|
On July 01 2014 07:02 Salient wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 03:55 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 01 2014 02:52 Salient wrote:
This article is is beyond biased. It is almost dishonest to use pre-patch statistics to support the notion that Terran is underpowered. Since the recent slew of Terran buffs, Terran is now favored in all match ups. Buffed Widow mines and hellbats plus the removal of great blink maps has made a big impact. TL should be ashamed to have this piece anywhere other than in the blog section. The only match up where Terran is favored is TvT. I can honestly not tell if some of these posts are just trolling anymore - the record of Premier/Major tournaments for 2014 show Terran to be non-existent and the patch will not have much impact on this. Your own personal troubles against Terran are not reflective of the balance situation, only your own inadequacies. Against Zerg something needs to be done about Muta flocks and their insane health regeneration. Buffing WMs will not work as most pros have an overseer with the flock. Turrets are useless as soon as the flock gets to a 7 or more and Thors are too expensive and slow. Push out as Terran and there is an extremely high risk that your base will be wrecked by a Muta counter-attack whilst you are still trying to clear creep in the middle of the map. Nerfing Muta regen would be welcome. Wrong. You can make up your opinions. But you shouldn't make up your facts. Terran is favored in TvP. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
It's all about how you interpret statistics though. You cannot look at naked win/rates, and that is unfortunately what David Kim is doing. The reason for this is that when one race is underpowered, the players of the race will drop down in leagues, which causes fewer players of the UP race in master/GM. Win/rates, however stay close to 50/50, because that's how the ladder system is designed. Thus, the only relevant metric for assessing ladder balance is looking at race distribution. According to Nios.Kr terran only has 24% players in GM and 28% in masters league, while they should have had 30% assuming the average terran player is equally good as the average zerg/protoss/random player.
Regarding Aliguac statistics, when one race gets underpowered, it will have fewer players being able to get far enough in tournaments, which means that the Aliguac database won't pick them up. This means that the Aliguac database will only pick up the games played by very the best players of the UP race while having more games played by players from the weaker races.
So if you go in and study Aliguac numbers you will notice that there only was a terran player in a non-mirror matchup in 57% of all games (in June so far). Compare that to the 70% of protoss/zerg, and the balance issue is quite significant.
Once against, be aware that win/rates significantly underestimates the real issue here. Because Aliguac statistics only picks up the very best terran players against a higher number of protoss/zergs that doesn't neccsarily have the same skill. As an example, if the 5th best terran player in the world is being faced up against the 50th best zerg/toss, the terran player should (If the game was balanced and average skill level of zerg/toss was = average skill of terran) have a w/r above 50%. However, looking at Aliguac statistics (for June at least), that is not the case.
So if you study the statistics in a way that makes sense, you cannot come to any other conclusion than terran being significiantly underpowered.
|
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
On July 01 2014 07:13 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 07:02 Salient wrote:On July 01 2014 03:55 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 01 2014 02:52 Salient wrote:
This article is is beyond biased. It is almost dishonest to use pre-patch statistics to support the notion that Terran is underpowered. Since the recent slew of Terran buffs, Terran is now favored in all match ups. Buffed Widow mines and hellbats plus the removal of great blink maps has made a big impact. TL should be ashamed to have this piece anywhere other than in the blog section. The only match up where Terran is favored is TvT. I can honestly not tell if some of these posts are just trolling anymore - the record of Premier/Major tournaments for 2014 show Terran to be non-existent and the patch will not have much impact on this. Your own personal troubles against Terran are not reflective of the balance situation, only your own inadequacies. Against Zerg something needs to be done about Muta flocks and their insane health regeneration. Buffing WMs will not work as most pros have an overseer with the flock. Turrets are useless as soon as the flock gets to a 7 or more and Thors are too expensive and slow. Push out as Terran and there is an extremely high risk that your base will be wrecked by a Muta counter-attack whilst you are still trying to clear creep in the middle of the map. Nerfing Muta regen would be welcome. Wrong. You can make up your opinions. But you shouldn't make up your facts. Terran is favored in TvP. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Look at what those stats are made up of.
