|
Hey,
so today I summed up some stats from all premier tournaments since the last patch, and the 3 WCS regions becaus the majority of the games were played on this version of Starcraft.
Most of the time I included the Ro32 onwards (if not i wrote it there):
2014 DreamHack Open: Winter
HomeStory Cup X
2014 WCS Global Finals
MSI Beat IT 2014
2014 DreamHack Open Stockholm
2014 Red Bull Battle Grounds: Washington
2014 DreamHack Open Moscow (Ro16+)
2014 KeSPA Cup
IEM Season IX - Toronto (Ro16+)
2014 Red Bull Battle Grounds: Detroit
2014 Taiwan Open
2014 WCS S3 America
2014 WCS S3 Europe
2014 GSL S3 Code S
The stats since the widow mine patch are:
TvZ - games ( -series): 167 - 140, 54.4% (64 - 48, 57.1%)
TvP - games ( -series): 172 - 129, 57.1% (69 - 35, 66.3%)
I hope posting this is allowed. I will update this as soon as I can and other tournaments such as IEM San Jose or Hot6Cup are finished.
|
some great research there, how was the stats before the patch?
|
On November 30 2014 23:07 bypLy wrote:
some great research there, how was the stats before the patch?
I didn't collect those, but I think they're both very much in Zerg's and Protoss' favor, if you include Ro32 onwards.
However these stats kinda confirm what many people already suspected, that Protoss needs massive help against Terran.
|
Well, maybe a summary or point about the stats would guide the thread in the right direction rather than just balance whining which is what I imagine it will turn into.
For me, when I read this, I was really surprised at the 57% when I read it was TvP... but then I got them reversed. 66% sounds about right to me... I've talked to a few other top P players and some Ts as well on NA... It's really tough especially with pretty much only one way to play right now. More than any balance complaints or anything else I just wish Protoss had a bit more diversity other than either blink or straight colo openers. Luckily at least it looks like Legacy is going to be adding a ton of new aspects to PvT in particular due to all the timing changes so it will definitely be interesting!
|
even as a zerg its pretty easy to see how protoss is kinda getting wholloped by terran atm, the combination of WM buffs killing Ht play and hugeley T favoured maps is hitting prettyhard, honestly though we cant really complain untill we get a new map pool to see if they were overbuffed
im also of the opinion T is definatley favoured in TvZ aswell but id say the protoss players are getting it worse
|
|
|
Well maps don't matter anymore given the state of the dreampool, or should I say Blizzard's troll pool.
|
I'm sorry, but contrarily to what many people believe, pure statistics are not enough to make conclusions. Not only do you need to include stats from before the patch, but you also has to look at why are these stats the way they are.
|
|
|
On November 30 2014 23:15 -Kyo- wrote:
Well, maybe a summary or point about the stats would guide the thread in the right direction rather than just balance whining which is what I imagine it will turn into.
For me, when I read this, I was really surprised at the 57% when I read it was TvP... but then I got them reversed. 66% sounds about right to me... I've talked to a few other top P players and some Ts as well on NA... It's really tough especially with pretty much only one way to play right now. More than any balance complaints or anything else I just wish Protoss had a bit more diversity other than either blink or straight colo openers. Luckily at least it looks like Legacy is going to be adding a ton of new aspects to PvT in particular due to all the timing changes so it will definitely be interesting!
Do you mean like balance proposals? Because in my opinion a simple reduction of widow mine splash against shields (like down to +10 or +15 flat, or maybe reinclude actual splash for the +shield damage instaed of the flat damage) would hugely help PvT get back on the tracks.
And reincluding Transformation servos, but reducing it's cost to 50/50/60 seconds will balance out Terran options in the early game, both being more commitment and easier to scout, and help Mech a little compared to before the hellbat patch.
|
On November 30 2014 23:30 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 23:15 -Kyo- wrote:
Well, maybe a summary or point about the stats would guide the thread in the right direction rather than just balance whining which is what I imagine it will turn into.
For me, when I read this, I was really surprised at the 57% when I read it was TvP... but then I got them reversed. 66% sounds about right to me... I've talked to a few other top P players and some Ts as well on NA... It's really tough especially with pretty much only one way to play right now. More than any balance complaints or anything else I just wish Protoss had a bit more diversity other than either blink or straight colo openers. Luckily at least it looks like Legacy is going to be adding a ton of new aspects to PvT in particular due to all the timing changes so it will definitely be interesting! Do you mean like balance proposals? Because in my opinion a simple reduction of widow mine splash against shields (like down to +10 or +15 flat, or maybe reinclude actual splash for the +shield damage instaed of the flat damage) would hugely help PvT get back on the tracks. And reincluding Transformation servos, but reducing it's cost to 50/50/60 seconds will balance out Terran options in the early game, both being more commitment and easier to scout, and help Mech a little compared to before the hellbat patch.
honestly i hope blizzard just tries a less T favoured map pool and see how that goes first, because while protoss is struggling id rather not have it swing back to terran getting curbstomped after being over-nerfed again
the transformation servos change would have a much much bigger effect in TvZ than tvp tbh and mean zergs can play a bit more greedy earlygame to get to midgame ona good footing.surprise mech really isnt a problem in TvP or TvZ because its so easy to scout, while you can proxy a stargate or dt or even use overlord creep to hide zerg tech, hiding 3+factories is pretty impossible, and heck even 2 factories gives away its not bio :S
|
Map pool of yeonsu clones incoming next season.
|
On November 30 2014 23:37 Enigmasc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 23:30 SoulmaN__ wrote:On November 30 2014 23:15 -Kyo- wrote:
Well, maybe a summary or point about the stats would guide the thread in the right direction rather than just balance whining which is what I imagine it will turn into.
