|
On June 30 2014 11:49 SepH_TL wrote:
Why is a 1000 line balance whine on the a featured TL front page. (Well written or not)
Where was the 1000 page on BL infestor.
Where was the 1000 page on 111.
Honestly this isn't what i expect from TL. Slightly disappointing.
16 posts? Seems like you are a very involved TL member. And how many Terrans would you like to drop off the map before a post like this is made? The representation of Terran is in an even worse position that it was during the "patch Zerg" era (which I didn't think was possible).
|
Same goes for statements without any proof :
Terran has less options, leading to a more predictable (and thus more easily "countered") play
Terran has a much higher vulnerability to all-ins (partially fueled by scouting issues)
Terran is way more unforgiving: mistakes and sloppiness are punished harder, and once the race falls behind there is almost no comeback potential (in particular due to the weaker reproducibility)
Terran has an inferior lategame.
I'd like to know why you think there is no "proof" or "weight" to these statements. All of them ring pretty true to me.
1) Terran doesn't have a lot options. They have very few early game/harassment options, and they have even fewer viable mid/late game options. The only exception is TvT.
2) I mean, it's pretty true. If you watch SC2 games, you can see this is pretty evident.
3) Terran has the slowest production capabilities in the game. Period. And that is fact. Have you seen what happens when Z/P/T reaches the Terrans production buildings? As well, Terran is the micro/control race of this game(not saying other races don't require it, just that it's really Terrans thing).
4) Terrans late game, is well, not the best.. I'd like to put it some other way, but that's the truth. Main issue being that Terran has such few options to transition into in the late game.
I do agree with the author in that I doubt the recent hellbat buff will have much long-term effect and my feeling is that it's not enough. I think part of Terran's problems are structural: they are a race that are intrinsically powerful in the midgame but weaker in the lategame, and as the other races perfect their builds, over time they're better able to hold off Terran's midgame pushes and survive into a lategame where they are favoured. In other words, the way Terran is designed, they become weaker over time, and that may be a fundamental flaw.
Personally I'd like to see Terran get a better lategame so that they can match the other races, otherwise this problem will persist. The fact that marines and marauders are the backbone of the terran army whether at 5:00 or 30:00 indicates to me a fundamental problem with the race. Terran have no lategame because unlike the other races there is nothing to transition to.
QFT.
|
On June 30 2014 11:49 SepH_TL wrote:
Why is a 1000 line balance whine on the a featured TL front page. (Well written or not)
Where was the 1000 page on BL infestor.
Where was the 1000 page on 111.
Honestly this isn't what i expect from TL. Slightly disappointing.
Link to article on BL/infestor.
There was never a need of an article on the 1/1/1. It was figured out + protoss was buffed to deal with it.
|
On June 30 2014 11:50 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 11:38 Evil_Sheep wrote:On June 30 2014 10:03 GoStu wrote:
A+ for grammar and presentation, C+ for tone. While obviously a lot of work went into writing this article and researching relevant games, it comes off a touch whiny. Statements about how some races are A-move and "hands off keyboard would have done the same thing" are the touch of insult that puts non-terran readers back on the defensive. Why soil an otherwise-good article? Yeah I'd echo the sentiment above, this is like a 10K+ word thesis with dozens of footnotes -- if nothing else the author pours his heart and soul into it and I respect that. He supports his yes opinionated arguments with heaps of evidence and I think he makes a lot of good points about terran that reflect a deep understanding of how the game is structured. But there is seriously no need for the combative and hostile tone; it's as if the author is writing as one of the last surviving Terrans at the Alamo. On the other hand, you would never get a 25 page footnoted thesis from someone who wasn't that passionate, so I suppose it goes with the territory. Let's not forget to put things into context. The author writes as if there is a conspiracy by Blizzard to undermine Terran: the reality is that Terran has spent long stretches of SC2, both WoL and HotS, as the most successful race. And when Terran has struggled in 2014, Blizzard has already put out three major patches to buff it. Lol wait what?? Terran hasn't won a GSL final since early 2012 (IMMvP) in May 2012. And there has only been one Terran in the finals since then (Innovation 2013 Season 1 who lost to Soulkey). So I would be careful when you make very broad, inaccurate generalizations about Terran having "long stretches of success" unless you are talking about 2011, which 2 1/2 years ago seems rather irrelevant.