Nah man KingKong is the 3rd best Zerg, you guys just don't know!
|
yes terran is weak. but i feel it was created though as the race that human machines will play and become gods. it has an infinite skill ceiling so i think its great we get to see taeja and maru just completely dominate because they are superhuman. it sucks for all the terran players not named above though.
|
On July 01 2014 07:02 Salient wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 03:55 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 01 2014 02:52 Salient wrote:
This article is is beyond biased. It is almost dishonest to use pre-patch statistics to support the notion that Terran is underpowered. Since the recent slew of Terran buffs, Terran is now favored in all match ups. Buffed Widow mines and hellbats plus the removal of great blink maps has made a big impact. TL should be ashamed to have this piece anywhere other than in the blog section. The only match up where Terran is favored is TvT. I can honestly not tell if some of these posts are just trolling anymore - the record of Premier/Major tournaments for 2014 show Terran to be non-existent and the patch will not have much impact on this. Your own personal troubles against Terran are not reflective of the balance situation, only your own inadequacies. Against Zerg something needs to be done about Muta flocks and their insane health regeneration. Buffing WMs will not work as most pros have an overseer with the flock. Turrets are useless as soon as the flock gets to a 7 or more and Thors are too expensive and slow. Push out as Terran and there is an extremely high risk that your base will be wrecked by a Muta counter-attack whilst you are still trying to clear creep in the middle of the map. Nerfing Muta regen would be welcome. Wrong. You can make up your opinions. But you shouldn't make up your facts. Terran is favored in TvP. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
You shouldn't jump to conclusions with incomplete data. The balanced report you posted, regardless of whether it is indicatative of balance or not, is out of date. It only goes to May.
These are the stats for June.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Oc9x1bJ.png)
|
On July 01 2014 07:02 Salient wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 03:55 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 01 2014 02:52 Salient wrote:
This article is is beyond biased. It is almost dishonest to use pre-patch statistics to support the notion that Terran is underpowered. Since the recent slew of Terran buffs, Terran is now favored in all match ups. Buffed Widow mines and hellbats plus the removal of great blink maps has made a big impact. TL should be ashamed to have this piece anywhere other than in the blog section. The only match up where Terran is favored is TvT. I can honestly not tell if some of these posts are just trolling anymore - the record of Premier/Major tournaments for 2014 show Terran to be non-existent and the patch will not have much impact on this. Your own personal troubles against Terran are not reflective of the balance situation, only your own inadequacies. Against Zerg something needs to be done about Muta flocks and their insane health regeneration. Buffing WMs will not work as most pros have an overseer with the flock. Turrets are useless as soon as the flock gets to a 7 or more and Thors are too expensive and slow. Push out as Terran and there is an extremely high risk that your base will be wrecked by a Muta counter-attack whilst you are still trying to clear creep in the middle of the map. Nerfing Muta regen would be welcome. Wrong. You can make up your opinions. But you shouldn't make up your facts. Terran is favored in TvP. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
Come on, you must not watch any Starcraft if you think Terrran is favored versus Protoss. 90% of Terrans are pulling their scv's, it's not because they have confidence they're going to win later on.
|
I know this seems like a complete non-issue to most people here, but why are the diamond and below leagues classified as 'irrelevant' when it comes to balance? It's a common thread i see throughout this... well, thread.
The game should be balanced at all levels, not just pro. It's not good business to completely ignore game balance for 98% of the population (masters and up is only 2% after all, 5 if you want to give it a really, REALLY high number). As a gold player i just can't keep up with zerg and protoss. I can't tech switch whatsoever and scouting after 6 minutes is nearly impossible. Whenever i win i don't feel that it's down to skill, but to the other player just playing really badly and honestly, that shouldn't happen.
I also don't know what's going on, but even TvT's aren't fun anymore. Everyone just goes 1 base all-in to be done with it (anecdotal though, admittedly).
The article points out how T is behind at pro level, but most people call it 'just a whine' and say 'L2P' - If such arguments as in the OP can be made for the pro level alone, imagine how bad must be below that. Honestly, i feel like Z only needs to mass banelings and/or mutas and P just needs storm to be done with it. I'm trying to catch up, but it's disheartening to see how much i need to micro to avoid blings or storm whereas the other player just has to a-move and t-click to win the game.