For me, when I read this, I was really surprised at the 57% when I read it was TvP... but then I got them reversed. 66% sounds about right to me... I've talked to a few other top P players and some Ts as well on NA... It's really tough especially with pretty much only one way to play right now. More than any balance complaints or anything else I just wish Protoss had a bit more diversity other than either blink or straight colo openers. Luckily at least it looks like Legacy is going to be adding a ton of new aspects to PvT in particular due to all the timing changes so it will definitely be interesting! Do you mean like balance proposals? Because in my opinion a simple reduction of widow mine splash against shields (like down to +10 or +15 flat, or maybe reinclude actual splash for the +shield damage instaed of the flat damage) would hugely help PvT get back on the tracks. And reincluding Transformation servos, but reducing it's cost to 50/50/60 seconds will balance out Terran options in the early game, both being more commitment and easier to scout, and help Mech a little compared to before the hellbat patch. the transformation servos change would have a much much bigger effect in TvZ than TvP
That's the purpose of it, Zerg has big time trouble scouting anything other than 3CC in ZvT, so reducing the amount of options Terran has will help equalize the matchup.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
This thread can only end well
|
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not.
|
On the ginormous designated balance discussion thread AntiRW posted stats of TvP/PvZ/TvZ including only code S participants or top50 aligulac players, terran pretty much runs away with it, very similar to those stats, a new map pool will help but unless it's a ridiculous map pool I think Terran's will still be favored, also you're going to have to come up with a map pool that doesnt favor Protoss vs Zerg, and doesnt favor Terran in either MU's.
|
On November 30 2014 23:20 SatedSC2 wrote:
Protoss doesn't need help vs. Terran regarding patches to units. We just need retarded maps like Nimbus removing from the game.
It's the same as what Terran needed when Protoss were dominating: They needed retarded Blink maps removing from the game. Instead they got favourable maps and units buffs at the same time, leading to the current situation.
Hopefully Blizzard are smart enough to realise that it is only the maps that need to be sorted out else we'll end up in another situation were Terran can't win anything again. Even if I am wrong and it is more than just the maps, only the maps should be changed first so that we know for sure that it isn't the maps. Changing more than one variable at once is not the way to go.
Definitely exactly this. Get rid of the dreadful Catallena/Nimbus etc, give us a sound map pool and see how it goes. Then tamper with balance if things are still problematic. Not two things at the same time.
|
On December 01 2014 00:30 sibs wrote:
On the ginormous designated balance discussion thread AntiRW posted stats of TvP/PvZ/TvZ including only code S participants or top50 aligulac players, terran pretty much runs away with it, very similar to those stats, a new map pool will help but unless it's a ridiculous map pool I think Terran's will still be favored, also you're going to have to come up with a map pool that doesnt favor Protoss vs Zerg, and doesnt favor Terran in either MU's.
Some of the maps are pretty ridiculous in Terran's favor, at least in some matchups. Nimbus TvP might be the most imbalanced map on TLPD since forever. And Catallena and Foxtrot are still pretty ridiculous, even if not Nimbus level. You don't need to have a ridiculous mappool, just throw out the maps that are under 45-55.
It's inevitable that sometimes some a will play out in favor of a race and it has always been like that. But usually that means like 45-55. Going close to 40-60 and lower is inacceptable. Even the maps that Terran's complaint about because of blink allins weren't half as bad statswise.
Also usually mappools swing both ways, but these days in PvT Protoss' best choices are more or less 1-3 balanced maps and from there it is all downhill with 4maps lower than 45-55 stats.
|
On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not.
It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes.
On December 01 2014 00:30 sibs wrote:
On the ginormous designated balance discussion thread AntiRW posted stats of TvP/PvZ/TvZ including only code S participants or top50 aligulac players, terran pretty much runs away with it, very similar to those stats, a new map pool will help but unless it's a ridiculous map pool I think Terran's will still be favored, also you're going to have to come up with a map pool that doesnt favor Protoss vs Zerg, and doesnt favor Terran in either MU's.
Which points to what may be the main issue, as in the huge amount of constraints on map design caused by race design.
The way things are going, we'll end up with only variations on the same map because anything else favors a specific race.
It wouldn't be that bad if all races were more or less equally favored over the entire map pool, but still... being able to have more varied maps without breaking balance would be nice. Hopefully LotV will help (zergs being able to break force fields is a good step in that direction... if it reaches beta).
|
Right where Terran's meant to be.
|
On November 30 2014 23:25 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 23:24 Incognoto wrote:
Well maps don't matter anymore given the state of the dreampool, or should I say Blizzard's troll pool. That's funny because Dreampool actually has less retarded maps than last season's map-pool did (at least in my opinion); not that Dreampool actually matters in this context because tournaments haven't been using it.
Indeed, to be fair I don't mind maps like Cloud Kingdom, Daybreak and so on. However XelNaga caverns? Metalopolis? Naaaaha come on Blizzard why.
I also find it distasteful that professional players can no longer use the ladder to practice for upcoming tournaments. Blizzard is basically saying, blizzcon is over, wcs is over, nothing else matters.
