|
If this thread can't remain civil then we'll have to close it. Thread will be moderated harshly from pg.3 onwards. |
On August 20 2012 02:25 LuckyFool wrote:
MVP beat alot of VERY good zerg players in IEM, everyone really should go watch those replays with an open mind. I know I am.
I know one event alone doesn't mean much, but they start to add up, Taeja has pretty much been dominating lately so this just adds to the recent Terran win list.
Problem is DRG was probably the #1 player in the world before the Queen patch as well. Balanced should always be for the tip top players (pros) but not to the extent of like the top 5 players.
|
On August 20 2012 02:28 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 02:27 iAmJeffReY wrote:On August 20 2012 02:25 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:21 zmansman17 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote:
not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch. Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it. ... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything. http://www.team-dignitas.net/articles/blogs/Starcraft-II/1474/Talking-Starcraft-2-Prize-Money-Part-1/ Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought. "On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). " Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. "Terran : $1,362,778.00 Zerg : $927,790.00 Protoss : $740,394.00" ...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games. He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher... so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down.
But money for each tournament isn't the same... Hence why going off money earned isn't a solid way to prove anything. Win rates are far better to go off, as they're global and not a variable like the prizepool/tournament.
Nice aggression in all of your posts though. You're really fired up. Just pointing out the graph is old, and money earned is an awful way to show balance.
|
On August 20 2012 02:31 iAmJeffReY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 02:28 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:27 iAmJeffReY wrote:On August 20 2012 02:25 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:21 zmansman17 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote:
not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch. Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it. ... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything. http://www.team-dignitas.net/articles/blogs/Starcraft-II/1474/Talking-Starcraft-2-Prize-Money-Part-1/ Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought. "On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). " Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. "Terran : $1,362,778.00 Zerg : $927,790.00 Protoss : $740,394.00" ...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games. He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher... so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down. But money for each tournament isn't the same... Hence why going off money earned isn't a solid way to prove anything. Win rates are far better to go off, as they're global and not a variable like the prizepool/tournament. Nice aggression in all of your posts though. You're really fired up. Just pointing out the graph is old, and money earned is an awful way to show balance.
Ok so let me get this straight, would you agree that since release (including post balance patch) Terran has won the most tournaments and most prize money, yet it is completely under powered against Zerg even though the last 4 events (even after the dreaded patch) shows Terrans winning. That is the argument we are hearing? Interesting, I suppose that is a valid viewpoint, you should balance for Blizzard.
|
On August 20 2012 02:31 iAmJeffReY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 02:28 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:27 iAmJeffReY wrote:On August 20 2012 02:25 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:21 zmansman17 wrote:On August 20 2012 02:20 AngryMag wrote:
not 100% sure but I think Terran players won the last 4 offline events (Taeja's two tourney wins, Kas won the eastern Euro tournament with Korean participants and now MVP won IEM). I think these successes mean that eventual issues in in TvZ are atleast largely exagerated.
In my lowbob opinion, I do not see issues at all if I watch tournament play, there was only a period of Terrans adjusting to Zerg's multiqueen play postpatch. Yes but have you looked at how many Terrans have won in the last 200 tournaments? Ok, so they won a few recent tournaments, but that is dwarfed by the results of many, many before it. ... Are you joking? Why do people say such stupid shit without ever looking into anything. http://www.team-dignitas.net/articles/blogs/Starcraft-II/1474/Talking-Starcraft-2-Prize-Money-Part-1/ Oh hey, an article which proves you're an idiot, who'd of thought. "On the quarterly graph we can see that Terran has spent almost the entire duration of competitive Starcraft 2 at the top of the earnings race between the three races, dropping only the 1st Quarter to Zerg (which was when Fruitdealer won his whopping GSL prize). " Time to have a reality check and stop posting here, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. "Terran : $1,362,778.00 Zerg : $927,790.00 Protoss : $740,394.00" ...Look at your graph. It goes until may 2012...before the patch... It's now middle of august 2012, so what... almost 3 months of tournaments, and games. He said quote "200 tournaments" as in the past 200 tournaments. And if I recall, Terran won the last 4 events no? Doing what you said would actually raise the Terran threshold even higher... so from release to may it is proven Terran has dominated SC2 professional scene, then we hit may + and terran wins 4 events in a row? :O Terran is COMPLETELY underpowered, throw your game away Zerg isn't balanced let's burn Blizzard HQ down. But money for each tournament isn't the same... Hence why going off money earned isn't a solid way to prove anything. Win rates are far better to go off, as they're global and not a variable like the prizepool/tournament. Nice aggression in all of your posts though. You're really fired up. Just pointing out the graph is old, and money earned is an awful way to show balance.
No it's not. The more money a tournament provides, the better the participants. In that way, unlike just looking at "who wins what tournament", you even get a quality factor in - even if it does only work for bigger data as it is a statistical arguement.
Who cares that some barely GM master player won the daily 50€ can't-even-reach-128participants tournament...
|
i dont understand why people are so impatient. The pro players are trying out different stuff and trying out different builds. Give it some freaking time. TvZs are looking awy more "winable" now compared to before so just relax and see what the changes do.
|
Actually, that is a really dumb argument.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete.