"Making just one mistake" is really easy if you're not playing at a pro level and it causes an intense pressure on the T player in every single game. I've lost more than a few games because i lost sight of my army for 5 seconds. Whenever i win one i can't move out - By the time i get to my opponents base there's cannons, HT and colossus waiting, or a remax on roach/lings. Never mind zealot warpins. I know i've got a long way to go, but it's really killing my will to keep on playing when i switch to zerg for a game or two and win without even really trying...
|
On July 01 2014 07:26 ChromeBallz wrote:
I know this seems like a complete non-issue to most people here, but why are the diamond and below leagues classified as 'irrelevant' when it comes to balance? It's a common thread i see throughout this... well, thread.
The trickle down effect, essentially. Money and careers are on the line, so they really only focus on the top level. Lower league players are hard-pressed to complete a timing attack + follow up attack, macro'ing while attacking is no easy task.
|
^
There's a big problem in game design in the amount of unit control Terran needs to execute compared to P/Z
It's not that they don't want to do more, there just isn't a whole lot for them to do in engagements.
|
On July 01 2014 07:39 SC2Toastie wrote:
^
There's a big problem in game design in the amount of unit control Terran needs to execute compared to P/Z
It's not that they don't want to do more, there just isn't a whole lot for them to do in engagements.
Agree, and that is why the Widow Mine provided us with such fantastic TvZ games for like the first 6-8 months of HOTS. Simply becasue it created a dynamic where;
A) Terran had a strong enough midgame army to be aggressive, and
B) Forced Zergs to micro their units during engagements
Not only did the Widow Mine remove A (too some extent) and B from the gameplay, but it also dramtastically worsened balance in the game. If we read the patch notes, it should be quite clear that Blizzard balanced the game around the logic that bio + Mines/hellbats wasn't strong enough in itself, but if they mixed in tanks, it would be fine. As it turned out, tanks still sucks, and thus, Blizzard failed in the patch from a balance perspective as well.
Regardless, of how you look at this patch, it was a trillion times worse than the Queen patch, which actually made sense in a way (TvZ early game was very T favored with range 3 Queens. The fact that Broodlord/Infestor was imbalanced like !@#$%^&* was kinda a different matter IMO).
Just like Zerg need Banelings vs bio, and protoss needs Forcefield vs Zerg, terran also needs a strong AOE unit to match the high production of Zerg. Making Hellions transform into Hellbats for free never adressed that balance issue correctly.
|
On July 01 2014 07:57 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 07:39 SC2Toastie wrote:
^
There's a big problem in game design in the amount of unit control Terran needs to execute compared to P/Z
It's not that they don't want to do more, there just isn't a whole lot for them to do in engagements. Regardless, of how you look at this patch, it was a trillion times worse than the Queen patch, which actually made sense in a way (TvZ early game was very T favored with range 3 Queens. The fact that Broodlord/Infestor was imbalanced like !@#$%^&* was kinda a different matter IMO). Just like Zerg need Banelings vs bio, and protoss needs Forcefield vs Zerg, terran also needs a strong AOE unit to match the high production of Zerg. Making Hellions transform into Hellbats for free never adressed that balance issue correctly.
That's not entirely true. The Queen patch hit when players like DRG and Losira were perfecting 3 base, 6-8 queen and a spine crawler openings that worked well vs hellion banshee. The patch hit right on the verge of that innovation being put to the test.
As for the last part, Terran mostly just lacks the power to transition. Because 2/3rds of the terran arsenal suck bigtime. Useful Thor/BC/Tank (AoE in some way shape or form) would allow Terran to not have to yolo all in all the time desperately holding of lategame.
|
Hello, TeamLiquid. I have always stayed safely under my Arbiter's cloaking field on this forum, mainly because I do not consider myself good enough to comment on the game's current state, but the amount of effort in this post almost makes it necessary to comment on the current state of the game because a large majority of what the OP posted is true in the TvP matchup (I do not play Zerg, so I will be very brief regarding TvZ).
What seems to be hurting Terrans in TvP is the fact that the Protoss can enter the later stages of the game relatively unharmed and I would like to think that two of the main reasons for this is the MotherShip Core, the Photon Overcharge specifically in my opinion, and Blink builds.
