|
I tire of seeing debate over these graphs, because it's always the same:
If something agrees with the balance whine of the day, everyone who plays the apparently overpowered race claims it's "metagame." If something disagrees, those same people turn right around and take the stats as gospel.
It's pretty simple: watch the games. TvZ and PvZ are both broken because Zerg in general is broken. Yes, Zerg was underpowered at release, but they haven't been for a long time. The other thing to consider is that in many respects, there were simply more top level Korean T/P players in tournaments than Zerg. Nestea is a notoriously weak traveller, and DRG is actually pretty new in the scheme of the Zerg scene; same with Symbol. There was a long period of time in which you had Nestea and then a big void of skill beneath him as far as Zerg went. Even now, I can only think of less than 10 truly top Zerg players, but I can think of at least 20 Terrans and probably 15 Protoss.
Tl;dr when MKP or Hero beat Moon or something it doesn't mean the matchup is balanced.
|
i don't really need these graphs, i just look who qualifies for TSL, HSC, OSL and WCS and get angry that these rare and special tournaments have their qualifiers right now, because OSL and WCS happen for the first time in sc2, and the other tournaments are very rare compared to MLGs and GSL for example, where terrans are right back if the game changes play or patchwise.
|
On July 03 2012 00:55 Warpish wrote:Actually, I have seen a lot of proxy rax and 2 rax recently. In my opinion, this trend is develping again because Terrans try to avoid the late game.
i agree, i have avoided late game as much as possible over the last few weeks, my tvz wins all come from 2 raxxing or another all in, PERSONALLY i dont know how to play tvz lategame right now, i have tryed so many options but they dont seem to work for me, note im top 8 masters on both EU and NA
|
On July 02 2012 22:29 Tsubbi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 22:26 Asha` wrote:On July 02 2012 22:23 Whole wrote:
Seems that Korean Terrans were busy figuring out the new TvZ while International Terrans were busy complaining about balance. All the korean Terrans complain about TvZ =p but they're just much better players so still win games. oh you! ofc they complain about z, 51% winrate must feel underpowered after 2 years of dominating
They complain because it is ridiculous to be more mechanically skilled than your opponent and yet have no real chance of winning unless your opponent messes up.
|
On July 03 2012 01:08 AltOptimus wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 00:55 Warpish wrote:On July 03 2012 00:50 Sent. wrote:
Proxy barracks keeping Terrans in shape. Actually, I have seen a lot of proxy rax and 2 rax recently. In my opinion, this trend is develping again because Terrans try to avoid the late game. i agree, i have avoided late game as much as possible over the last few weeks, my tvz wins all come from 2 raxxing or another all in, PERSONALLY i dont know how to play tvz lategame right now, i have tryed so many options but they dont seem to work for me, note im top 8 masters on both EU and NA
Here is my argument why Terran avoids late-game:
People are now familiar with the common argument that the queen range buff made Zerg OP because Terran can't no longer do damage to Zerg economy early-game and Zerg can just be greedy and drone up to more than 70 and it's very difficult to beat Zerg after that. Before the 1.4.3.2 patch, Terran can do early and serious economic damage to Zerg, so Terran can beat Zerg in the mid-to-late game.
But why is that Terran has to do early economic damage to Zerg to win?
In fact, this is implicitly saying that there are some inherent problems in TvZ late-game. This is saying that if both sides are peaceful before mid-game, and then both sides start battling, Terran will have difficulty beating Zerg.
Is there truly some inherent problems in TvZ late-game? Let's do some analyses.
There are two main late-game Zerg composition these days:
1, ultra + zergling + bane + roach + infestor;
2, broodlord + corruptor + infestor + zergling + bane + roach.
The ratio of different units is different in different situations but the essence is in the above composition.
There are also two main late-game Terran composition in response to the above Zerg composition:
1, marine + marauder + tank + medivac + ghost + thor
2, marine + marauder + tank + medivac + ghost + thor + viking + raven
You may already see the problems in the above compositions. That is you can hardly see the full composition of "marine + marauder + tank + medivac + ghost + thor + viking + raven", though there have been some rare situation that such composition is developed in TvZ.
