much evidence as your assertion does. Second of all, the so-called "gay" strategies you were referring to earlier (6gate, Stargate harassment etc.) require good use of forcefields/blink/graviton beam/void-ray micro to be viable, which means the Protoss player is doing more than A-moving to victory. Third of all, by saying that Protoss hasn't been explored, you're choosing to ignore a lot of top-level play without any good reasons. Protoss have explored their options and they have been found to be lacking, which is why Blizzard are choosing to remove units like the Mothership and the Carrier. EDIT: Look at my first point again. The fact that "macro-stomping" works at lower-levels shows that lower-level players losing to A-move are only doing so because their macro isn't good enough and they need to work on it... which is exactly why balancing for low-level players is a terrible idea: The number of mistakes they make means it is difficult to see what is imbalanced and what isn't. Besides, it's no fun watching tournaments when you know that Race X has an advantage (could be any race, I don't care which). SC2 will die as an ESPORT if the game doesn't become balanced - BW only survived as long as it did because it is very balanced at the top-level, even though it isn't at lower levels (or so I hear).
I love arguing on TL. A whole bunch of semantics and word games without every approaching my core point. I use a lot of hyperbole, get over it.
Protoss players have stronger timing attacks than zerg.
That means protoss players have to practice everything else less.
That means if certain strats stop working (get figured out, nerfed, etc) those players will be in relatively bad shape.
All the while nobody knows what the current scene would look like if every protoss player played pure macro/reactive from the start
|
On November 08 2011 00:25 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 00:11 Pippi wrote:
Interesting graphs, but what whould be more interesting is some data about whining. Why do people whine?
I mean this is top level play, at bronze-masters (in Eu and NA) where 99 % of TL community are at, protoss got more win % than T for example. In masters + GM Z got 40 % win against T and P... I guess if you play in GM on korean server as P you can whine? No you can't. Korea grandmaster: - Protoss: 39.5% (75)- Terran: 35.8% (68) - Zerg: 24.2% (46)
That probably has something to do with the GSL and the new season starting to closely.
If you look at top100 of Korean Masters, its around 41% Terran (Top 200, 42%). Then if you check SC2Ranks GM history, you see that no one from the Korean ladder has been booted from Grand Master, yet.
So yeah, give it sometime and it will most likely go back to being how it has always been when Pro players feel comfortable to play ladder more often
But anyways, people are starting to get way too personal/heated with their race discussions. You guys need to calm down o.o
Protoss players have stronger timing attacks than zerg.
That means protoss players have to practice everything else less.
That means if certain strats stop working (get figured out, nerfed, etc) those players will be in relatively bad shape.
All the while nobody knows what the current scene would look like if every protoss player played pure macro/reactive from the start
"Timing attacks" hardly require much practice from Protoss, but are harder to recover from if scouted/countered.
Though races always tend to all-in more when they are at their weakest. I.E When ZvP was considered terrible for Zerg a half a year ago you always saw Zerg doing some kind of new timing. Even IdrA was at the stage where he would cheese every other game against Protoss but Protoss would always play Macro (with a bunch of Nexus cancles thrown in there for good measure).
Same thing for Terran, way back when people had the mind set that you could never win a macro game as Terran you rarely ever saw fast expands or third bases.
When Terran would do nothing but 1/1/1's you saw Protoss in the GSL do Stargate all-ins virtually every game.
A race will always fall back on timings or all-ins when they feel they are at a disadvantage when playing "standard"
Though watching Protoss games over the past month or two, what new timings have their been for Protoss? I just see the same old stuff
|
On November 08 2011 01:09 SeaSwift wrote:
Straw man argument - I never said "if you make any mistakes at all, balance doesn't affect your level". I said that if your play still has massive flaws in it, balance is irrelevant. You can easily get better and then the alleged balance problems at your level are just gone.
I guess the game will never be imbalanced for anybody seeing as how everybody makes hundreds of mistakes (even if tiny) every game. What a ridiculous argument from a ridiculous, ridiculous man. If you're the better player and you can't win (even if you know what the other guy is doing), imbalance. PERIOD. And that includes high level play, too. You so often see lesser protoss players beat better zergs.
|
Quite curious as there are more Protoss in korea GM than any other race. Quite curious indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
