EPTWelcome to ZParcraft II - Page 57
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Nightshake
France412 Posts
| ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On July 02 2014 01:42 fruity. wrote: Indeed. As a previous poster in this thread mentioned, Protoss should be tweaked so the cream of the players can show off their skills more etc. For example (as mentioned) By altering chronoboost. I'm not sayiong that's the answer, just an example. Watching Maru split a group of bio to survive against banelings leaves me in awe of his skill. But is there a similar aspect to Protoss play? I don't say that to flame or insult Protoss, but would like to see mid to late game Protoss play evolve in to something other than the deathball, and so that the top protoss players can show their skill set more, and leave me in awe aswell. I want SC2 to evole in to an RTS where macro, micro and above all else raw skill and talent matter most. It's honestly the fault of the casters, not the game. Most of them don't understand zerg or protoss well enough to explain the differences, and thus nobody knows what to look for. However, that does not mean the solution is to make protoss and zerg more like terran. Terran is distinct because it has that playstyle. Instead, people should take the time to ask "What about their play makes Classic, Parting, Soo, Zest, or Soulkey better than mid-level zerg and protoss players?" The answer isn't that hard to find, and it's not 'macro' or 'micro' or 'injects'. If micro made the best terrans in the world, MKP would be winning everything right now. Maru is much better than MKP for a variety of reasons, and it's not because his micro is better. The same is true for protoss and zerg players. Starcraft is first and foremost a strategy game. There are so many elements involved beyond the engagements that make a good player, ranging from properly interpreting limited information to army movement patterns and map vision usage, as well as transition timings and choices. It's not a failure of the game that the casual fan doesn't understand these concepts, it's a failure of the casters to explain it, and I'd rather not have the game toned down to the casual fan. If the game remains less popular than LoL for that reason, I can live with it. | ||
|
DeadByDawn
United Kingdom476 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteCrane
United Kingdom9 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/13272037737 Of course, I may have made bad mistakes and I can't really hope it will go beyond an extension mod, but I hope my heart is in the right place. If anyone has time to analyse it and leave comments or reviews, I'll be most grateful (it's available on both EU and NA and is called "Kit's Balance Suggestion Mod"). | ||
|
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On July 02 2014 02:40 CakeSauc3 wrote: Couldn't agree more. As a Terran player these buffs are not what I want... I want a late game Terran army with more options early  Put it this way - what you are asking for is a lot more involved and complicated than reverting a nerf that was made while the game was balanced.. a totally different viable unit comp would be sweet - but if they can't even manage to find 1 viable unit comp I think this is sort of a stretch..at least until LOTV.. we have plenty of games (an adequate sample size) where Z dealt totally fine with the old widow-mine.. fix that and then work on creating diversity without crippling the only viable unit comp played at the highest level. | ||
|
Roswell
United States250 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12683 Posts
You heard it here first guys. The reason why harass is hard for you is because players are getting lazier and not protoss got a stronger defense or stronger creep for zerg. Come on terrans, bw was harder, why you can't do better harass and macro | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On July 02 2014 08:45 Roswell wrote: Does anyone have overall TvZ and TvP premiere tourney game results from the last year or so? Thats the only neutral stat since you can just say there are less terran pro players hence why there are less of them making it to the ro8 etc Imagine a tourney where there is 15 protoss and one terran. The terran win 2 matches. Stats TvP on this tournament will be TvP : 66%. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9427 Posts
On July 02 2014 08:20 WhiteCrane wrote: For a while I wanted to attempt to create a "Balance Suggestion" extension mod that tries to address common complaints but without drastically changing the match-up. This is probably blantant and shameless advertising on my behalf, but I developed a mod that used a lot of the research discussed in the article, and I have to say 'thank you so much' for it. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/13272037737 Of course, I may have made bad mistakes and I can't really hope it will go beyond an extension mod, but I hope my heart is in the right place. If anyone has time to analyse it and leave comments or reviews, I'll be most grateful (it's available on both EU and NA and is called "Kit's Balance Suggestion Mod"). Afterburner cannot cost energy without totally changing how terran play the game. Also given that you make a lot of small changes that doens't really seem veyr important. For a balance-only mod, that seems quite off. | ||