I find it silly at best, I suppose.
|
On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes.
In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind.
|
On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind.
I don't think that this statement really holds anymore. The statment was true when we were talking about the difference between Metalopolis Short Distance or Metalopolis Cross Distance in 2010-11. But bigger maps like Frost, Deadwing, Alterzim, Whirlwind, Star Station, Newkirk were all balanced or even Terran favored, unless some form of Terran nerfs were involved. (like Frost stats severely suffered in TvZ after the mine nerf; before that they were were balanced).
I think this has mainly to do with Speedmedivacs in HotS.
The distance of a map is not much more impactful than the layout of the main, natural or third base imo.
|
On November 30 2014 23:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 23:07 bypLy wrote:
some great research there, how was the stats before the patch? I didn't collect those, but I think they're both very much in Zerg's and Protoss' favor, if you include Ro32 onwards. However these stats kinda confirm what many people already suspected, that Protoss needs massive help against Terran.
lmao protoss doesn't need any help. there OP as fuck,
User was warned for this post
|
On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence.
They were, but since that time medivacs got a new free ability that allows them to zoom through any map pretty quickly 
They should maybe look at opening up the options of everyone else too.
You can't have maps with too many chokes because of force fields, small maps are too easy to rush/proxy on, you must make sure siege tanks can't reach mineral lines from unbreakable positions, big air spaces around bases and big open areas used to be advantageous for zergs but now it's more useful for terrans, ...
That's quite a lot of constraints, and the advantages given when they're not applied are not very well spread out over the various races.
I'd rather see the number of constraints getting lower than numbers being tweaked to try to balance out their impact. But there's only a chance for that in LotV, so until then, having a map pool that's not so terran favored would be a nice start. Even if it means having similar standard and boring maps. And then, try to address the map design issues with LotV.
|
On December 01 2014 01:24 DreamR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2014 23:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:On November 30 2014 23:07 bypLy wrote:
some great research there, how was the stats before the patch? I didn't collect those, but I think they're both very much in Zerg's and Protoss' favor, if you include Ro32 onwards. However these stats kinda confirm what many people already suspected, that Protoss needs massive help against Terran. lmao protoss doesn't need any help. there OP as fuck,
Nope. Check the OP. There you can find out if they're OP.
|
They should have never given the WM the +shield damage. It does more than enough damage since it was returned to it's original value. This buff seemed necessary at the time because the maps were so blink favored, but in reality it has killed zealot ht openings completely, which were some of the most fun and dynamic games for both sides of the mathup; reducing TvP to a predictable bio vs colossus play, with the occasional proxy stargate or blink based all in.
|
Its mostly the maps though combined with the widow mine change it seems to have added a mind block to most protoss, so it will take them a bit longer to adapt, but then they will strike back double as hard.
But widow mines do decide a few games, because of their probe killing capabilities. They should nerf probes to 25 hp 15 shield heh.
But it is a tough topic, because maps that don't play standard usually get sorted out, so people have no idea what to do if a map breaks away from the norm and don't even want to try. Which really blocks evolution of maps and its usually up to Blizzard to force changes to maps, because they have the power.
|
On December 01 2014 01:42 FeyFey wrote:
Its mostly the maps though combined with the widow mine change it seems to have added a mind block to most protoss, so it will take them a bit longer to adapt, but then they will strike back double as hard.
But widow mines do decide a few games, because of their probe killing capabilities. They should nerf probes to 25 hp 15 shield heh.
But it is a tough topic, because maps that don't play standard usually get sorted out, so people have no idea what to do if a map breaks away from the norm and don't even want to try. Which really blocks evolution of maps and its usually up to Blizzard to force changes to maps, because they have the power.
i really dont think its got much to do with adapting, protoss prettymuch has to go collossus because chargelot/Ht struggles vs mines ( tho honestly alotugh it was harder it was much more fun to watch than collosus)
the problem with this is protoss has to wait aages to get a third because while you can hold the natural with just 1 collossus+ some gateway units you cant hold a third till you have a sizeable army
its not protss has much options since you need someform of splash vs Terran unless your allining and really the two options are collosus or HT, so its not even like they can try stargate etc
tbh the thing thats screwing mosts zerg over is that you used to be able t play greedy then fight equal fotting vs bio mine ( or wait till he ran outa steam to take a 4th ) or you built up too many muta for him to deal with
niether style works particularly well anymore because you have to get banenest or roaches to defend possible hellbats shenanigans which means later ups later 4th etc
they also have hellion banshee to be wary about but tbh when dealt with properly hellion banshee sets both zerg and terran back equal ammounts (banshee delays his ups since he needs 2 banshees +cloak etc whereas the hellbatpushes just need an armory in terms of investment) , not to mention banshees are much easier to scout
|
On December 01 2014 01:42 FeyFey wrote:
Its mostly the maps though combined with the widow mine change it seems to have added a mind block to most protoss, so it will take them a bit longer to adapt, but then they will strike back double as hard.
But widow mines do decide a few games, because of their probe killing capabilities. They should nerf probes to 25 hp 15 shield heh.
But it is a tough topic, because maps that don't play standard usually get sorted out, so people have no idea what to do if a map breaks away from the norm and don't even want to try. Which really blocks evolution of maps and its usually up to Blizzard to force changes to maps, because they have the power.