Terrans won 14/31 (45.1%) Premier tourneys in HotS in 2013, and if you follow the balance report link in my post, terrans had dominant winrates in the first few months of HotS and overall strong win%'s in 2013. I'm not the one making broad or inaccurate generalizations.
|
As a Maru fan i support this thread.
|
Makes some good points but is undermined by moments of subjective whine.
|
Its funny that this terran thread came up and one of the top headlines for TL news is taeja (terran) wins DH summer. I think maybe we just need to start watching more taeja replays and terran will do better!
|
On June 30 2014 13:08 Cool C wrote:
Its funny that this terran thread came up and one of the top headlines for TL news is taeja (terran) wins DH summer. I think maybe we just need to start watching more taeja replays and terran will do better!
Yeah
Maybe Zerg never needed a buff in 2010
They just needed to copy Fruitdealer and Nestea and grab their GSL paychecks
|
On June 30 2014 13:08 Cool C wrote:
Its funny that this terran thread came up and one of the top headlines for TL news is taeja (terran) wins DH summer. I think maybe we just need to start watching more taeja replays and terran will do better!
Taeja is just beating up on weaker players.
Like cmon, he may be a top terran, but other top terrans like Innovation can't even get past the Ro16 in GSL, Maru can't seem to win GSL despite being the best terran in the goddamn world
But when you look at the big picture, the real indication that something has gone terribly wrong is that the mid-range terrans aren't even making it into Code S, that massive under representation is unreal.
|
|
|
One of the perks of being in a mathematics major is that it is easy to recognize such completely informal articles. Sure there is "statistics" in this paper, but no statistical evidence/analysis to prove that sc is actually imbalanced.
Instead, someone should do a 95% confidence interval for a terran's win rate over past xxx months, and determine if 0.5 is NOT within that interval.
Only after that will there be statistical evidence proving that terran is underpowered.
|
United States7483 Posts
On June 30 2014 13:38 Painiyff wrote:
One of the perks of being in a mathematics major is that it is easy to recognize such completely informal articles. Sure there is "statistics" in this paper, but no statistical evidence/analysis to prove that sc is actually imbalanced.
Instead, someone should do a 95% confidence interval for a terran's win rate over past xxx months, and determine if 0.5 is within that interval.
Only after that will there be statistical evidence proving that terran is underpowered.
Even if you did that, there would be a ton of complaints about the data being used for the econometric test. Some people would say to only use pro matches. Others would say only use Kespa and GSL matches. Others would say a former imbalance has left only 1-2 amazing terrans around who are skewing data. Others would say use all ladder games. No matter how much work you do, it'll never answer the question well enough for people.
|
On June 30 2014 13:42 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 13:38 Painiyff wrote:
One of the perks of being in a mathematics major is that it is easy to recognize such completely informal articles. Sure there is "statistics" in this paper, but no statistical evidence/analysis to prove that sc is actually imbalanced.
Instead, someone should do a 95% confidence interval for a terran's win rate over past xxx months, and determine if 0.5 is within that interval.
Only after that will there be statistical evidence proving that terran is underpowered. Even if you did that, there would be a ton of complaints about the data being used for the econometric test. Some people would say to only use pro matches. Others would say only use Kespa and GSL matches. Others would say a former imbalance has left only 1-2 amazing terrans around who are skewing data. Others would say use all ladder games. No matter how much work you do, it'll never answer the question well enough for people.
That's true. But at least its something... Some headline like "Mathematically proven: terran underpowered in overall pro matches" sounds much more convincing to me.
|
On June 30 2014 13:42 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 13:38 Painiyff wrote:
One of the perks of being in a mathematics major is that it is easy to recognize such completely informal articles. Sure there is "statistics" in this paper, but no statistical evidence/analysis to prove that sc is actually imbalanced.
Instead, someone should do a 95% confidence interval for a terran's win rate over past xxx months, and determine if 0.5 is within that interval.