|
Ravomat
Germany422 Posts
On July 02 2014 08:06 DeadByDawn wrote: Seems that the work put into this has caused Blizz to finally consider fixing this rather than waiting for what seems an eternity. Shame that they are buffing the M* units again, what about the iconic Siege Tank?? Still, good job TheDwf. They are not trying to fix the game. They are thinking of applying some more bandaids to the inherent playstyle of bio based armies. They are trying to force that style to work. These changes merely allow Terran to prolong the midgame by trading armies better/doing more economic damage thus improving their ability to snowball in that time without addressing any of the late-game issues. | ||
|
Roswell
United States250 Posts
On July 02 2014 08:56 Faust852 wrote: Imagine a tourney where there is 15 protoss and one terran. The terran win 2 matches. Stats TvP on this tournament will be TvP : 66%. Overall, so what all games TvP and TvZ are from premiere tourneys. As in all 6,342 of them or whatever the number is. All other stats are skewed more. | ||
|
WhiteCrane
United Kingdom9 Posts
On July 02 2014 09:01 Hider wrote: Afterburner cannot cost energy without totally changing how terran play the game. Also given that you make a lot of small changes that doens't really seem veyr important. For a balance-only mod, that seems quite off. There were a few aesthetic changes that aren't really related to balance, so I guess calling it a 'balance mod' is misleading of me. It's not meant to be a band-aid change though, but some base tweaking without fundamentally changing the way the races are played. Afterburners requiring energy is meant to make the ability more tactical, and also doubles as a subtle defence against High Templar, as it siphons off excess energy and hence increases their survivability against Feedback. I'm trying to encourage different styles of play, if niche at best, like the Sentry energy upgrade allows Hallucination to be used more often, as well as allowing Guardian Shield to be used as soon as it's warped in. The Robotics Facility requirement, besides being logical for a robotic unit's upgrade, is to prevent it from being used in early timing attacks. | ||
|
GoStu
Canada60 Posts
On July 02 2014 02:04 y0su wrote: blizzard responds This seems strange. To me, the biggest issue underlying TvP is that the Protoss can get away with murder due to the safety offered by the MSC, specifically the power of Photon overcharge. Tweaking that downward (and what the hell, add a 50/50 research to use Time Warp or something) would make that matchup a little more variable. The biggest takeaway I got from the entire OP is that Terran has to prepare for the worst from Protoss in the first 10 minutes, while the Protoss can play more or less like it's NR10. I don't think PvP would suffer too much with a weaker overcharge as it'd still be a defender's advantage, albeit a weaker one. TvZ might benefit a bit from the mine buff. I don't know much about that matchup. Playing around with the unload speed, maybe as an upgrade (campaign drop tubes, anyone?) would probably extend the longevity of drop play a bit past the mid game, and would make later doom drops scarier I suppose. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
I'm all for being able to save medivacs from easy blink sniping, but I hesitate to say that's what Terran needs today for game balance. If they're beefier in TvZ/TvP, they're beefier in TvT, and that could become a greater problem. That's just speculation on my part; it could be helpful and part of a miraculous turnaround in a healing balance patch. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
| ||
|
Caihead
Canada8550 Posts
On July 02 2014 08:51 ETisME wrote: You heard it here first guys. The reason why harass is hard for you is because players are getting lazier and not protoss got a stronger defense or stronger creep for zerg. Come on terrans, bw was harder, why you can't do better harass and macro Yea terrans, it doesn't matter if your hellions get warded off by queens / spines / stalkers at the third base, just run them into the natural where they die to the main army sitting at the ramp. How do people not realize that the play style is completely different now. In bw zergs used to expand to a different corner for their third / fourth base so you could actually harass multiple locations, and doing run-bys or drops with vultures vs protoss were way more dangerous than hellions since they could plant mines and by themselves ward off dragoons or escape. | ||
|
Ottoman042
United States35 Posts
| ||
|
Sienionelain
33 Posts