In which way do the maps in the current tournament-mappool break away from the norm?
|
On December 01 2014 01:53 Enigmasc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 01:42 FeyFey wrote:
Its mostly the maps though combined with the widow mine change it seems to have added a mind block to most protoss, so it will take them a bit longer to adapt, but then they will strike back double as hard.
But widow mines do decide a few games, because of their probe killing capabilities. They should nerf probes to 25 hp 15 shield heh.
But it is a tough topic, because maps that don't play standard usually get sorted out, so people have no idea what to do if a map breaks away from the norm and don't even want to try. Which really blocks evolution of maps and its usually up to Blizzard to force changes to maps, because they have the power. tbh the thing thats screwing mosts zerg over is that you used to be able t play greedy then fight equal fotting vs bio mine ( or wait till he ran outa steam to take a 4th ) or you built up too many muta for him to deal with niether style works particularly well anymore because you have to get banenest or roaches to defend possible hellbats shenanigans which means later ups later 4th etc they also have hellion banshee to be wary about but tbh when dealt with properly hellion banshee sets both zerg and terran back equal ammounts (banshee delays his ups since he needs 2 banshees +cloak etc whereas the hellbatpushes just need an armory in terms of investment) , not to mention banshees are much easier to scout
Exactly, which is why you don't see Zergs go for the standard macro game anymore.
The most prominent example of this is Life, sure, he did win Blizzcon and we're all grateful for it, but he did cheese and all in his way towards it.
soO on the other hand tried to macro but eventually couldn't fight back even if he's easily the best macro Zerg out there.
|
I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month.
Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53.
Since then, parts of Hot6ix and HSC V and all of DH:W were completed, for an additional 4-4 from Hot6ix, 7-6 from HSC V, and 23-21 from DH:W, both favoring Zerg, which brings my earlier total to 51.7% in favor of Zerg from a score of 90-84.
I question the OP's methodology in using all games after the patch, because that suggests that all games after the patch fall under the same umbrella, that the situation today is the same as it was two months ago, and that simply isn't true. It takes time for responses to certain strategies to be figured out. Take the Hellbat push that Flash had such monstrous success with in Code S, yesterday ForGG tried it at least three times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure.
My post isn't, strictly speaking, necessary, because everybody is being quite level headed about results that are much worse than the reality today. But the aims of the OP are suspect. Nowhere does he suggest that ZvT winrate has gone up consistently and considerably the longer the patch has been out.
On December 01 2014 01:27 Maniak_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. They were, but since that time medivacs got a new free ability that allows them to zoom through any map pretty quickly They should maybe look at opening up the options of everyone else too.
Whirlwind Innovation vs DRG had speedy Medivacs, and that was smaller than Deadwing and Catallena. I'm very glad that the community is willing to look at the maps first in this situation, I just don't think the mistake Blizzard made was a rookie one. As you go on to say, there are very many things to factor into map design.
edit: updated with full HSC V results.
|
Canada13406 Posts
On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind.
No.
Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation.
Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014.
I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen.
the shortlist has a ton of maps I think it was around 30 or so? We had a LOT of entries into the contest afterall
Some of my favourites didnt make the finalists because we did a consensus vote for top 5 or w/e it was.
Blizz got the shortlist not the top 5 list and from it they looked at the maps and picked what they did and didnt like and ran with em. We got some great maps this season. There were some innovative and interesting builds this season as well which I am really glad for.
At the same time however we discovered another map concern - how much droppable space is too much? Catallena and Nimbus were tough before the mine patch for toss, and I think this was okay. Before that patch terrans were losing a LOT and Cata was good for SCV pulls, Nimbus less so, but Nimbus's rotational symmetry lead to a couple of good positions for Terran to spawn in and due to the 4p nature lessened the impact of very early proxy oracles - which meant more in base stargate openers than on the season 2 2p maps.
I think part of the reason toss might be having such a low win rate might be due to the fact that there simply are more 3-4player maps, making proxy oracle play and 10 gate play much weaker which we saw a LOT of is season 2 of 2014.
I for one think if we do change the maps and hope for a fix, it might work. It might not. I am not sure to be honest. I think the maps did a good job in season 3 but for reasons that differ from "making mines weaker". I think the aggressive options for P and all ins were really hurt with the map pool alone and by strengthening the mines on top of it and the drop space it became an issue.
However all this being said I really wish that templar openers were still viable, and that the next season map pool does make a difference.
I wish they had also never buffed the mine to begin with because I felt the maps were evening out TvP just fine! I don't play TvZ so I can't say how the maps did or didn't hurt them. I do know that nimbus used to be even more T favoured before some minor changes were made, where you could PF a third and then attack into the Z in 2/3 spawn positions on the map.
|
On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen.
Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation.
Agreed about Templar openers.
|
ForGG tried it five or six times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure.
Well, and how did the games end? Just because the rushes did not outright win doesn't mean they failed.
Though personally I think it has less to do with forgg doing hellbat pushes, but with Life playing very bad builds against them that can hold but fall behind by default, even against such commited allins.
|
On December 01 2014 02:36 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +ForGG tried it five or six times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure. Well, and how did the games end? Just because the rushes did not outright win doesn't mean they failed. Though personally I think it has less to do with forgg doing hellbat pushes, but with Life playing very bad builds against them that can hold but fall behind by default, even against such commited allins.
