|
On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: Show nested quote +That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken.
Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation.
In the link david kim even said that "the complexity of the terran race makes it harder to learn" or something along those lines. Not all races are equally hard to play, not all races are equally strong at all levels of play, terran benefits the most from micro, if your micro is bad you won't be able to beat equally skilled protoss or zerg players. That's not to say that the game is imbalanced at pro level too, it is very balanced, but at lower levels terran is clearly the hardest race and I'd even go as far as to say that terran is the hardest race for everyone who is not a pro player, which of course is just my own opinion and not backed up by what david kim said. but terran being the weakest race and hardest race to learn for low level players is a fact. It's in the link, so please stop arguing about this, it's been official for more than a month now.
|
|
|
zerg winnings are down in feb but were just up the month before so I expect it to balance out this month around (korea wise)
|
On March 04 2012 00:55 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:54 Recognizable wrote:On March 04 2012 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:
For fuck's sake, if you aren't a pro, any percieved imbalance at your level of play can be overcome by just playing better instead of whining on forums. End of story. Unless the game is completely broken and imbalanced to the point of being unplayable, eg the 10 damage per shot Marine, you are not affected by balance. The problem is when you have to play twice as good as your opponent and still barely beat him in standard macro game eg: TvP. Of course, that might be problem. And we can know this to be true because... you said so.
I've seen posts from players like BeastyQT and Cloud basically saying the same thing, strelok just yesterday was telling on his stream how you just need to be better much better then the protoss to win playing completely standard.
Why do you think no foreign Terran has won a major tournament in 1.5 years.
|
On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2012 23:32 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 03 2012 23:24 Grumbels wrote:On March 03 2012 23:12 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 03 2012 23:08 Grumbels wrote:On March 03 2012 22:45 SeaSwift wrote:On March 03 2012 22:32 Grumbels wrote:
Note that balance at lower skill levels is relevant, even if the matchmaking system will ideally keep you at a 50% win rate. As an example, suppose you have a completely degenerate situation where protoss > zerg > terran > protoss goes very strongly. Then your placement is decided solely by your mirror match-up, as the other ones aren't really contributing to measuring your skill. So such things lead to frustrating match-ups, because a player simply can't avoid playing certain races, so he will keep having these awfully hard games where he isn't favored at all. It's an issue with the match making system that doesn't take skill at specific match-ups into account.
As far as me personally goes, I sometimes feel like playing against protoss can be like trying to get through a barrier/wall and no matter how many tricks or tactics you use, you're just not even able to make a dent. You don't feel outplayed, you feel outmatched and completely helpless. That doesn't have too much to do with balance, but it's just annoying. It is relevant, but not nearly as important. You don't win or lose a tournament worth thousands of dollars because balance in Silver League is very Zerg favoured (for example). It matters if the balance is so horrific that Blizzard are turning people away from the game, and making people less likely to buy the expansion, but to be honest it clearly isn't that bad watching the game, and if win/lose means that much more to you than just playing at a level you are satisfied with, you shouldn't be playing Starcraft 2 at a low level anyway - it might be more worthwhile for you to either improve enough that the balance at that level doesn't affect you any more, or to play a different game. I'm sorry for you if some people actually play the game and want to have engaging and balanced match-ups at their level. I guess it's highly selfish, but I care a lot more about having a fun playing experience at my level of play than at a pro level. I recognize the need for both, and of course Blizzard can prioritize and such, but arguments that just wave away the existence of, say, gold-diamond players, as if they're worthless scum that don't deserve any consideration do annoy me. Starcraft is like the only game where if you say: "I'd like a fun playing experience for myself" people tend to hate you for it. Balance does not affect anyone below mid masters. It simply does not. If you don't have the time to put into the game to improve, then that's just the way it is. You cannot ever show me a game between two players below masters where I would say that balance had an impact on the outcome of the game. Seriously, these