Only after that will there be statistical evidence proving that terran is underpowered. Even if you did that, there would be a ton of complaints about the data being used for the econometric test. Some people would say to only use pro matches. Others would say only use Kespa and GSL matches. Others would say a former imbalance has left only 1-2 amazing terrans around who are skewing data. Others would say use all ladder games. No matter how much work you do, it'll never answer the question well enough for people.
At least you can answer the question better for some people. It doesn't have to be perfect, just better.
|
On June 30 2014 11:59 Deonto wrote:Show nested quote +Same goes for statements without any proof :
Terran has less options, leading to a more predictable (and thus more easily "countered") play
Terran has a much higher vulnerability to all-ins (partially fueled by scouting issues)
Terran is way more unforgiving: mistakes and sloppiness are punished harder, and once the race falls behind there is almost no comeback potential (in particular due to the weaker reproducibility)
Terran has an inferior lategame. I'd like to know why you think there is no "proof" or "weight" to these statements. All of them ring pretty true to me. 1) Terran doesn't have a lot options. They have very few early game/harassment options, and they have even fewer viable mid/late game options. The only exception is TvT. 2) I mean, it's pretty true. If you watch SC2 games, you can see this is pretty evident. 3) Terran has the slowest production capabilities in the game. Period. And that is fact. Have you seen what happens when Z/P/T reaches the Terrans production buildings? As well, Terran is the micro/control race of this game(not saying other races don't require it, just that it's really Terrans thing). 4) Terrans late game, is well, not the best.. I'd like to put it some other way, but that's the truth. Main issue being that Terran has such few options to transition into in the late game. QFT.
this is pure whine based on personal experience,
1/ that is always been the case : bio or mech and that's pretty much it , no big news here. I'm no BW expert but i think it was pretty much the same back then in terms of choices.
2/ reaper + scans.
The only issue is with unscoutable P proxy allins.
3/ have you seen what happened when a terran snipes pylons in a Protoss base or snipes hatcheries/queens ?
Same story there.
You can argue about the traveling time for units if you want
4/ No latter than last week we witnessed a terran coming back from nowhere on frost ( cant remember the players names though )
See how easy it is to write something like that ?
Of course I had time to waste I would go replay fishing and look at pro terrans doing all the above and can conclude that everything is fine.
There is definitely something to argue about Terran performances but rathen than whining with the help of selected replays.
I would rather try to get interviews from top Terrans to try to understand why they dont play marine/tank anymore in TvZ ( which was pretty popular until the end of WoL ) since almost nothing changed there : tank got a small buff and muta got a regen buff. Is it this that triggered it ? or the cheap very easy to produce / effective mine ?
I would also try to understand the change of plays and things like this rather than projecting my probably personal frustration on such a big article
|
On June 30 2014 13:38 Painiyff wrote:
One of the perks of being in a mathematics major is that it is easy to recognize such completely informal articles. Sure there is "statistics" in this paper, but no statistical evidence/analysis to prove that sc is actually imbalanced.
Instead, someone should do a 95% confidence interval for a terran's win rate over past xxx months, and determine if 0.5 is within that interval.
Only after that will there be statistical evidence proving that terran is underpowered.
Terran's wins where?
Globally? Player populations and skill levels differ massively.
In major / premier tournaments only? Same problem applies, the same top Koreans participate in foreigner tournaments and skew the statistics completely.
In Code S / Premier league only? Most terrans get knocked out in Challenger / Code A, only the best of the best (namely Taeja and Maru) are even in Premier league. Unless you think 2 individuals are a good representation and sample size of the whole race.
Starcraft 2 isn't a controlled environment, balance patches happen all the time, players and teams choose whether or not they participate in tournaments, etc. Try answering any of the technical points raised in the OP instead of dismissing it because it doesn't have perfect statistical analysis, because there can't be perfect statistical analysis when regions are segregated and only certain individuals get invited or can afford to travel.