I will start with my proposed change to Photon Overcharge; the way Photon Overcharge currently works provides the Protoss player with too much defense. A MSC with 200/200 energy can deflect any sort of pressure a Terran can muster against a two-base Protoss, and versus a three-base Protoss, the Protoss can simply leave its Army at its third and allow the MSC to protect its other two bases via PO with some well placed zealots to support it. Being able to cast a defensive spell instantly twice is just not right. Therefore, I propose we up the cost of the PO to either 125 or 150. 150 does seem extremely high, so I would really only consider it if 125 does not work as well as intended.
Also, the length of time the PO lasts is ludacris: I can actually not die for a whole minute, especially not against early pushes. And these attacks that PO usually defends against are early pushes which is why Protoss is able to have so few units. By increasing the energy cost, we almost solve the problem in my opinion. The next step would be to also reduce the amount of time PO lasts down to 50 seconds. This is necessary to allow for Terran players to have a big enough window that their attack can actually matter because, as it stands, it would take about 89 seconds for another PO to be ready with my energy cost in place. A full minute of PO leaves under 30 seconds for another one to be ready at the Protoss's disposal. Decreasing the length of PO by 10 would give about a 40 second window for Terran to do damage with two-pronged attacks.
Both of these changes will force Protoss to not be so easy to defend with in the early game and prevent Protoss from being able to rush for high tech like Colossus and High Templar because they will need to drop more resources into units to defend against Terran agression.
I also think that increasing the cost of Blink to 200/200 and perhaps increasing the Twilight Council cost a bit as well would be a good idea, but I do not use Blink builds like 4 gate blink into 3 bast High Templar or 7 gate blink, so I do not know the true nature of what makes those builds so strong first hand. But basically, the idea would be that because Blink builds can hit so early, the best thing to do would be to increase the cost of prossibly the Twilight Council and Blink to help Terran players get more troops out before the build hits.
I will talk briefly on TvZ now: while I do not have much experience in the MU, I will say that the mine nerf was too strong. I know I will get attacked for this, but this is not actually just an opinion that I share. Many top Zergs when the nerf came out said things like "top zergs are already splitting their units against mines". Suppy even said on State of the Game in regards to the nerf (sorry, no exact quote here) that mines were not that big of a problem at that point because most players were beginning to split their zerglings and banelings against them quite well, so the nerf wasn't even needed in the first place. Now, if what Suppy, and many other top zergs, said is true, then it sounds like the nerf itself was not needed and swung a very even MU off balance. I would like to see the mine returned to its former glory, even if my probes die because of it because they are such a key part of the game for TvZ, and the nerf that hit them has really shown that as Terrans have fallen left and right due to not having very good splash vs Zerg anymore.
Thanks for reading. Let me know what you guys think of my suggestions. I'm going back into hiding until then.
|
On July 01 2014 07:19 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 07:02 Salient wrote:On July 01 2014 03:55 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 01 2014 02:52 Salient wrote:
This article is is beyond biased. It is almost dishonest to use pre-patch statistics to support the notion that Terran is underpowered. Since the recent slew of Terran buffs, Terran is now favored in all match ups. Buffed Widow mines and hellbats plus the removal of great blink maps has made a big impact. TL should be ashamed to have this piece anywhere other than in the blog section. The only match up where Terran is favored is TvT. I can honestly not tell if some of these posts are just trolling anymore - the record of Premier/Major tournaments for 2014 show Terran to be non-existent and the patch will not have much impact on this. Your own personal troubles against Terran are not reflective of the balance situation, only your own inadequacies. Against Zerg something needs to be done about Muta flocks and their insane health regeneration. Buffing WMs will not work as most pros have an overseer with the flock. Turrets are useless as soon as the flock gets to a 7 or more and Thors are too expensive and slow. Push out as Terran and there is an extremely high risk that your base will be wrecked by a Muta counter-attack whilst you are still trying to clear creep in the middle of the map. Nerfing Muta regen would be welcome. Wrong. You can make up your opinions. But you shouldn't make up your facts. Terran is favored in TvP. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ It's all about how you interpret statistics though. You cannot look at naked win/rates, and that is unfortunately what David Kim is doing. The reason for this is that when one race is underpowered, the players of the race will drop down in leagues, which causes fewer players of the UP race in master/GM. Win/rates, however stay close to 50/50, because that's how the ladder system is designed. Thus, the only relevant metric for assessing ladder balance is looking at race distribution. According to Nios.Kr terran only has 24% players in GM and 28% in masters league, while they should have had 30% assuming the average terran player is equally good as the average zerg/protoss/random player. Regarding Aliguac statistics, when one race gets underpowered, it will have fewer players being able to get far enough in tournaments, which means that the Aliguac database won't pick them up. This means that the Aliguac database will only pick up the games played by very the best players of the UP race while having more games played by players from the weaker races. So if you go in and study Aliguac numbers you will notice that there only was a terran player in a non-mirror matchup in 57% of all games (in June so far). Compare that to the 70% of protoss/zerg, and the balance issue is quite significant. Once against, be aware that win/rates significantly underestimates the real issue here. Because Aliguac statistics only picks up the very best terran players against a higher number of protoss/zergs that doesn't neccsarily have the same skill. As an example, if the 5th best terran player in the world is being faced up against the 50th best zerg/toss, the terran player should (If the game was balanced and average skill level of zerg/toss was = average skill of terran) have a w/r above 50%. However, looking at Aliguac statistics (for June at least), that is not the case. So if you study the statistics in a way that makes sense, you cannot come to any other conclusion than terran being significiantly underpowered.