arguments are getting old. You know that when Blizzard patched gateway timings (to weaken proxy gate), reaper speed upgrade (to make 2v2 playable) and many other such changes, the forums were shocked and couldn't stop complaining about how Blizzard was even thinking about lower level players. In fact, the game is mostly balanced at lower levels precisely so because they do put some effort into having it relatively fair. I'm not really complaining about the way it is now, just giving a counter argument for those that would be content to trivialize the playing experiences of what is the vast majority of the player base. You also don't address the argument of having situations such as t > z > p > t where a lack of balance can make playing ladder pointless. If a race is equally weak in all match-ups, this actually does not really matter for your playing experience, the problem is relative weakness. Obviously you can just put all your practice into your one weakest match-up, but I don't always care to do so. Again, I don't think it's selfish if people want and expect an enjoyable playing experience at their level, I'm sure Blizzard would agree. t > z > p >t DOES NOT OCCUR AT LOWER LEVELS. Blizzard patched gateway timings because 4 gate was simply too strong in certain positions and on certain maps, even at high level play. Reaper speed wasn't for 2v2, reaper speed was for 5 rax reaper, which was ridiculously imbalanced at any level of play. Lower level play is balanced. If you don't think so, you haven't played enough and are simply not good at a certain match up/ups. Wow what a bunch of bullshit. Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? If balance does not affect lower levels then Blizzard are either handing out wrong information (for whatever reason) or terran players are simply worse than their Zerg and protoss counter parts. And really, is that what we are arguing here? Think again.
I know what you mean, but isn´t that the exact opposite thing protosses heard time and time again that the best players are playing terran in korea(meaning for the most part that they are unlocking the full potential of the race) and we(protoss) should NOT whine that terran is soooo dominant in korea and we should simply get better(even including the best protosses btw.)? Now that does not apply? Even though there is definitely a LOT of improvement in lower leagues? Don´t follow that logic - but that´s probably me.
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
On March 04 2012 01:05 Recognizable wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:55 SeaSwift wrote:On March 04 2012 00:54 Recognizable wrote:On March 04 2012 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:
For fuck's sake, if you aren't a pro, any percieved imbalance at your level of play can be overcome by just playing better instead of whining on forums. End of story. Unless the game is completely broken and imbalanced to the point of being unplayable, eg the 10 damage per shot Marine, you are not affected by balance. The problem is when you have to play twice as good as your opponent and still barely beat him in standard macro game eg: TvP. Of course, that might be problem. And we can know this to be true because... you said so. I've seen posts from players like BeastyQT and Cloud basically saying the same thing, strelok just yesterday was telling on his stream how you just need to be better much better then the protoss to win playing completely standard. Why do you think no foreign Terran has won a major tournament in 1.5 years.
I can tell you pro from each races that will tell you the same shit about the other races
And maybe if foreigners simply started winning major tournaments and stopped getting rolled by Koreans, there would be
|
On March 04 2012 01:05 Recognizable wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:55 SeaSwift wrote:On March 04 2012 00:54 Recognizable wrote:On March 04 2012 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:
For fuck's sake, if you aren't a pro, any percieved imbalance at your level of play can be overcome by just playing better instead of whining on forums. End of story. Unless the game is completely broken and imbalanced to the point of being unplayable, eg the 10 damage per shot Marine, you are not affected by balance. The problem is when you have to play twice as good as your opponent and still barely beat him in standard macro game eg: TvP. Of course, that might be problem. And we can know this to be true because... you said so. I've seen posts from players like BeastyQT and Cloud basically saying the same thing, strelok just yesterday was telling on his stream how you just need to be better much better then the protoss to win playing completely standard. Why do you think no foreign Terran has won a major tournament in 1.5 years.
They are pros. If there is a balance issue there, it certainly is relevant. For the record, I believe that TvP for pros is fundamentally broken at the moment, especially after seeing the winrate over time graphs. Terran is too strong midgame, when microed, stimmed MMM is at its peak efficiency, and Protoss too strong lategame, when mass splash kicks in.