But it’s much easier to see the full composition of “ultra + zergling + bane + roach + infestor” and “broodlord + corruptor + infestor + zergling + bane + roach”.
Terran mostly is using their tier 1 and tier 2 units to fight the “full-tiers” composition of Zerg. So why doesn’t Terran build higher-tier units?
Many people have said things like “marine counters everything” or “Terran should explore more compositions behind MMM balls” or “Many Terrans overlook that ghost is so good” or “Terran should use raven late-game; they are powerful than most people think”.
But the truth is not that Terran doesn’t want to build higher-tier units or Terran players are too stupid to come up with new late-game compositions but that their higher-tier units are either not worth building or too expensive for the crippled late-game economy.
Let’s do some comparison.
1. Viking vs Corruptor
Viking is widely used in TvZ but it’s not so good compare to corruptor which is considered the most powerful air-to-air unit in the game.
Corruptor:
Cost: 150 / 100
Build time: 40
Life: 200
Viking:
Cost: 150 / 75
Build time: 42
Life: 125
Viking can’t win corruptor with the same supply. Some one may said you can kite Corruptor because Viking’s range is 9. But no you can’t, because corruptor is much faster than Viking. It’s like saying you can use tank to kite roach.
So, you have to use PDD to win an air battle against Corruptor. But your Viking will face the danger of fungal growth.
2. Ultra vs Thor
Normally Terran doesn’t use Thor to fight ultra, but actually Thor wins in one on one against ultra by one shot. But still people normally use marauder to counter ultra. Why? One important reason is that ultra has a build time buff in 1.4.0 where its build time decreased from 75 to 55.
Ultra:
Cost: 300 / 200
Build time: 55
Speed: 2.9531. Speed Multiplier on Creep: 1.3
Thor:
Cost: 300/ 200
Build time: 60
Speed: 1,875
You would just wonder with larvae Zerg can build multiple units much faster than other races, why their late-game units have shorter build time than other races? They just do. When Zerg normally build 3-5 ultra at a time, you never saw a Terran build more than 2 thors at one time. And did you see the mobility of ultra?
3. Ghost / Raven vs Infestor
Infestor
Cost: 100 / 150
Build time: 50
Ghost
Cost: 200 / 100
Build time: 40
Raven
Cost: 100 / 200
Build time: 60
First fungal growth outranges EMP and sniper. The range of fungal is 9 + 2 = 11. EMP is 10 + 1.5 = 11.5 But EMP requires an animation while fungal is instant cast, so fungal can always hit ghost before ghost can shoot EMP. Snipe’s range is 10 and it requires an animation too, so fungal easily outranges snipe too.
Also, the ghost cost change from 150 / 150 to 200 / 100 is definitely a nerf, according to QXC and Bomber. Late-game Terran has excessive gas but lacks mineral, the cost change increased the mineral cost but reduced the gas cost.
This is not my point. It's the words from QXC and Bomber. In SOTG EP72, QXC talks about why ghost's cost will damage the production of other Terran units in the mid-to-late game. Bomber in the GSL interview this season laid out the reason that he built raven late-game is that Terran has excessive gas the late-game but enough mineral. (Raven cost is 100 / 200).
But when do you see auto-turret? Infested terran is now used in almost every TvZ matchup to shot down dropships, to attract enemy fire, and even to mass infested terrans like in Freaky’s play. Infested terran is 25 energy cost but has a range fo 9. Auto-turret is 50 energy cost but has a range of 3. And the DPS of one auto-turret is much lower than two infested terrans.
The infestors pit costs 100 / 100 and a build time of 50. The starport and tech lab combine cost 200 / 125 and a build time of 75. And three raven researches cost 600 / 600 and research time of 330. But the infestor researches cost 300 / 300 and research time of 190.
Several raven is easily shut down by chain fungal + infested terran. But you can’t even use seeker missile to kill infestors before they use fungal and infested terran, because the range of seeker missile is 6 but the fungal growth’s range is 11 and the infested Terran’s range is 9 + 5 = 14.
Creep and Burrowed Unit
Beside all the above comparisons of late-game units, Zerg has several advantages late-game. First, one hatchery’s max larvae number is 19. When Zerg has more than 5 bases, they may have more than 100 larvae at maximum.