Great post, but i will give my 2 cents.
Race distribution: representation in GM is indeed a good indicative of balance, and on the Kr ladder its also a good measure of balance at pro level. Balance can change in different levels of play, if balance must be adjust to the best play available then it must take into account mostly the pro games. But those people can switch races climbing the ladder.
But yeah, 24% is big.
Winrates: First of all your logic does not apply to proleague and some other formats that much (team leagues, pool play, group stages), since losing players are not immediately kicked.
Aligulac: If fewer players advance into tournaments and winrates are still close to 50% that means other players are winning/making deep runs (blame Taeja), that means assymetry in skill not really balance. The race is not necessarily UP. Aligulac is more influenced by results from better players, that do exist for terran.
Representation: Less games from a race can simply indicate that a race is less popular between pros. Im not sure about the actual distribution of race choice for pros but 29.38% of grandmaster koreans play terran, with 30.49% for all leagues. It fells like all those 10.13% randoms pick either protoss or zerg in higher leagues, when random is rare.
Im not saying you are wrong, but i think its even trickier, winrates are relevant and race distribution is not that great to measure balance.
What is clear for me is that terran is harder (has a higher skill cap), but not really weak (maybe a little). There is skill assymetry even at the top for terran, thats why MVP dominated when others stayed even with zergs and protoss. I think its clear that a design issue exist, while the balance issue is probably a less relevant problem right now. I say live with it (with the design issue, not the balance one).
|
Read. Every. Word. Fantastic read.
I doubt many would disagree with me when I say Blizzard has a reputation for being slow to make changes. I personally agree with that stance, whilst many others no doubt think it wrong. But after reading this article I'm left thinking that it's not that Blizzard are slow to adapt - it's that they've fucked up time after time. Am I being fair in saying that? Or have I been brainwashed by the above?
TLDR (of the article not this post); Give Mr Kim the boot, and let someone else have a go. It's time the shit rolled uphill for a change, that is, if you happen to agree with this article anyway.
Keep up the fine writting TheDwf, it's brillant articles like these that spark debate (for good or bad, agreeing or disagreeing) And who knows maybe might even bring about possitive change to the game we're all passonate about.
But hey, I'm not in the top 2% of GM (nowhere bloody near) So my opinion doesn't matter or count.
And do you know the worst thing about all of this? I ate all 4 of my blueberry muffins reading this. Now I have none for tomorrow  Dam you TheDwf, you owe me two muffins.
|
On June 30 2014 07:36 FlowOfIdeas wrote:
Shut up, Terran dominated starcraft for 2 years, and long before that in brood war.
Cool, which Brood War Mod was that, I didn't play it!
Also: 2 yrs, rly? Like during the 1 year of Broodlord Winfestor?