What is less clear or relevant is whether that trend continues down the ladder, to the point where players don't even know when to get the splash or stim that makes their race so powerful at each point, and whether any imbalances are significant enough to ruin the game for people.
|
On March 04 2012 00:57 ChaosTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken. Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation.
Lol okay, because Terrans under performing below masters is indicative of the race being harder to play, and not that Terrans below masters are just not as good as the Zerg and Protoss counterparts. Since we're just going to make assumptions now.
It's also important to note just how much lower level Terran and Protosses resort to all in builds, which are ridiculously popular at lower levels. So when they reach a certain level, that cheese stops working, and they cannot play macro games. Ladder win rates below GM cannot ever be taken as any indication of balance whatsoever, I do not see how this is even slightly difficult for anyone to understand.
Yes, from your biased Terran perspective, Terran is the hardest race to play. Even if that were true, a race being harder to play does not make it under powered.
|
On March 04 2012 01:08 pPingu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 01:05 Recognizable wrote:On March 04 2012 00:55 SeaSwift wrote:On March 04 2012 00:54 Recognizable wrote:On March 04 2012 00:01 SeaSwift wrote:
For fuck's sake, if you aren't a pro, any percieved imbalance at your level of play can be overcome by just playing better instead of whining on forums. End of story. Unless the game is completely broken and imbalanced to the point of being unplayable, eg the 10 damage per shot Marine, you are not affected by balance. The problem is when you have to play twice as good as your opponent and still barely beat him in standard macro game eg: TvP. Of course, that might be problem. And we can know this to be true because... you said so. I've seen posts from players like BeastyQT and Cloud basically saying the same thing, strelok just yesterday was telling on his stream how you just need to be better much better then the protoss to win playing completely standard. Why do you think no foreign Terran has won a major tournament in 1.5 years. I can tell you pro from each races that will tell you the same shit about the other races And maybe if foreigners simply started winning major tournaments and stopped getting rolled by Koreans, there would be
Good point.
I might split hairs here, but how many foreigner terrans are as of today effectively training in korea, and then come back to own some NA/EU tournaments? Jinro comes to mind first, and he is definitely a good player, but his results are quite lacking.
Thorzain was there, he improved quite a bit but said KR is not his way to get better. I am still waiting for Kas or Beasty or Cloud to learn from the best, since they are obviously at a loss for ideas, especially vs Protoss. Many foreigners from the other races have been there, and their results showed(HuK,Nani,Grubby,IdrA,SaSe,ToD...etc I just know most Tosses because I am more familiar with them obviously).
|
On March 04 2012 01:18 Flonomenalz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 00:57 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken. Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation. Lol okay, because Terrans under performing below masters is indicative of the race being harder to play, and not that Terrans below masters are just not as good as the Zerg and Protoss counterparts. Since we're just going to make assumptions now. It's also important to note just how much lower level Terran and Protosses resort to all in builds, which are ridiculously popular at lower levels. So when they reach a certain level, that cheese stops working, and they cannot play macro games. Ladder win rates below GM cannot ever be taken as any indication of balance whatsoever, I do not see how this is even slightly difficult for anyone to understand. Yes, from your biased Terran perspective, Terran is the hardest race to play. Even if that were true, a race being harder to play does not make it under powered.
Right.... terrans are just worse. Excellent argument.
I'm done here, you are basically insulting every terran player in this post. This is ridiculous.
|
international looks pretty balanced when korea looks really bad for zergs : (
|
On March 04 2012 01:20 ChaosTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 01:18 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 04 2012 00:57 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken. Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation. Lol okay, because Terrans under performing below masters is indicative of the race being harder to play, and not that Terrans below masters are just not as good as the Zerg and Protoss counterparts. Since we're just going to make assumptions now. It's also important to note just how much lower level Terran and Protosses resort to all in builds, which are ridiculously popular at lower levels. So when they reach a certain level, that cheese stops working, and they cannot play macro games. Ladder win rates below GM cannot ever be taken as any indication of balance whatsoever, I do not see how this is even slightly difficult for anyone to understand. Yes, from your biased Terran perspective, Terran is the hardest race to play. Even if that were true, a race being harder to play does not make it under powered. Right.... terrans are just worse. Excellent argument. I'm done here, you are basically insulting every terran player in this post. This is ridiculous.