Also, Terran’s expansion to the fourth base is easily blocked by creep. Killing the creep and wait for the creep to go away will cost another 2 minutes. In addition, a single burrowed Zergling can deny your further expansion and force you to bring several marines back and use a scan to clean up the burrowed Zerglings.
The suggestion for further patches:
1. Don’t revert the queen buff, but change the range to 4 should be the best solution. Anyone remember of the pre-patch days when BFH just kill all the drones right away will not support reverting the queen buff.
2. Zerg’s burrowed Light units can no longer prevent Terran flying build from landing. The burrowed Light unit will instantly die when building lands. (Terran flying building still cannot land with unburrowed Light units or other non-Light burrowed units underneath.)
3. Revert ghost cost to 150 / 150 or 125 / 150. Snipe changed to 45 (30 vs Massive)
4. Some minor Raven buff:
----Auto-turret's hit point increased to 200, up from 150 and damage increased to 12, up from 10.
----Seeker Missile's casting range increased to 7, up from 6.
----Durable Materials research removed. Auto-Turrets and Point Defense Drones's duration are now 240 seconds. Seeker Missile's duration is now 20 seconds.
|
On July 03 2012 00:59 Shiori wrote:
I tire of seeing debate over these graphs, because it's always the same:
If something agrees with the balance whine of the day, everyone who plays the apparently overpowered race claims it's "metagame." If something disagrees, those same people turn right around and take the stats as gospel.
It's pretty simple: watch the games. TvZ and PvZ are both broken because Zerg in general is broken. Yes, Zerg was underpowered at release, but they haven't been for a long time. The other thing to consider is that in many respects, there were simply more top level Korean T/P players in tournaments than Zerg. Nestea is a notoriously weak traveller, and DRG is actually pretty new in the scheme of the Zerg scene; same with Symbol. There was a long period of time in which you had Nestea and then a big void of skill beneath him as far as Zerg went. Even now, I can only think of less than 10 truly top Zerg players, but I can think of at least 20 Terrans and probably 15 Protoss.
Tl;dr when MKP or Hero beat Moon or something it doesn't mean the matchup is balanced.
Do you really think PvZ is imbalanced towards zerg? I understand if you just disagree with some of the lategame mechanics in zerg deathball vs vortex, but I hardly think it's fair to say the matchup is broken towards zerg.
|
On July 03 2012 00:59 Shiori wrote:
I tire of seeing debate over these graphs, because it's always the same:
If something agrees with the balance whine of the day, everyone who plays the apparently overpowered race claims it's "metagame." If something disagrees, those same people turn right around and take the stats as gospel.
It's pretty simple: watch the games. TvZ and PvZ are both broken because Zerg in general is broken. Yes, Zerg was underpowered at release, but they haven't been for a long time. The other thing to consider is that in many respects, there were simply more top level Korean T/P players in tournaments than Zerg. Nestea is a notoriously weak traveller, and DRG is actually pretty new in the scheme of the Zerg scene; same with Symbol. There was a long period of time in which you had Nestea and then a big void of skill beneath him as far as Zerg went. Even now, I can only think of less than 10 truly top Zerg players, but I can think of at least 20 Terrans and probably 15 Protoss.
Tl;dr when MKP or Hero beat Moon or something it doesn't mean the matchup is balanced.
So zerg is so OP they only have 3 good players?
Terran and Protoss are so underpowered that almost the entire korean pro scene is made up of terran/toss?
|
On July 03 2012 00:59 Shiori wrote:
I tire of seeing debate over these graphs, because it's always the same:
If something agrees with the balance whine of the day, everyone who plays the apparently overpowered race claims it's "metagame." If something disagrees, those same people turn right around and take the stats as gospel.
It's pretty simple: watch the games. TvZ and PvZ are both broken because Zerg in general is broken. Yes, Zerg was underpowered at release, but they haven't been for a long time. The other thing to consider is that in many respects, there were simply more top level Korean T/P players in tournaments than Zerg. Nestea is a notoriously weak traveller, and DRG is actually pretty new in the scheme of the Zerg scene; same with Symbol. There was a long period of time in which you had Nestea and then a big void of skill beneath him as far as Zerg went. Even now, I can only think of less than 10 truly top Zerg players, but I can think of at least 20 Terrans and probably 15 Protoss.