As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august.
Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
Yeah, nice double standards there.
|
On August 20 2012 02:38 Zoesan wrote:
Actually, that is a really dumb argument.
What is relevant should be looking at GSL winrates etc, where a lot of top players compete.
As people have already written: nestea won the GSL last year without dropping a map and had a whopping 19-0 record between may and august.
Yet everyone was crying about how overpowered terran was. So now the situation is reversed with zergs overall winning and a single terran still at the top and terran is still the overpowered race.
Yeah, nice double standards there.
I dont think terran is overpowered but i think bad terrans think they are underpowered. I would say if you play like mvp does taking bases like he does and cutting of positions terran is op. But bad terrans cant do that.
|
On August 20 2012 01:43 Zoesan wrote:MVP with 4 GSL titles stomping mediocre foreigners. In other news, china produces rice. @blug: seeker missiles only cost a 200 gas unit and then take 3 minutes to build up, nope, no window there to get something done. Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 01:41 Scila wrote:
All of the information you wrote is true but has already been said for months. The problem is Blizzard doesn't real TL or anywhere else for that matter to decide on how to balance things. They have 2 guys making their own decisions, largely centered on making the game more "fun" and "fresh" so more people buy the games, rather than balancing it properly. Not mutually exclusive with competitive balance
So, when Taeja wins he's just a transcendent Terran, and when MVP wins he's just on another level. I wonder what people will say when MKP wins a championship?
|
I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then. Meanwhile, previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
|
i think the queenbuff brought the fun back to zerg play .. it simply was not fun to always have to defend, be the victim, figure out what the terran/protoss plans to do early on. Anyway i agree that terran late game is weak, though theoretically the mule economy does not impose any limit to terran income .. however i think avilo is way too biased, getting broodlords out also requires a lot of time and is easily scoutable.
Given that hsm can be pretty game deciding, it should get nerfed if research times are buffed.
We already have enough "terrible damage" utilities which in general lead to a kind of luck based end game (=> vortex, fungals). I dislike it also as a spectator if one single action, be it the 'money' fungal or vortex or hsm decides the game within some seconds. Same applies to some other unit designs like blue flame hellion (can decide a game early on by extremely quick mass drone killing) baneling (can vaporate a marine army within a second not watching the army).
|
Win rates dont mean much, they never do.
|
On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote:
I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then while previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
Queen cost 150 minerlas making 6 queens isnt worth it they are to slow for hellions to. So no its not that big
|
Get rid of seeker missiles and add a modified version of irradiate. One that is casted only on biological units and not on other ravens. Also with limited area of effect range. Anyone?
|
On August 20 2012 02:52 ReaperCo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote:
I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then while previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out. Queen cost 150 minerlas making 6 queens isnt worth it they are to slow for hellions to. So no its not that big
The purpose of queens is to defend creep tumors and block ramps and defend vs early air harass. Not chasing hellions across the map to kill them.
|
On August 20 2012 02:55 sickkungen wrote:
Get rid of seeker missiles and add a modified version of irradiate. One that is casted only on biological units and not on other ravens. Also with limited area of effect range. Anyone?
Or keep the missile and if needed (which doesn't seem like it is the case) adjust it sligthly?
|
On August 20 2012 03:00 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 02:52 ReaperCo wrote:On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote:
I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then while previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out. Queen cost 150 minerlas making 6 queens isnt worth it they are to slow for hellions to. So no its not that big The purpose of queens is to defend creep tumors and block ramps and defend vs early air harass. Not chasing hellions across the map to kill them.
Yes but air range isnt changed? So nothing is diffrent. If you scout banshee maybe you can get extra queens so you have 5 instead of 3.
|
guys
listen to me on this ok?
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
|
On August 20 2012 03:03 Zergrusher wrote:
guys
listen to me on this ok?
Look at the cast ranges of the ravens spells..... they are pathetic!
PDD and Auto turret cast range is 3!
Blizzard should buff the cast ranges to 6
Seeker missle cast range should be buffed from 6 to 8
Because right now any time you try yo deploy a spell from a raven(regardless of match up) your more then likey TO LOSE the raven itself.
Because simply the cast range is to short for all the spells.
And on the flip side it's spells are really good after deployed. It seems to work out, so why would you change them that drastically?
|
On August 20 2012 02:48 Jermstuddog wrote:
I have pointed this out in countless threads, and this seems to be another opportune time in this thread.
Zerg win rates have gone DOWN since 1.4.3 and the "OP queen" buff.
If trying to attribute any win rates to the 1.4.3 patch, we should all be complaining about the observer build time buff. Protoss as a whole has been on an absolute tear since then. Meanwhile, previously dominant Zergs like DRG and Stephano seem to be in a slump.
Tldr: considering how OP queens are, they sure don't seem to be helping anybody out.
So because protoss are doing better against zergs, we should just ignore the TvZ match-up?
I'm sure you can go rant about this in the balance thread, however this thread was made to discuss TvZ.
|
I would say something this is off topic but i have say it they should change Ghosts snipe range to was it was before but increase energy cost to 200.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