You seem to have another, more awesome version of the game, can you send it to me via PM?
|
On June 29 2014 20:10 Jonicc wrote:
How much time did it take you to write this article?
you sig makes this even better
|
On July 01 2014 07:02 Salient wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 03:55 DeadByDawn wrote:On July 01 2014 02:52 Salient wrote:
This article is is beyond biased. It is almost dishonest to use pre-patch statistics to support the notion that Terran is underpowered. Since the recent slew of Terran buffs, Terran is now favored in all match ups. Buffed Widow mines and hellbats plus the removal of great blink maps has made a big impact. TL should be ashamed to have this piece anywhere other than in the blog section. The only match up where Terran is favored is TvT. I can honestly not tell if some of these posts are just trolling anymore - the record of Premier/Major tournaments for 2014 show Terran to be non-existent and the patch will not have much impact on this. Your own personal troubles against Terran are not reflective of the balance situation, only your own inadequacies. Against Zerg something needs to be done about Muta flocks and their insane health regeneration. Buffing WMs will not work as most pros have an overseer with the flock. Turrets are useless as soon as the flock gets to a 7 or more and Thors are too expensive and slow. Push out as Terran and there is an extremely high risk that your base will be wrecked by a Muta counter-attack whilst you are still trying to clear creep in the middle of the map. Nerfing Muta regen would be welcome. Wrong. You can make up your opinions. But you shouldn't make up your facts. Terran is favored in TvP. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
Actually, win rates only denote changes in balance and are not an indicator of balance itself. If TvP is at a 52-48 split favoring Terran currently, that only means that Terran is doing better in the matchup relative to what they were before.
Obviously reality is not as black and white as this, but here's an example to illustrate the point. If Protoss representation was already so low that only the top 5 Protoss players were playing against the top 15 Terran players (In a tournament such as GSL for example), even at 50-50 winrates TvP is not 'balanced' if the top 5 Protoss are consistently beating rank 15-8 Terran and consistently losing to rank 7-1 Terran.
|
Havent followed Sc2 in a long time, but that was a really good read and impressively long 
|
1. We need Chanman or Artosis to do a show about just this article.
2. Just because it's blatantly biased, you have to give the author credit for the redonculous amount of research that he did.
3. Every Terran unit needs looking at so that all the units can be viable.
|
Winrates: First of all your logic does not apply to proleague and some other formats that much (team leagues, pool play, group stages), since losing players are not immediately kicked.
Aligulac: If fewer players advance into tournaments and winrates are still close to 50% that means other players are winning/making deep runs (blame Taeja), that means assymetry in skill not really balance. The race is not necessarily UP. Aligulac is more influenced by results from better players, that do exist for terran.
The logic does always apply though. But ofc, the effect isn't as strong in PL as it is on the ladder. After a patch had arrived at the ladder, it should only take a couple of weeks before w/r are back to 50/50. In PL, it may never get there, however, it will still go towards 50/50. Like if one race is extremely UP, then teams will have fewer players of that race on their roster and send out fewer players to play in PL, which brings w/r's closer to 50/50. But this proces obviously takes longer than the ladder-adjustment.
If fewer terran players advance into tournaments, but the few remaining terran players perform extrremely well, win/rates should be above 50%. Like if we have one tournament with the 100 best toss/zerg players in the world, and only the 3 best terran players. Then we would expect terran win/rates to be far above 50%.
Representation: Less games from a race can simply indicate that a race is less popular between pros. Im not sure about the actual distribution of race choice for pros but 29.38% of grandmaster koreans play terran, with 30.49% for all leagues. It fells like all those 10.13% randoms pick either protoss or zerg in higher leagues, when random is rare.
Im not saying you are wrong, but i think its even trickier, winrates are relevant and race distribution is not that great to measure balance.
Notice, that I stated that terran is UP assuming the average terran player is equally skilled as the average protoss/zerg player, which is an extremely fair assumption. You simply cannot assume that the reasoning for once race underperforming signifciantly is due to the players just being bad. If that logic was applied, there wouldn't have been a single patch after the release of WOL.
If we go back in time to early WOL, where Zerg in retrorepect was considered very UP, we will find a similar type of debate. Terran players were saying "L2P" Zergs. FD/Nestea/Idra were winning (like Taeja is now). Dustin Browder, was arguing that TvZ win/rates were close to 50/50 and thus was reluctant to balance it, but Aliguac distribution statistics pointed heavily in favour of Zerg being extremely UP/terran being OP.
FYI, the balance issue (today) isn't just amongst pro players/competitive players, as terrain in master league is underpresented as well.
|
WoL was so much better. I really think they need to let go of David Kim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
