|
On June 21 2013 03:16 IPA wrote:
Hey Guys. How about we don't freak out like a bunch of children, play some ladder games, watch some professional play, and take stock of the change with cool heads in a few weeks.
Or you could continue with knee-jerk reactions fueled by emotion rather than experience or facts.
As Z, looking forward to see how the match up changes.
Cock jerking not allowed at work, so knee jerking will have to suffice 
|
On June 21 2013 03:16 IPA wrote:
Hey Guys. How about we don't freak out like a bunch of children, play some ladder games, watch some professional play, and take stock of the change with cool heads in a few weeks.
Or you could continue with knee-jerk reactions fueled by emotion rather than experience or facts.
As Z, looking forward to see how the match up changes.
too late, thread has devolved into TvP balance whine (irrelevant of the change).
|
The reason people are disputing what Dwf (who I actually respect a lot when it comes to balance discussions based on his usual posts) said is because he lamented that now he's going to have Zealots in his main all the time. Um, what? This upgrade changes absolutely nothing about lategame PvT, since you'd already have enough money to get the speed upgrade (and should do so, even if you initially opened Templar you need to eventually add a Robo Bay). Furthermore, in the phase of the game that this change actually affects, Protoss doesn't really have a large number of Gateways, because mass Gateway openings that sacrifice tech and upgrades for Gateway units are either all-ins or metagame strategies. You cannot open with a large number of Gateways and use those Gateways for warp-in harassment with a WP without foregoing any sort of standing army, reasonably timed upgrades, and tech.
Standard PvT, be it Templar or Colossus based (or even Stargate) simply doesn't have the infrastructure to warp 10 Zealots into a Terran main from a WP. If it's just 4-6 Zealots, then it's the exact same as it was pre-patch, but the WP is a little harder to kill. Well, that doesn't really matter because top Terran players usually either make Turrets or leave small numbers of bio at expansions to deal with lategame Zealot/DT warp-ins, regardless of whether they come from a WP. In the early game, these sorts of warp-ins simply cannot be maintained without sacrificing everything else, particularly the ability to take a third base.
|
On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly.
I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable?
On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe.
Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising?
ForGG 1:2 SaSe
Happy 2:1 HasuObs
ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN
ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN
Mvp 2:0 Siw
Mvp 2:1 Socke
Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa
Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa
KrasS 0:2 Grubby
MMA 1:2 Feast
MMA 2:0 MaNa
Happy 2:0 BabyKnight
Mvp 2:0 SaSe
Mvp 2:0 SaSe
LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight
Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on.
|
On June 21 2013 03:23 Shiori wrote:
The reason people are disputing what Dwf (who I actually respect a lot when it comes to balance discussions based on his usual posts) said is because he lamented that now he's going to have Zealots in his main all the time. Um, what? This upgrade changes absolutely nothing about lategame PvT, since you'd already have enough money to get the speed upgrade (and should do so, even if you initially opened Templar you need to eventually add a Robo Bay). Furthermore, in the phase of the game that this change actually affects, Protoss doesn't really have a large number of Gateways, because mass Gateway openings that sacrifice tech and upgrades for Gateway units are either all-ins or metagame strategies. You cannot open with a large number of Gateways and use those Gateways for warp-in harassment with a WP without foregoing any sort of standing army, reasonably timed upgrades, and tech.
Standard PvT, be it Templar or Colossus based (or even Stargate) simply doesn't have the infrastructure to warp 10 Zealots into a Terran main from a WP. If it's just 4-6 Zealots, then it's the exact same as it was pre-patch, but the WP is a little harder to kill. Well, that doesn't really matter because top Terran players usually either make Turrets or leave small numbers of bio at expansions to deal with lategame Zealot/DT warp-ins, regardless of whether they come from a WP. In the early game, these sorts of warp-ins simply cannot be maintained without sacrificing everything else, particularly the ability to take a third base.
Sounds legit
|
On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on.
Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win?
|
so many tears in this thread. why dont you guys play out the patch first before theory crafting about balance? remember when skytoss was super imba? medivac speed? reapers? grow up, honestly.
|
On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win?
No, what he is saying is that you can't go like "herp derp look at pvt! Korean terrans owning foreign protosses!'
|
On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win?
Because 2 players does not make a metagame...
|
On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win?