My point is specifically that the Hellbat push is nowhere near as scary as it used to be. I never implied that Terran is unable to transition from it into a macro game. Although in g5 of their second series, ForGG was in fact not able to transition from it into a macro game, because Life's immediate Roach counter pressure killed him dead.
|
This stats saves eSports 
|
Tournaments are also responsible for this.
I mean once Blizzcon was finished why did they stick to the old map pool.
If DH had replaced Nimbus and Foxtrot by Frost and Habitation Station, we would have got a much better tournament in terms of equality of win rates. For the record Nimbus has 35% win rate in PvT, Foxtrot has 42% (raw aligulac stats).
Hot6ix cup and IEM should also get rid of the most broken maps.
I also hope that in 2015 WCS system won't be so conservative in terms of map pool and let GSL/OSL add their own maps.
It is very hard to know what the meta will evolve to on each map, tournaments should always be allowed to remove maps that ends up being broken.
Last, why just 7 maps each season? it locks the map pool for all finals which are usually bo7, we should ahve 10 maps or so to work with. Moreover, it would allow to test some non-standard maps without breaking the balance in every tournament for the next 4 monthes....
|
On December 01 2014 02:45 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:36 Big J wrote:ForGG tried it five or six times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure. Well, and how did the games end? Just because the rushes did not outright win doesn't mean they failed. Though personally I think it has less to do with forgg doing hellbat pushes, but with Life playing very bad builds against them that can hold but fall behind by default, even against such commited allins. My point is specifically that the Hellbat push is nowhere near as scary as it used to be. I never implied that Terran is unable to transition from it into a macro game. Although in g5 of their second series, ForGG was in fact not able to transition from it into a macro game, because Life's immediate Roach counter pressure killed him dead.
My point is that if you defend them in ways that still make you lose the game then they are still as scary as ever. So despite agreeing that the hellbat pushes aren't as scary anymore, the chosen examples do not show that at all. Despite the g5 you pointed out.
(though the hellbat/banshee is just not a good hellbat push to begin with; it's like a zerg that goes for a roach/ling allin at the time he could do roach/bane)
|
On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. the shortlist has a ton of maps I think it was around 30 or so? We had a LOT of entries into the contest afterall Some of my favourites didnt make the finalists because we did a consensus vote for top 5 or w/e it was. Blizz got the shortlist not the top 5 list and from it they looked at the maps and picked what they did and didnt like and ran with em. We got some great maps this season. There were some innovative and interesting builds this season as well which I am really glad for. At the same time however we discovered another map concern - how much droppable space is too much? Catallena and Nimbus were tough before the mine patch for toss, and I think this was okay. Before that patch terrans were losing a LOT and Cata was good for SCV pulls, Nimbus less so, but Nimbus's rotational symmetry lead to a couple of good positions for Terran to spawn in and due to the 4p nature lessened the impact of very early proxy oracles - which meant more in base stargate openers than on the season 2 2p maps. I think part of the reason toss might be having such a low win rate might be due to the fact that there simply are more 3-4player maps, making proxy oracle play and 10 gate play much weaker which we saw a LOT of is season 2 of 2014. I for one think if we do change the maps and hope for a fix, it might work. It might not. I am not sure to be honest. I think the maps did a good job in season 3 but for reasons that differ from "making mines weaker". I think the aggressive options for P and all ins were really hurt with the map pool alone and by strengthening the mines on top of it and the drop space it became an issue. However all this being said I really wish that templar openers were still viable, and that the next season map pool does make a difference. I wish they had also never buffed the mine to begin with because I felt the maps were evening out TvP just fine! I don't play TvZ so I can't say how the maps did or didn't hurt them. I do know that nimbus used to be even more T favoured before some minor changes were made, where you could PF a third and then attack into the Z in 2/3 spawn positions on the map.
honestly its not that the maps are bad or ridiculously broken per se, moreso that the maps + terran buffs pushed them a little too far
i actually quite liked some of the maps such as merrygo-round for play etc its just they caused problems along with the buffs
(and merry could be tough PvZ too aswell tbh)
|
I think Blizz made the good choice. Terrans players are the most powerful lobby and whinners in Sc2 ^^. If P or Z are dominant we have shitstorms during months, but when T have stats like that, it's clearly not balance but T players think it is and forums are calm.
So, to save sc2 from balance drama, Blizz must make Terrans OP :p
|
On December 01 2014 02:58 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:45 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:36 Big J wrote:ForGG tried it five or six times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure. Well, and how did the games end? Just because the rushes did not outright win doesn't mean they failed. Though personally I think it has less to do with forgg doing hellbat pushes, but with Life playing very bad builds against them that can hold but fall behind by default, even against such commited allins. My point is specifically that the Hellbat push is nowhere near as scary as it used to be. I never implied that Terran is unable to transition from it into a macro game. Although in g5 of their second series, ForGG was in fact not able to transition from it into a macro game, because Life's immediate Roach counter pressure killed him dead. My point is that if you defend them in ways that still make you lose the game then they are still as scary as ever. So despite agreeing that the hellbat pushes aren't as scary anymore, the chosen examples do not show that at all. Despite the g5 you pointed out. (though the hellbat/banshee is just not a good hellbat push to begin with; it's like a zerg that goes for a roach/ling allin at the time he could do roach/bane)
There was a time when Zergs were saying Hellbat pushes themselves were undefendable. That is no longer the case. The meta has evolved. If you take nothing else from my post, then at least I am sure we can agree that this proves that metas do evolve, and so we cannot be sure where TvZ will be one month from now, because the way Hellbat games go has already changed from one month ago.
|
On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53.