Dude, are you reading what I'm writing?
I'm saying that you making the assumption that because Terrans in general are under performing at lower leagues means the race must be harder to play is just as bad as me making the assumption that Terrans in general are just worse than Protoss and Zergs. Both of which are untrue.
You cannot, cannot, cannot ever try to balance around lower leagues. It does not work, and it has been proven time and time again through replay analysis of anyone mid masters and below that the reason they lose in games they have no idea why they lose has nothing to do with balance issues.
I find it incredible that Terran has never had a win rate below 50% in any match up and people are still trying to throw out the harder to play card. Does it require more multi tasking at lower levels? Yes. But it also rewards that multi tasking equally, and the other races require just as much multi tasking at the pro level. And lastly, multi tasking is not the only indicative factor of skill in Starcraft.
|
On March 04 2012 01:33 Flonomenalz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 01:20 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 01:18 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 04 2012 00:57 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken. Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation. Lol okay, because Terrans under performing below masters is indicative of the race being harder to play, and not that Terrans below masters are just not as good as the Zerg and Protoss counterparts. Since we're just going to make assumptions now. It's also important to note just how much lower level Terran and Protosses resort to all in builds, which are ridiculously popular at lower levels. So when they reach a certain level, that cheese stops working, and they cannot play macro games. Ladder win rates below GM cannot ever be taken as any indication of balance whatsoever, I do not see how this is even slightly difficult for anyone to understand. Yes, from your biased Terran perspective, Terran is the hardest race to play. Even if that were true, a race being harder to play does not make it under powered. Right.... terrans are just worse. Excellent argument. I'm done here, you are basically insulting every terran player in this post. This is ridiculous. Dude, are you reading what I'm writing? I'm saying that you making the assumption that because Terrans in general are under performing at lower leagues means the race must be harder to play is just as bad as me making the assumption that Terrans in general are just worse than Protoss and Zergs. Both of which are untrue. You cannot, cannot, cannot ever try to balance around lower leagues. It does not work, and it has been proven time and time again through replay analysis of anyone mid masters and below that the reason they lose in games they have no idea why they lose has nothing to do with balance issues. I find it incredible that Terran has never had a win rate below 50% in any match up and people are still trying to throw out the harder to play card. Does it require more multi tasking at lower levels? Yes. But it also rewards that multi tasking equally, and the other races require just as much multi tasking at the pro level. And lastly, multi tasking is not the only indicative factor of skill in Starcraft.
Blizzard does balance around lower leagues. They prioritize high level play, but they do try to maintain an okay lower level balance. (which is all that's necessary, I think) A bunch of people here, including you, seem to act like trying to take lower leagues into account is the most awful thing you could do when it already happens. It's a silly and absolutist way of thinking that you can only afford because Blizzard took care to actually not let it get to the point where lower leagues are completely broken.
|
Still, David Kim agrees with ChaosTerran :
That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. We suspect that the initial complexity of the terran race may be a contributing factor to this, so internally, we’re experimenting with moving some of the new terran units around to make terran slightly more intuitive to play — at lower levels only.
|
Good to see that Protoss is not the red headed step child anymore. Whether by patch changes or getting a clue. Looks good to me.
|
On March 04 2012 01:33 Flonomenalz wrote:
Dude, are you reading what I'm writing?
I'm saying that you making the assumption that because Terrans in general are under performing at lower leagues means the race must be harder to play is just as bad as me making the assumption that Terrans in general are just worse than Protoss and Zergs. Both of which are untrue.
You cannot, cannot, cannot ever try to balance around lower leagues. It does not work, and it has been proven time and time again through replay analysis of anyone mid masters and below that the reason they lose in games they have no idea why they lose has nothing to do with balance issues.