Tl;dr when MKP or Hero beat Moon or something it doesn't mean the matchup is balanced.
dumbest/most biased post ever plus flame baiting. a biased zerg response would be that zerg is just UP and nestea is just way better so he can win while all other zerg players who are equal in skill to T/P players cannot win due to UP race. see how stupid heavily biased comments are?
|
I still don't get how 1-sided the tvp whines are. They flat out win more games every month. Yet, I'm only supposed to hear about how the late game is in favor of the protoss. I've never once in my life played a game where I just magically ended up in the late game; there was no such thing as an early game. So, the question is, if toss has an imbalanced part of the game in their favor, then just how imbalanced are the other stages of the game that you can't avoid? I've never heard anyone say "I'm stronger at every part of the game but the late game, and that game design bothers me."
Then I hear interviews with David Kim where he is talking about analyzing the late game and noticing the stats are a lot more balanced than people are letting on to... (correct me if I'm wrong). Terran players are either imbalanced when it comes to crying, or they are just really good players that earn their > than Toss win percent, every day.
New player and biased, sure, but something doesn't add up for me. I think it's a bs matchup and it's gay that nothing in the stargate is worth making in the mu and there's 10000 god damn things to research and 100000 timing windows to kill you. Meanwhile, being able to stay on tier 1 all game sounds real hard.
|
On July 03 2012 00:41 Charon1979 wrote:
This Thread is very interesting...
last month:
"look how imbalanced it is in Korea!"
"The sample is too small and doesnt include all..."
"Doesnt matter! Zerg imba!"
"Look at the international graph, it got a bigger sample size and is pretty balanced"
"International doesnt matter!"
This month:
"wtf Korea balanced... you must have made this up!"
"its the same like every month..."
"no you made it up and besides the sample size is too small and doesnt cover all tournaments!"
"but last month you said...."
"Shut up! Just look at international!"
"but last month..."
"Doesnt matter, zerg imba!"
But clearly terran is under powered! It has to be....I mean....terrans keep losing....50% of the time.
I guess terrans are not used to waiting for the pro to figure out the next go to build or play style to copy. Protoss and zerg are used to waiting months before a solid, well rounded build is found.
|
On July 02 2012 22:20 Raid wrote:
Im shocked Korean TvZ is that balance while Internationally its gotten worse than ever.
Sample size is too small in Korea... but it still looked like every zerg was winning in Korea.. not sure whats up.
That's likely due to your bias. You see Terran lose a couple games and zerg lose a couple and focus much more strongly on the Terran losses.
I do find it fairly amusing that Terran has the best win rate in Korea considering the state of the current balance whining.
|
Reading this thread shows how sad people are. Can't accept Z isn't imba...
|
On July 03 2012 01:33 playa wrote:
I still don't get how 1-sided the tvp whines are. They flat out win more games every month. Yet, I'm only supposed to hear about how the late game is in favor of the protoss. I've never once in my life played a game where I just magically ended up in the late game; there was no such thing as an early game. So, the question is, if toss has an imbalanced part of the game in their favor, then just how imbalanced are the other stages of the game that you can't avoid? I've never heard anyone say "I'm stronger at every part of the game but the late game, and that game design bothers me."
Then I hear interviews with David Kim where he is talking about analyzing the late game and noticing the stats are a lot more balanced than people are letting on to... (correct me if I'm wrong). Terran players are either imbalanced when it comes to crying, or they are just really good players that earn their > than Toss win percent, every day.
New player and biased, sure, but something doesn't add up for me. I think it's a bs matchup and it's gay that nothing in the stargate is worth making in the mu and there's 10000 god damn things to research and 100000 timing windows to kill you. Meanwhile, being able to stay on tier 1 all game sounds real hard.
I said this for quite awhile actually. Terrans think they suck at late game vs protoss? Well considering the balance that obviously mean Protoss sucks early game vs Terran.
|
On July 02 2012 23:04 Kenshi235 wrote:
I don't believe the TvZ winrate in Korea ~50/50. I'm calling bs on this. I'd like to know who regularly posts this and what games these are derived from.