You just have to love how people think how koreans are genetically better equipped to play starcraft or something.
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons.
Now to your stats: As I said, they're spoiled because you chose to cut into the actual happening games, because you personally thought they don't belong there. Just because you think all foreigners should lose to koreans all the time doesn't mean it actually is like that.
I on other hand chose all games which are relevant, and because in most qualifiers there is a HUGE skill difference until the semi-finals/ finals I didn't include them all together. I didn't include some Rounds of tournaments because they showed too much of a skill difference or contained too many low level players (for example DH: Moscow Ro32, featured so many local or in general unknown players that they would have broken the statistics. If you wanna know what happens if you include qualifiers, major tournaments, minor tournaments, weekly tournaments: Just look at the Terran-Goodfeel graph on Aligulac, it always says 50% for stats in the past year).
|
On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. You just have to love how people think how koreans are genetically better equipped to play starcraft or something. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons.
We've said this about foreigners in the past. It never ended how we imagined.
|
On December 01 2014 03:00 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:58 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 02:45 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:36 Big J wrote:ForGG tried it five or six times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure. Well, and how did the games end? Just because the rushes did not outright win doesn't mean they failed. Though personally I think it has less to do with forgg doing hellbat pushes, but with Life playing very bad builds against them that can hold but fall behind by default, even against such commited allins. My point is specifically that the Hellbat push is nowhere near as scary as it used to be. I never implied that Terran is unable to transition from it into a macro game. Although in g5 of their second series, ForGG was in fact not able to transition from it into a macro game, because Life's immediate Roach counter pressure killed him dead. My point is that if you defend them in ways that still make you lose the game then they are still as scary as ever. So despite agreeing that the hellbat pushes aren't as scary anymore, the chosen examples do not show that at all. Despite the g5 you pointed out. (though the hellbat/banshee is just not a good hellbat push to begin with; it's like a zerg that goes for a roach/ling allin at the time he could do roach/bane) There was a time when Zergs were saying Hellbat pushes themselves were undefendable. That is no longer the case. The meta has evolved. If you take nothing else from my post, then at least I am sure we can agree that this proves that metas do evolve, and so we cannot be sure where TvZ will be one month from now, because the way Hellbat games go has already changed from one month ago.
Well, to put this up front, I don't think TvZ is broken currently. Aside from 1-3maps, the matchup is in a great state. I believe similar things could have been said before the last patch! For example if you watch what forgg did in his games against Life, it had nothing to do with the WM or Thor patch. He even won with aggressive Mech without Ravens, something that Terran's have been calling impossible since the start of HotS.
Matchups always evolve. And they always evolve both ways. If we kept this in mind, we would never "need" changes, because we can't predict how the matchups will evolve and you can always clutch on a positive evolution in a race's play.
Which is why I don't really like that argument, because you can always justify any state of a matchup with it, regardless of how one-sided it "currently" is. (again, I don't think TvZ is one-sided currently; it's just your argumentation that I don't agree with)
There was a time when Zergs were saying Hellbat pushes themselves were undefendable.
Those people were probably not very high caliber. What I have heard from players like Snute and experienced myself is that you needed to be way more greedier after the WM patch (go to 80drones instead of 65-70 in macro games), so you were much more susceptible to such rushes. In particular at that point in time when Terrans themselves hadn't figured out how to properly hellbat push, hence scouting hellbat pushes was much harder because they were being done of so many different setups and it wasn't clear that some just weren't good to begin with.
|
On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried
Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance.
|
On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not.
That's really an awful idea. Sc2 has massive restrictions on map design as it is, we don't need more. Map-making is already like juggling chainsaws where the slightest variation can break the map in any MU. If we keep blaming the maps over and over we are going to paint ourselves into a corner where we'll play on 5 different tilesets of Frost in 2016.
The problems are endemic to the the game, they cannot be scapegoated away on maps.
Edit: not that it really matters right now, with LotV poised to turn the game upside down, of which I heartily condone.
|
every time there's a tournament result: HERE ARE SOME STATISTICS GUISE...
|
On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. You just have to love how people think how koreans are genetically better equipped to play starcraft or something. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons. Now to your stats: As I said, they're spoiled because you chose to cut into the actual happening games, because you personally thought they don't belong there. Just because you think all foreigners should lose to koreans all the time doesn't mean it actually is like that. I on other hand chose all games which are relevant, and because in most qualifiers there is a HUGE skill difference until the semi-finals/ finals I didn't include them all together. I didn't include some Rounds of tournaments because they showed too much of a skill difference or contained too many low level players (for example DH: Moscow Ro32, featured so many local or in general unknown players that they would have broken the statistics. If you wanna know what happens if you include qualifiers, major tournaments, minor tournaments, weekly tournaments: Just look at the Terran-Goodfeel graph on Aligulac, it always says 50% for stats in the past year).
statistically its undeniable that taking korean vs korean matches will get you the balance at TOP level play.
also none of those foreigners have a chance in code S. im sorry.
|
On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance.
So why then? Because players like Hush, Myungsik, Trap or Reality are so much better than them? Because they're korean? You've gotta be kidding me.
|
On December 01 2014 03:22 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. So why then? Because players like Hush, Myungsik, Trap or Reality are so much better than them? Because they're korean? You've gotta be kidding me.