I find it incredible that Terran has never had a win rate below 50% in any match up and people are still trying to throw out the harder to play card. Does it require more multi tasking at lower levels? Yes. But it also rewards that multi tasking equally, and the other races require just as much multi tasking at the pro level. And lastly, multi tasking is not the only indicative factor of skill in Starcraft.
David Kim even stated Terran is failing at lower levels because it's a harder race to play. Why you want to neglect those quotes people are posting is beyond me. I do agree with you, this game should be balanced around the best players in the world(even if that does mean there will likely be no results from foreign Terrans).
Have you bothered to look at the graphs? The past 3/4 months, Terran has had a sub 50% WLR in TvP.
|
On March 04 2012 01:33 Flonomenalz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 01:20 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 01:18 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 04 2012 00:57 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken. Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation. Lol okay, because Terrans under performing below masters is indicative of the race being harder to play, and not that Terrans below masters are just not as good as the Zerg and Protoss counterparts. Since we're just going to make assumptions now. It's also important to note just how much lower level Terran and Protosses resort to all in builds, which are ridiculously popular at lower levels. So when they reach a certain level, that cheese stops working, and they cannot play macro games. Ladder win rates below GM cannot ever be taken as any indication of balance whatsoever, I do not see how this is even slightly difficult for anyone to understand. Yes, from your biased Terran perspective, Terran is the hardest race to play. Even if that were true, a race being harder to play does not make it under powered. Right.... terrans are just worse. Excellent argument. I'm done here, you are basically insulting every terran player in this post. This is ridiculous. Dude, are you reading what I'm writing? I'm saying that you making the assumption that because Terrans in general are under performing at lower leagues means the race must be harder to play is just as bad as me making the assumption that Terrans in general are just worse than Protoss and Zergs. Both of which are untrue. You cannot, cannot, cannot ever try to balance around lower leagues. It does not work, and it has been proven time and time again through replay analysis of anyone mid masters and below that the reason they lose in games they have no idea why they lose has nothing to do with balance issues. I find it incredible that Terran has never had a win rate below 50% in any match up and people are still trying to throw out the harder to play card. Does it require more multi tasking at lower levels? Yes. But it also rewards that multi tasking equally, and the other races require just as much multi tasking at the pro level. And lastly, multi tasking is not the only indicative factor of skill in Starcraft.
1) Wrong
2) Yeah, I loved watching the ZvP finals today where DRG and Genius were microing multiple drops and a main engagement,
|
On March 04 2012 00:56 NotSorry wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 17:53 lichter wrote:
Someone needs to do an analysis as to why Korean and International winrates are so different Obviously it's because of a larger number of games, and Korea being based off very few tournaments, so if a player or two of a race make a deep run in the GSL it really off sets the score to one side
I think that's only a minor factor. I think the way bigger factor is that due to the few tournaments in Korea it's nearly always "Pro vs Pro"-games, while in foreign tournaments we see a lot of "nonpro vs nonpro" and "pro vs nonpro"-games as well.
In detail:
Lets assume, that the "nonpro vs nonpro"-games (usually master+ players) and "pro vs pro" games reflect the gamebalance somewhat due to rather equal, rather high skill level; and lets assume that there are somewhat equal amounts of Pro and Nonpro players per race, leading to the same amount of "pro vs nonpro"-games in each matchup (so the same amount of pro Ts playing nonpro Zs and pro Zs playing nonpro Ts is somewhat equal).
The pro players should have a very high winrate in "pro vs nonpro"-games, pretty much independend of the actual gamebalance and matchup!
If we add now the "true balance" stats of the "nonpro vs nonpro" and the "pro vs pro" games with the "~50:50"-stats of "pro vs nonpro"-games, the average will be lower than the "true balance".