On July 02 2014 05:59 Poisonbox wrote: Well than leave the whole statistical part aside or do it right. In this post I study the argued underrepresetation of Terran players in higher leagues through statistical analysis. The used method is Pearson's goodness of fit test, which tests if a sample is drawn from a theoretical distribution. First I take data of global racial distributions across GM and Master leagues and across all leagues. Now assuming that each race has equally skilled players and equal chances to progress in leagues the racial distributions of all players and players in GM or Master leagues should be the same. Data used is from SC2Ranks and it was viewed 2.7.2014. In this post I conclude that Terran is underrepresented globally in both GM and masters leagues. Reasons for and implications of this underrepresentation is not discussed. For the brevity of this post I don't present Pearson's goodness of fit test here but I provide a link to the Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson's_chi-squared_test Assumptions for the data used are that skill is distributed evenly across all players and that every race has equal chances of progressing through leagues. Random palyers are not taken in to account because they clearly do not fulfill the assumptions. For example nearly ten percent of players play random but only three percent of players in master league are random players. Therefore taking random players into account would lead into the test failing. Furthermore leaving random players out of the analysis should not have any impact on the results. Theoretical frequencies for Zerg, Protoss and Terran players is taken from all the playerbase, for this is the distribution that all leagues racial distribution should follow should the assuptions about the data hold. The theoretical frequencies for Zerg, Protoss and Terran players are 33.8, 32.5 and 33.6 players out of 100 players respectively. In masters league there are in total 5784 non-random players globally. Now the theoretical frequencies of the races in masters league are 1956.397939 Zerg players, 1881.787856 Protoss players and 1945.814205 Terran players. The observed frequencies are in the same order 2177, 1916 and 1691. The null hypothesis of this test is, that the racial distribution of masters league is drawn from the presented theoretical distribution. The alternative hypothesis is that the racial distribution is not drawn from the theoretical distribution. I choose the significance level of the test to be 0.05. The Chi-squared test statistic for this data is 58.86614133 and the p-value for Chi-squared distribution with two degrees of freedom is 1.6496E-13. Because the p-value of the test statistic is smaller than 0.05 the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis stands. The same statistical analysis can be made for GM league and the Chi-squared test statistic then is 26.19473662 and the p-value 2.05062E-06. Because the p-value of the test statistic is smaller than 0.05 the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis stands. Therefore there is statistically significant evidence that the racial distribution of masters and GM leagues is not that of the whole playerbase. Also I observe that Terran is the only race thats representation in these leagues is smaller than the theoretical distribution expects. From these two observation I conclude that Terran is underrepresented in GM and Masters leagues. TL;DR There is statistically significant evidence that Terran is underrepresented in GM and Masters leagues | ||
|
fruity.
England1711 Posts
On July 02 2014 08:05 Whitewing wrote: It's honestly the fault of the casters, not the game. Most of them don't understand zerg or protoss well enough to explain the differences, and thus nobody knows what to look for. There was an excellent META episode last year where Artosis was host to TLO, Ret and Harstem. At one point this very subject came up and Ret waxxed lyrical in a most eloquent and expressive way about casters, and how they would focus on the mundane whilst the player is pulling of some awesome move. Perhaps my mentioning this might prod someones memory who happens to know which META it was. It's worth a watch if you missed it the first time round. I think however to get the level of insight in to a race which would enable a caster to point out all the subtle nuances, can only be achieved by playing the game at the very highest level and for 6 odd hours a day, in short, you have to be a pro-gamer. And that's not feasible for a caster. Which is why I love the fact that pro-gamers colour commentating along side the play by play caster seems to be becomming the norm. Appologies for taking the thread slightly off track, but I am hoping RedEye is reading this! Split screens dam it! I want to be able to watch from the players point of view, heck give us 3 streams per game.. One for the usual in game observer and one each for the players point of view. Watching a top Zerg like Jaedong hit his injects whilst spamming creep tumours left right and center all the while building units and dealing with a push, it's nuts to watch! | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26262 Posts
More broadcasts with things like this please. Hard to do live, but highlights packages and uploaded VoDs should be exploring these kind of avenues IMO. | ||
| ||