? No, you didn't get it at all. I am saying that Mvp winning inferior players cannot be used to state that "TvP is Terran favoured". I don't know, it's common sense. When arguing about balance, you want opponents of roughly similar skill, it's logical. If the skill gap is too wide, you can't deduce anything (unless inferior players regularly win superior opponents, for example at the end of WoL in ZvX).
|
On June 21 2013 03:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win? Because 2 players does not make a metagame...
Yeah, but he threw out an entire region.
"Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance."
I wasn't aware you could just declare an entire region unlucky and just ignore it.
|
there are historically very little high result capable protoss in Europe. Winrates in high tourneys dont tell anything about balance, there was not a single unexpected dropout of an toss in Eu.
Naniwa is a hype guy, sometimes good, but mostly plays like shit because of his emo-attitude. Titan is stable but not top. The macro toss Hasuobs, or socke aren't absolute top too. Protoss tourneywinners are nearly non existent in EU, because there are always some exceptional players on Zerg or Terran, that are just plain better than those few good toss. Tod has become very good lateley, BK is improving a lot ( but watching his WCS games shows, that he is a one trick poney with very little adaption skills), Feast is sometimes impressive, Pandatank i think could be top if he wouldnt play from southafrica, his play is very impressive and i think he could be the toss tourney winner guy., but the rest just arent an even match for guys like Lucifron / dimaga / forgg, players that have been around and winning tourneys since like forever. There is no toss on this level, and even prismspeed 5 from, warpgate tech with no research wouldnt change that.
|
On June 21 2013 03:37 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win? Because 2 players does not make a metagame... Yeah, but he threw out an entire region. "Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance." I wasn't aware you could just declare an entire region unlucky and just ignore it.
Because that "region" was Thorzain winning two games, Happy winning one game, and MVP winning the rest.
You can't say that EU's PvT is bad when only 1 player made it bad.
|
On June 21 2013 03:37 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win? ? No, you didn't get it at all. I am saying that Mvp winning inferior players cannot be used to state that "TvP is Terran favoured". I don't know, it's common sense. When arguing about balance, you want opponents of roughly similar skill, it's logical. If the skill gap is too wide, you can't deduce anything (unless inferior players regularly win superior opponents, for example at the end of WoL in ZvX).
I get where you are coming from, but it is one step away from the classic Idra argument of "This player is supposed to win". I am looking at the rest of that list and there are some very good protoss players on it as well.
|
On June 21 2013 03:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:37 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win? Because 2 players does not make a metagame... Yeah, but he threw out an entire region. "Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance." I wasn't aware you could just declare an entire region unlucky and just ignore it. Because that "region" was Thorzain winning two games, Happy winning one game, and MVP winning the rest. You can't say that EU's PvT is bad when only 1 player made it bad.
So because MVP and Innovation exist, we can't really use any data from Korea or EU, is what you are saying? Because as long as they are doing well, they are going to eliminate a lot of players from all races.
|
On June 21 2013 03:37 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win? ? No, you didn't get it at all. I am saying that Mvp winning inferior players cannot be used to state that "TvP is Terran favoured". I don't know, it's common sense. When arguing about balance, you want opponents of roughly similar skill, it's logical. If the skill gap is too wide, you can't deduce anything (unless inferior players regularly win superior opponents, for example at the end of WoL in ZvX).
Well it's a chicken or egg type of thing. Because how can you tell if 2 players are of equal skill if the races are not balanced? Maybe one race is significantly stronger and they only appear of similar level because of imbalance. Or, how can you tell if the races are balanced, if all the skilled people are playing one race?
