| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TheoMikkelsen
Denmark196 Posts
If not, dont make hallucinations get selected when doing control+click or pressing "select army" dont make observers be a part of "select army" - Make a hotkey option to allow to jump to the unit pages at the bottom of the screen for quicker manual unit selection. This will balance the game insanely much. Thank you. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On January 11 2014 19:32 Theobeo wrote: Create an option to allow seperate units to be a part of "select army" or to be selected when doing control+click. If not, dont make hallucinations get selected when doing control+click or pressing "select army" dont make observers be a part of "select army" - Make a hotkey option to allow to jump to the unit pages at the bottom of the screen for quicker manual unit selection. This will balance the game insanely much. Thank you. It doesn't seem to balance the game as much as it makes it easier (and for Protoss, worst of it :D) | ||
|
Talack
Canada2742 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 11 2014 17:38 Tyrhanius wrote: He's looking at statistics for players factoring in their MMRs, which is affected by the other matchups. Any rube knows you rise to the league/ranking that gives you near that 50%, so now let's look at players that play TvZ and TvT at equal skill at one level and TvP at another! He makes a powerful case for slight changes.Problem of david kim is he only look for stats, and don't really speak about meta/games etc... I don't understand how he can rely only on stats beacause Winrate ratio are so difficult to interpret with MMR. If T lose vs a P, he will get match vs a lower skilled P until he can win. But, you have no reliable stats to know if the T is way better than the P, but the MU is broken, so he's forced to stagnate in a lower league/MMR, or if the players match each others have an real egal skill. Moreover, if with this system the win rate is about 52.63% for example, is it really balance cause it's closed to 50% ? Cause, if 100 000 games (exemple, don't know exactly how many games are played) are played, that mean in master NA league Protoss wins 5263000 games and Terran only 4727000 : That's a lot while the system supposed to keep players at a 50% win rate. Of course, david must only look for the win rate of master kor league, for saying things are OK. But we can aslo see, P are favored vs T until the players reach a very high level. That's mean, the fact all of us we know, T need way more skill to beat a P. And Davie refuse to look the GM league whereas he says he only want to balance the game at pro level, he refuses to look the pro level ? By the way, this league is one of the best indicator of the balance state, beacause not that affected by MMR. GomTvT area : a lot of more Terrans. Broodlord infestor area : More Zergs. More than 50% protoss GM ? Davie "It's Ok, the game is balance". it is not signifiant. This mean that some changes can be made to balance the PvT, without affecting the high top GM, like making Protoss management harder while not touching of the strenght of the race. Thus, terran players will not anymore have the feelings to be beaten by a low skill player while they need a pro kor level to beat them. Dear himself and some top P have said they want tools to differenciate between a good toss and a gosu toss. But we have this feelings David kim and balance team always look for the way to do nothing until they are forced to, and don't care about the game anymore due to the length they need to speak about the issue we have been reporting for months/years (honestly it takes 1 years to admit photon overcharge last to long, we have known that since beta...) But, I hope davie will make me lie. He is presenting exactly the kind of statistics that make his case. I wouldn't mind breakdowns with game length, but we're not looking at that now. You're hating on statistics but statistics ARE the games. If T lose vs a P, he will get match vs a lower skilled P until he can win. But, you have no reliable stats to know if the T is way better than the P, but the MU is broken, so he's forced to stagnate in a lower league/MMR, or if the players match each others have an real egal skill. He will get matched with more T's, Z's, R's and P's. If he loses against P's his same skill in all matchups, that shows through. If his case is repeated across the ladder, they generate the exact statistics he quotes.That says nothing about the quality of games or how dumb some victories or losses are. Your complaint is unfounded here. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26028 Posts