Myunsik, Trap and Reality are much better. Hush cannot easily make Code S either. He may slip in once or twice. (though I could be totally wrong and he has been improving greatly and will be an up- and commer next year; in that case shame on me)
|
On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers.
Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/
I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max.
Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time.
So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do?
|
On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance.
I like the confident "easily" too. Not even with luck they couldn't...
|
What frustrates me the most about the widow mine change is that it killed templar openings completely. Not only is templar openings 10 times more fun than colossus to both play and watch, but it also gave Protoss a choice. Since the change almost all we ever see are colossus openings. To me this change really showed how little insight the Blizzard balance team has for their own game, and it's very sad.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Given Huk/Naniwa had decent runs in Code S, don't see why Snute or whoever couldn't make code S like Dwf sneers. Silly.
Been mentioned a few times but aside from whatever the winrates are, it's really sad that Protoss can't open with templar stuff anymore. The matchup was so much more interesting then.
|
On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do?
I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D
|
On December 01 2014 03:25 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:22 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. So why then? Because players like Hush, Myungsik, Trap or Reality are so much better than them? Because they're korean? You've gotta be kidding me. Myunsik, Trap and Reality are much better. Hush cannot easily make Code S either. He may slip in once or twice. (though I could be totally wrong and he has been improving greatly and will be an up- and commer next year; in that case shame on me)
Based on what exactly do you think those players are much better? I mean if you think they are of a slightly higher level (which I also do) and think they would probably beat the foreigners mentioned in a long series I understand, but to say they are much better, I just don't see it at all. Kind of why discussions/arguments on tl rarely amount to anything that can be taken seriously when posts are full of exaggerations that one would expect from minors.
|
On December 01 2014 03:46 KrOmander wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:25 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 03:22 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. So why then? Because players like Hush, Myungsik, Trap or Reality are so much better than them? Because they're korean? You've gotta be kidding me. Myunsik, Trap and Reality are much better. Hush cannot easily make Code S either. He may slip in once or twice. (though I could be totally wrong and he has been improving greatly and will be an up- and commer next year; in that case shame on me) Based on what exactly do you think those players are much better? I mean if you think they are of a slightly higher level (which I also do) and think they would probably beat the foreigners mentioned in a long series I understand, but to say they are much better, I just don't see it at all. Kind of why discussions/arguments on tl rarely amount to anything that can be taken seriously when posts are full of exaggerations that one would expect from minors.
Myunsik and Trap are two Protoss players that have been going toe-to-toe with the best of the best players in the world for a long time now. And when I say toe-to-toe, I mean they are beating the likes of Innovation, Solar, Soulkey, Zest, sOs on a regular basis. They are the players that would win every tournament without a Korean Superstar in it.
Reality is very similar to them.
On the other hand, players like Snute or Scarlett have OK results when it comes to playing against foreign Koreans, but they usually gets stomped by the likes of Innovation, herO, sOs, Solar, Zest, Maru. Like Bunny+Snute+Scarlett combined have how many wins against Code S Koreans? That one against Flash from Snute. Any more?
Out of those players, Snute has been the most consistent one. I could see him qualify for Code S. But not easily, just with an easy bracket in the qualification process and if all his stars align.
And that despite being a huge foreigner and in particular Snute fanboy. But he just doesn't have that Korean training.
|
I don't see a problem with those stats. I think as long as the best player of a race can still beat the best players of the other races, balance is fine. Even if you look at the top 10 players for each race only, there is already a huge skill difference. If every matchup had 50% that wouldn't mean the races are perfectly balanced, it would just mean that the game's balance was adjusted so the winrates average at 50%, despite the fact that not all players are equally strong.
David Kim and co. aren't trying to balance the game so that we have an equal amount of top players for every race that can all beat each other, they are trying to balance the game so that the very best always has a shot at winning. I think they are doing a great job at that and it will hopefully allow us to have real star players for each race in the future.
Now if things get out of control and we see only Terrans in the top8 of every tournament I think maps will just have to be adjusted, but please stop the cry for balance patches. Just give the players and map makers time.
|
TvP 66,3 % I don't think any matchup been that imbalanced ever... Hopefully there will be some changes....
|
Hrmm nice stats and everything, but do they matter?
Groups are not made up evenly. There are situations in wich a player only has to prepare one matchup, while the others at least have two.
Also the Skill levels are not equal in those Tournaments, DH had pretty disappointing games until the epic final.
Dreamhack Champion: Terran over Zerg
HSCX Winner: Protoss over Terran
WCS-World Champion: Zerg over Terran.
Distribution of Winners: Equal.
Protoss Won 100% of their finals, Zerg won 50%, Terran 33%.
|
Win rates aren't everything.
|
On December 01 2014 04:06 TheWinks wrote:
Win rates aren't everything.
True, but the same inbalance from before this patch (P wins everything) now shows in T. I haven't really played a lot this season but as a P myself I am having an awful time against Terrans where I would crush them before. The winrates show the same differentation and the state of T is just not where it should be right now...
|
this is mostly maps + tournament slots stabilizing.
|
Protoss needing "massive help" is a bit of an exaggeration. It's 7% (well, really 14%) with a limited sample size. In addition, it just so happens that some of the best Koreans who travel are Terran (Polts, Taejas, etc.) and go to tons of tournaments. So, it makes a fair bit of sense to see some Terran dominance.
Truthfully, the GSL is about the only place where the competition is consistently high enough that statistics could be used. Sadly, that has such a small sample size that it still doesn't give a good representation of balance.