So there has to be some middle ground between 35% PvT at WCS Europe and "throw out all the results because MVP"
|
On June 21 2013 03:44 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:37 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 03:30 Plansix wrote:On June 21 2013 03:24 TheDwf wrote:On June 21 2013 02:06 Wingblade wrote:
Countless games? You cited two, and two horrible examples at that. sOs DIDN'T fight with pure gate units. Yes having storm helped to an extent, but writing "countless games in which Protoss plays on pure gate units" after citing a game where that is just flat wrong is ignorant and silly. I said "with zero robo fighting unit" for the sOs example. Other instances? OK. ForGG vs sOs, Neo Planet S, WCS global finals: 13'20 robo, 14'30 robobay i. e. pure gates until at least 15'. Second game from that series, Bel'shir Vestige: 12'30 robo, 14'20 robobay. Can't you just watch top players from your race and know by yourself that opening Templars into late Colossi (Immortals aren't even mandatory, zeal/archons/storm can work on its own) is perfectly viable? On June 21 2013 02:45 Wingblade wrote:
Meanwhile in tournaments, PvT featured something like a 35 percent winrate in Europe. Ah yes, the famous proof of "imbalance" in which the 35% is based on a glorious 37 games sample size (14-23 according to Liquipedia), including Mvp having 8 wins against much inferior Protoss. OK. Please watch the following list and tell me some of the results are surprising? ForGG 1:2 SaSe Happy 2:1 HasuObs ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN ThorZaIN 2:1 TitaN Mvp 2:0 Siw Mvp 2:1 Socke Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa Shuttle 0:2 NaNiwa KrasS 0:2 Grubby MMA 1:2 Feast MMA 2:0 MaNa Happy 2:0 BabyKnight Mvp 2:0 SaSe Mvp 2:0 SaSe LucifroN 3:0 BabyKnight Any Terran upset? No, that's right. Protoss had a bad season on WCS Europe, which is irrelevant for balance. Move on. Wait, you can argue like this? You can just say: "These players was good, so he should have one. There for, all data associated with this is irrelevant"? So can I just ignore all data coming out of Korea because all the players are good and they should all win? ? No, you didn't get it at all. I am saying that Mvp winning inferior players cannot be used to state that "TvP is Terran favoured". I don't know, it's common sense. When arguing about balance, you want opponents of roughly similar skill, it's logical. If the skill gap is too wide, you can't deduce anything (unless inferior players regularly win superior opponents, for example at the end of WoL in ZvX). Well it's a chicken or egg type of thing. Because how can you tell if 2 players are of equal skill if the races are not balanced? Maybe one race is significantly stronger and they only appear of similar level because of imbalance. Or, how can you tell if the races are balanced, if all the skilled people are playing one race? So there has to be some middle ground between 35% PvT at WCS Europe and "throw out all the results because MVP"
The record is 14-16 if you remove MVP from the equation.
|
On June 21 2013 03:41 Plansix wrote:
I get where you are coming from, but it is one step away from the classic Idra argument of "This player is supposed to win". I am looking at the rest of that list and there are some very good protoss players on it as well.
I am not saying the Protoss players were bad. One player happened to be one league above the rest, which skews the results, that's all. I don't know, let's say we introduce Flash in WCS America and he plays 10 TvZ on the 35 TvZ played during the season, the results will likely be skewed as well.
|
On June 21 2013 03:44 DinoMight wrote:
Well it's a chicken or egg type of thing. Because how can you tell if 2 players are of equal skill if the races are not balanced? Maybe one race is significantly stronger and they only appear of similar level because of imbalance. Or, how can you tell if the races are balanced, if all the skilled people are playing one race?
Agree. But in this case, I don't think you can reasonably argue that Mvp should just have a 50% probability to win a bo3 against Siw, Socke or SaSe. Historically and currently, he's by far better, as evidenced by the fact he the won WCS Europe and made it to the semi-finals on the global event afterwards.
|
On June 21 2013 03:48 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2013 03:41 Plansix wrote:
I get where you are coming from, but it is one step away from the classic Idra argument of "This player is supposed to win". I am looking at the rest of that list and there are some very good protoss players on it as well. I am not saying the Protoss players were bad. One player happened to be one league above the rest, which skews the results, that's all. I don't know, let's say we introduce Flash in WCS America and he plays 10 TvZ on the 35 TvZ played during the season, the results will likely be skewed as well.
Well then all the results from WCS are worthless. Innovation is in KR, MVP is in EU and NA players don't matter because its NA and filled with Korean B teamers. None of it matters because of the highly skilled(or not skilled) players involved in each region. The data invalidates itself by existing.
This is the problem that most protoss players have. We can be losing with a 35% win rate and terrans will just point to MVP and say its all ok. We can be the least winning race in all of SC2, but a single buff comes out that increased the speed of a non-attacking unit slightly and terran world comes to an end.
And the whole time, Zerg just sit there say "Oh the WP, I remember those. They hold immortals, right?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