Was chatting to him and he conceded that it means nothing really, he could just be bad at the matchup. Happens. The issue that frustrates him is that he rolls so many Protoss, more than his vZ and vT combined this season. Now these aren't stats like some put a lot of stock in but something just seems off with race distribution at that level, or indeed pretty much Korean progamer downwards. That said, outside of balance I do feel Protoss suits the multiple Bo1 vs many randomised opponents that is the ladder for most people better than the other two races. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On January 11 2014 20:22 Wombat_NI wrote: Well perhaps. That said my friend was whining the other day, 65 and 61% win in TvT and TvZ respectively. 31% vs Protoss :p High masters EU T, Was chatting to him and he conceded that it means nothing really, he could just be bad at the matchup. Happens. The issue that frustrates him is that he rolls so many Protoss, more than his vZ and vT combined this season. Now these aren't stats like some put a lot of stock in but something just seems off with race distribution at that level, or indeed pretty much Korean progamer downwards. That said, outside of balance I do feel Protoss suits the multiple Bo1 vs many randomised opponents that is the ladder for most people better than the other two races. First, I would just like to say I'd be only to happy to, uh, assist, with the masochism bit. Other than that, yeah, protoss was basically built for Bo1 vs unknown opponents. Whenever I play toss I just play standard and cross my fingers, accepting that if there is some weird timing or cheese I didn't prepare for, I'll probably lose. Honestly, we've been at this since 2010, I'm just about ready to cave and just accept that this game will probably never each its full potential and will always be a story of what ifs. Have you checked out Starbow by any chance? I've watched a few vods lately, and they almost brought a tear to even my hardened nerdling eyes. Strongly recommended. Oh and I still want to eat your child. | ||
|
Prugelhugel
Austria637 Posts
I think now I can relate to the grumpy terrans here. Switched to T about 120 games or so ago. Was low master Z with ZvP being my best mu by far (I don't know the correct stats but it felt like about 80+%). Now I am at high diamond with 60+% winratio vs both zerg and terran and a 40% winratio against protoss... I thought P was the race I understood the best, but I feel so helpless in the early game. They can stay on 1 base and kind of allin you in 10 different ways, be aggressive and expand/tech/allin. Techswitches are super simple due to mothershipcore (the only TvP wins I gathered are when my opponent tried to go stargate into robo into double forge storm charge or something like that) I don't think that there is a balance issue per se, but Protoss has definitly too many different pathways to go for and still stay reasonably safe! | ||
|
Dapper_Cad
United Kingdom964 Posts
On January 11 2014 09:15 Grumbels wrote: Blizzard could change the game if they wanted to. They could run a test server that functions as an open beta for a more experimental version of the game. Taeja won't play on it, but many gm and masters level players will. They could have some minor tournaments to further incentivize people to take it seriously. This will suffice to create a balanced enough game. As long as the changes are for the better this will be good for the game. Balance is a meaningless concept when there is a really immature metagame anyway, so there is plenty of time to finetune the balance once pros start to play this version en masse. All of this can be done without Blizzard. I would love to see a group of pros or teams commit to a tournament featuring an adjusted version of the current patch. It wouldn't be starbow or another complete redux of the game as it stands. It would be more like UTs mutators, speed or bullet chess or 20/20 cricket or a planned version of the War3 map fix scandal. The same game with a few rule adjustments which could be applied to any map. It definitely doesn't need to be super serious, although I don't think it should be a complete throw away either. Of course bad racial imbalances would just crop up. But you can mitigate that problem... hell you can even make it a feature. Give out prize money based on placement in each race as a separate category. Let participants know what the mutator will be far enough in advance and it can be a challenge to work out how to break the change in your favour. Unknown player has the brains to take a change and beat everyone to death with it? There are worse stories. At it's simplest you might have a tournament played on "fast" instead of "faster". Or with a 300 supply cap. But you could do some pretty crazy stuff as long as you could contain the changes in an SC2 map extension (So avoiding having to sink a ton of time into map creation). The keys would be some big name involvement and clever mutator selection that would create at worst watchable games but at best create great games, suggest a direction for future mutators and eventually have an influence on Blizzard patches. Could it crash and burn horribly? Possibly. But no money need be risked. It could be funded by community donation. If you want my £5 then you have it. | ||
|
Ammanas
Slovakia2166 Posts
Now I am not saying the pro scene should switch to Starbow or anything but the mod greatly illustrates the point of design faults in SC2, things that all community was concerned with since start of SC2 and shows how to deal with them. No sentries, delayed warp tech, etc. Goliaths present. Numerous things that SC2 designers told us are impossible in SC2 (lurkers, reavers) or 'have no real impact' (the unit movement/not clumping). That TvP clearly demonstrates the economy aspect that I was on and on about in numerous threads and how to 'punish' turtling player by outexpanding him. Seriously, just watch that TvP and tell me it is not better/more exciting to watch than what we currently have. And bear in mind, that it is just a 'random' masters players going against each other. And than just think, what could Flash/Inno/Taeja do against Rain/Dear/sOs after few months of practice... EDIT: Or watch this. When was the last time we had such a game in SC2? And between amateurs! | ||