|
On June 30 2014 13:48 BoBiNoU wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 11:59 Deonto wrote:Same goes for statements without any proof :
Terran has less options, leading to a more predictable (and thus more easily "countered") play
Terran has a much higher vulnerability to all-ins (partially fueled by scouting issues)
Terran is way more unforgiving: mistakes and sloppiness are punished harder, and once the race falls behind there is almost no comeback potential (in particular due to the weaker reproducibility)
Terran has an inferior lategame. I'd like to know why you think there is no "proof" or "weight" to these statements. All of them ring pretty true to me. 1) Terran doesn't have a lot options. They have very few early game/harassment options, and they have even fewer viable mid/late game options. The only exception is TvT. 2) I mean, it's pretty true. If you watch SC2 games, you can see this is pretty evident. 3) Terran has the slowest production capabilities in the game. Period. And that is fact. Have you seen what happens when Z/P/T reaches the Terrans production buildings? As well, Terran is the micro/control race of this game(not saying other races don't require it, just that it's really Terrans thing). 4) Terrans late game, is well, not the best.. I'd like to put it some other way, but that's the truth. Main issue being that Terran has such few options to transition into in the late game. QFT. this is pure whine based on personal experience, 1/ that is always been the case : bio or mech and that's pretty much it , no big news here. I'm no BW expert but i think it was pretty much the same back then in terms of choices. 2/ reaper + scans. The only issue is with unscoutable P proxy allins. 3/ have you seen what happened when a terran snipes pylons in a Protoss base or snipes hatcheries/queens ? Same story there. You can argue about the traveling time for units if you want 4/ No latter than last week we witnessed a terran coming back from nowhere on frost ( cant remember the players names though ) See how easy it is to write something like that ? Of course I had time to waste I would go replay fishing and look at pro terrans doing all the above and can conclude that everything is fine. There is definitely something to argue about Terran performances but rathen than whining with the help of selected replays. I would rather try to get interviews from top Terrans to try to understand why they dont play marine/tank anymore in TvZ ( which was pretty popular until the end of WoL ) since almost nothing changed there : tank got a small buff and muta got a regen buff. Is it this that triggered it ? or the cheap very easy to produce / effective mine ? I would also try to understand the change of plays and things like this rather than projecting my probably personal frustration on such a big article
gee let me think of the reason marine/tank doesn't work anymore
The fact that its hilariously immobile and gets torn apart by P and Z?
|
The impression I was expecting to get from this thread was that people are concerned that Terran is not consistently getting into the higher brackets of major tournaments. (Which is true). The impression I actually got was that people are complaining that Terran is not winning every major tournament. Like 100% of them, which is ridiculous. And highly disturbing. I actually want Terran to dominate now. To see if it provokes similar reaction. I am betting it wont. Or if it does it will be quickly and efficiently shut down. I dont care who is on top but please dont claim to be on the side of balance when it is clear that you want your race to be on top. I cant stand this hypocrisy.
|
On June 30 2014 13:48 BoBiNoU wrote:
I would rather try to get interviews from top Terrans to try to understand why they dont play marine/tank anymore in TvZ ( which was pretty popular until the end of WoL ) since almost nothing changed there : tank got a small buff and muta got a regen buff. Is it this that triggered it ? or the cheap very easy to produce / effective mine ?
Pretty much the only reason why you went Marine Tank in TvZ was because pure MMM died to ling bane muta since you had nothing that could aoe Banelings down, and over making marauders to tank means you potentially die to the mutas and had no dps to handle the lings. Tanks were also immobile and getting them caught by anything (lings or mutas) meant all your bio were doomed to the banelings. Widow mines solved that issue and offers additional protection against mutalisks, and getting a few mines caught out is no where near as bad as losing your tanks.
|
On June 30 2014 13:58 MrLightning wrote:
The impression I was expecting to get from this thread was that people are concerned that Terran is not consistently getting into the higher brackets of major tournaments. (Which is true). The impression I actually got was that people are complaining that Terran is not winning every major tournament. Like 100% of them, which is ridiculous. And highly disturbing. I actually want Terran to dominate now. To see if it provokes similar reaction. I am betting it wont. Or if it does it will be quickly and efficiently shut down. I dont care who is on top but please dont claim to be on the side of balance when it is clear that you want your race to be on top. I cant stand this hypocrisy.
Who on all earth says that T needs to win every major tournament? Ah, it's your "impression"...
ppl say terrans whine a lot. My "impression" that you'll find at least as many non-sense anti-whine comments as urs here.
*facepalm*
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