So under those circumstances, all the stats will always tend to be very close to 50:50 and in fact, that's what we are seeing since the beginning of those balance threads (compare the trend lines of Korea and international stats!): International and Korea nearly always show the same race being favored in a Matchup, international graphs only tend to be very close to 50:50 due to getting evened out by "pro vs nonpro" games, while in fact the game is probably way more "imbalanced" internationally.
|
On March 04 2012 02:07 MVTaylor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2012 01:33 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 04 2012 01:20 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 01:18 Flonomenalz wrote:On March 04 2012 00:57 ChaosTerran wrote:On March 04 2012 00:46 SeaSwift wrote:Thanks for the link, ChaosTerran. What you said: On March 04 2012 00:23 ChaosTerran wrote:
Did you read blizzard's blog in which they said that below master league terran is getting dominated by zerg and to a lesser extent by protoss?!?!? What Blizzard said: That said, we have noticed that terran at lower skill levels are underperforming a bit, especially vs. zerg and somewhat vs. protoss. _______________________ On March 04 2012 00:41 ChaosTerran wrote:
Now please take your "sc2 is balanced at all levels of play" and leave this thread. Wrong person. I never said that sc2 is balanced at all levels of play. I said that balance is irrelevant unless the game is completely broken. Yeah, you are right, I probably worded that the wrong way, sorry for that. But point is, that I don't buy this "terran at lower levels are simply worse". I think it's time to accept that terran is simply harder to learn/play, hence why their win rate at lower levels is worse compared to protoss and zerg. I'm of course open for other suggestions, but imo that's the only logical explanation. Lol okay, because Terrans under performing below masters is indicative of the race being harder to play, and not that Terrans below masters are just not as good as the Zerg and Protoss counterparts. Since we're just going to make assumptions now. It's also important to note just how much lower level Terran and Protosses resort to all in builds, which are ridiculously popular at lower levels. So when they reach a certain level, that cheese stops working, and they cannot play macro games. Ladder win rates below GM cannot ever be taken as any indication of balance whatsoever, I do not see how this is even slightly difficult for anyone to understand. Yes, from your biased Terran perspective, Terran is the hardest race to play. Even if that were true, a race being harder to play does not make it under powered. Right.... terrans are just worse. Excellent argument. I'm done here, you are basically insulting every terran player in this post. This is ridiculous. Dude, are you reading what I'm writing? I'm saying that you making the assumption that because Terrans in general are under performing at lower leagues means the race must be harder to play is just as bad as me making the assumption that Terrans in general are just worse than Protoss and Zergs. Both of which are untrue. You cannot, cannot, cannot ever try to balance around lower leagues. It does not work, and it has been proven time and time again through replay analysis of anyone mid masters and below that the reason they lose in games they have no idea why they lose has nothing to do with balance issues. I find it incredible that Terran has never had a win rate below 50% in any match up and people are still trying to throw out the harder to play card. Does it require more multi tasking at lower levels? Yes. But it also rewards that multi tasking equally, and the other races require just as much multi tasking at the pro level. And lastly, multi tasking is not the only indicative factor of skill in Starcraft. 1) Wrong 2) Yeah, I loved watching the ZvP finals today where DRG and Genius were microing multiple drops and a main engagement,
Yes those damn overlords and warp prisms are just so good at dropping, every protoss would be dropping with 3 warp prisms at a time if they just had the multi tasking to do it.
Terran drops are one of the main parts of the race, protoss and zerg players have other things to do. I don´t see how it´s required to triple drop during an engagement, it´s a fact protoss and zerg doesn´t benefit as much from multi tasking, but that doesn´t mean the players are worse at it. You are also forgetting that if a terran uses a drop, the protoss and zerg player needs to react to it, resulting in equal ammounts of multi tasking from both players.
|
my ideal 'fix' for terran vs protoss would be something to make tanks good against protoss...
terran is sooooooo anti-terran without tanks... it's rediculous. tank is the terran poster boy, even more than the marine...
exactly how to fix tank without making it OP by messing with the cost, supply or base damage of tanks.... no idea.
then again, tanks would be good if terran had some kind of answer to mass chargelots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