|
ETisME
12513 Posts
On January 11 2014 20:28 Squat wrote: First, I would just like to say I'd be only to happy to, uh, assist, with the masochism bit. Other than that, yeah, protoss was basically built for Bo1 vs unknown opponents. Whenever I play toss I just play standard and cross my fingers, accepting that if there is some weird timing or cheese I didn't prepare for, I'll probably lose. Honestly, we've been at this since 2010, I'm just about ready to cave and just accept that this game will probably never each its full potential and will always be a story of what ifs. Have you checked out Starbow by any chance? I've watched a few vods lately, and they almost brought a tear to even my hardened nerdling eyes. Strongly recommended. Oh and I still want to eat your child. I thought this 'protoss is best at bo1' thing was just because they did well in pl and didn't do well in individual leagues and now it has changed? | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12513 Posts
On January 11 2014 21:56 Grumbels wrote: I think that 'protoss is for bo1' is inspired by past of performances of protoss players that would lose in the semis etc because their strategies would be figured out by that point, so they could never actually win a tournament. but then we also have the most diverse stylish players enabled by toss. the 2 base all in king MC the mass void ray style sOs the turtling style Rain the hard to predict style Naniwa I mean what other race can have such diversed style players? Terran always are offensive. Zerg are almost always macro based. Only toss has good level of success with all different style. | ||
|
Comadevil
Germany214 Posts
On January 11 2014 21:10 Ammanas wrote: EDIT: Or watch this. When was the last time we had such a game in SC2? And between amateurs! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rzxiEuRx24 Romson is not really an amateur. He is GM player | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
EDIT: and the Vultures, OMG. Who ever thought that replacing them with the Hellion is a good idea is a nut. Such a cool unit | ||
|
Ammanas
Slovakia2166 Posts
On January 11 2014 22:16 Comadevil wrote: Romson is not really an amateur. He is GM player He is very good for sure, much better then i will ever be, but he is not a pro player. And definitely not a Korean pro player. That is not the point though, imo. What I was trying to say is, look at how cool those games are. And then imagine what would happen if that would be Tajea vs Rain instead of Romson vs Hider. | ||
|
Zulu23
Germany132 Posts
I covers data from what, 6 Days? Great, what about last season? Looking at the win ratio over the leagues for statistical purposes is very strange. As the MMR adjusts with every game it's clear that the winrates are very close together. If, for example one losses a game versus protoss, the MMR will adjust downwards and the next player, maybe a protoss will be "easier", right? Then it's also more probable to win against him, and the winrate will adjust again.... With that said a +3% or -2% in an overall PvX or XvP Matchup seems huge to me. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On January 11 2014 22:16 Comadevil wrote: Romson is not really an amateur. He is GM player That's not the definition of amateur or professional. If he does not get paid to play, he is an amateur, regardless of skill. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On January 11 2014 22:34 Zulu23 wrote: Sorry but this statistic means nothing.... I covers data from what, 6 Days? Great, what about last season? Looking at the win ratio over the leagues for statistical purposes is very strange. As the MMR adjusts with every game it's clear that the winrates are very close together. If, for example one losses a game versus protoss, the MMR will adjust downwards and the next player, maybe a protoss will be "easier", right? Then it's also more probable to win against him, and the winrate will adjust again.... With that said a +3% or -2% in an overall PvX or XvP Matchup seems huge to me. No, they use the adjusted win rates to factor out mmr. | ||
|
Comadevil
Germany214 Posts
On January 11 2014 22:36 Squat wrote: That's not the definition of amateur or professional. If he does not get paid to play, he is an amateur, regardless of skill. Well it is put here in context with skill (when have we seen such games between amateurs??) , so i would call him in this context a pro, especially if he is able to beat players like Jjakji. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Solar vs Zoun
MaxPax vs Bunny
Kung Fu Cup
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
Classic vs Cure
Reynor vs TBD
WardiTV Korean Royale
PiGosaur Monday
RSL Revival
Classic vs Creator
Cure vs TriGGeR
Kung Fu Cup
herO vs TBD
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
herO vs Gerald
ByuN vs SHIN
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