I finally found out sample size is only 114 for KR TvZ and excludes Code A qualifers, TSL4 qualifiers, VS 996 sample size of international graph. I'm sorry, but I don't believe Koreans adapted to patch perfectly.
Code A + TSL qualifers are 220 sets alone. Good job lying with your statistics. I added TSL and Code A qualifers in from data further in post. Sample size is 334 and TvZ winrate is 41.5% for T. This is why you don't believe everything you hear.
THIS!
Please lock this thread now
|
Protoss nealry not getting above 50% against P/Z once in one year (international graph), thats sso confusing. I don't get this, many of the foreigners i'd consider being the stronger players are often times P, pretty often Z, but very rarely T. Even in Korea P's don't look so hot anymore. Pretty surprised that the "OP race" has such a hard time getting at least even.
|
On July 03 2012 01:36 mrtomjones wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 22:20 Raid wrote:
Im shocked Korean TvZ is that balance while Internationally its gotten worse than ever.
Sample size is too small in Korea... but it still looked like every zerg was winning in Korea.. not sure whats up. That's likely due to your bias. You see Terran lose a couple games and zerg lose a couple and focus much more strongly on the Terran losses. I do find it fairly amusing that Terran has the best win rate in Korea considering the state of the current balance whining.
Seeing as that is a false statement as it has been pointed out that the Korea stats show ESV online matches, but don't take into account TSL Qualifiers which are also online, and by no means less than ESV. On pure GSL, GSTL, etc, TvZ is below 50, throw in ESV, it goes to slightly over, throw in TSL, it drops magnificently to show Zerg winning more.
Sampling Bias!
|
On July 03 2012 01:43 EnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 23:04 Kenshi235 wrote:
I don't believe the TvZ winrate in Korea ~50/50. I'm calling bs on this. I'd like to know who regularly posts this and what games these are derived from.
I finally found out sample size is only 114 for KR TvZ and excludes Code A qualifers, TSL4 qualifiers, VS 996 sample size of international graph. I'm sorry, but I don't believe Koreans adapted to patch perfectly.
Code A + TSL qualifers are 220 sets alone. Good job lying with your statistics. I added TSL and Code A qualifers in from data further in post. Sample size is 334 and TvZ winrate is 41.5% for T. This is why you don't believe everything you hear. THIS!Please lock this thread now
lol Evidence must be wrong! It doesn't agree with what I know for a fact!
If you listened to certain shows in the last while you would realize that Korean Terrans HAVE adapted quite a bit already. If you want to look at balance you should never look at international too much. Korea also ALWAYS adapts faster than International scenes do. Code A qualifiers shouldn't be included due to the non Pro players in there and the people who just aren't very good playing in it. TSL should probably be included but yah.
|
On July 03 2012 01:44 CruelZeratul wrote:
Protoss nealry not getting above 50% against P/Z once in one year (international graph), thats sso confusing. I don't get this, many of the foreigners i'd consider being the stronger players are often times P, pretty often Z, but very rarely T. Even in Korea P's don't look so hot anymore. Pretty surprised that the "OP race" has such a hard time getting at least even.
It's widely known that Protoss has the lowest skill ceiling in terms of what you can do with your APM, that's the nature of the race design and that's why in Korea, Protoss players really don't differ as much stylistically. Evidence of this is seen in the massive impact the Protoss buff at the beginning of 2012, and Protoss performance has improved drastically as a result of this.
The opposite is true of Terran as a race, it has the highest skill ceiling, so the tournament results vary massively across the board, to the point where the less skilled players cannot compete, whilst the pros still can after nerfs.
|
On July 02 2012 22:25 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2012 22:20 Raid wrote:
Im shocked Korean TvZ is that balance while Internationally its gotten worse than ever.
Sample size is too small in Korea... but it still looked like every zerg was winning in Korea.. not sure whats up. It may well be "worse than ever", but it's scraping the 55/45 limit that Blizzard has stated several times is perfectly acceptable...
hmm? TvZ Korea is actually 50.9 / 49.1, Terran favoured
The only MU scraping 55/45 is TvP which is 54.1 / 45.9, Terran favoured t.t
|
I don't think these winrates prove anything. You have to look at win by game time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