And the map pool has been mediocre (to say the least), and should most definitely be revised for the upcoming seasons. I'd love to see some quality maps by those Korean map-makers. While it's great that we have a bunch of user-made maps, they just aren't quite up to snuff for competitive play.
|
I'm surprised to see that some seem to think that maps are not the issue. So let's use TLPD.
From 31 july to 30 november, TvP records :
Balanced :
Deadwing : 34-36 (48.6%)
Overgrowth : 86-86 (50%)
King Sejong's station : 78-77 (50.3%)
Imbalanced :
Merry go round : 67-52 (56.3%)
Catallena : 37-27 (57.8%)
Foxtrot Labs : 32-22 (59.3%)
WTF :
Nimbus : 67-35 (65.7%)
So basically every bo5+ PvT since july has been imba, not because of mines or stuff, simply because of map pool.
|
On December 01 2014 04:12 Taronar wrote:True, but the same inbalance from before this patch (P wins everything) now shows in T. I haven't really played a lot this season but as a P myself I am having an awful time against Terrans where I would crush them before. The winrates show the same differentation and the state of T is just not where it should be right now...
The imbalance that existed for T included only 3 and 4 terrans in Code S. Last season there were still 16 protoss in Code S.
No balance conclusions should be drawn from this season's ladder though, ugh, #nightmarepool.
|
All I read are apologies really.
The travelling koreans are mostly terran argument is completely ridiculous. Why not just come out and say "Terran players are just better"? 300+ games over 4 months in Ro32s of premier events only sure is not a "small sample size", and 57% and 66% is huge when it comes to balance.
Protoss had the same winrates, granted their vs.Z MU probably wasn't as bad, but still people whined FOREVER until Protoss was nerfed. It's not fair towards the community that now that Terran's doing well everything is ok.
|
Balance being slightly over 50% in the initial tournaments is normal.
Balance being in favor of Terran on the S3 map pool is understandable.
Some tournaments simply had stronger Terran representation.
Most of these tournaments are mostly foreign tournaments in which Terran often has an edge in representation (TERRANS ARE NOT "BETTER", BUT THE TRAVELING KOREAN TERRANS ARE STRONGER (CONSISTENT, EXPERIENCED, MORE NUMEROUS) THAN THEIR ZERG/PROTOSS COUNTERPARTS)
This might be a worrysome trend, I'm not fully sure this warrants balance changes yet, but it is certainly something to keep a very, very close eye on.
Thanks for collecting these stats!
|
On December 01 2014 04:24 Gwavajuice wrote:
I'm surprised to see that some seem to think that maps are not the issue. So let's use TLPD.
From 31 july to 30 november, TvP records :
Balanced :
Deadwing : 34-36 (48.6%)
Overgrowth : 86-86 (50%)
King Sejong's station : 78-77 (50.3%)
Imbalanced :
Merry go round : 67-52 (56.3%)
Catallena : 37-27 (57.8%)
Foxtrot Labs : 32-22 (59.3%)
WTF :
Nimbus : 67-35 (65.7%)
So basically every bo5+ PvT since july has been imba, not because of mines or stuff, simply because of map pool.
merry go round is super in favored of SCV pulls, catallena has incredible drop surface areas depending on spawns, nimbus can have incredibly fast drops in 2/3 cases of spawns, and foxtrot labs has argueably hard 3rd bases which protoss suffers more from than terran by design.
yes maps are the problem.
also, deadwing is still a bad map despite being balanced, free bases behind 1 choke is just stupid design.
|
On December 01 2014 04:27 SC2Toastie wrote:
Balance being slightly over 50% in the initial tournaments is normal.
Balance being in favor of Terran on the S3 map pool is understandable.
Some tournaments simply had stronger Terran representation.
This might be a worrysome trend, I'm not fully sure this warrants balance changes yet, but it is certainly something to keep a very, very close eye on.
Hence the idea to start with a (much) better map pool and see where it goes from there.
Though if a new map pool ends up being again made of mostly terran favored maps, maybe the issue will be more that it's too easy for maps to be terran favored and less the map themselves.
Of course the usual suspects who keep repeating that everything is fine, that whatever numbers are not statistically relevant (except their own) and who don't even recognize any issue with the current map pool... well... that's where an ignore function would be pretty useful
It was only 4 months ago that they were saying the exact opposite (terrans were completely disappearing from the game right?). They'll go back to that soon enough.
Hopefully new (and better) maps will come soon, and if the current trend continues, blizzard won't wait another 4 months to do something about it.
|
On December 01 2014 04:27 SoulmaN__ wrote:
All I read are apologies really.
The travelling koreans are mostly terran argument is completely ridiculous. Why not just come out and say "Terran players are just better"? 300+ games over 4 months in Ro32s of premier events only sure is not a "small sample size", and 57% and 66% is huge when it comes to balance.
Protoss had the same winrates, granted their vs.Z MU probably wasn't as bad, but still people whined FOREVER until Protoss was nerfed. It's not fair towards the community that now that Terran's doing well everything is ok.
You want to read apologies, your post clearly shows you are biased against Terran and look for excuses to legitimize a patch response.
57% is not huge, considering Terran had some catching up to do, tournament participation has to balance which inflates winrates for a race by a lot over a reasonably short period, like this is.
66% however, is. TvP is not that worrysome, especially considering the maps. TvZ moreso. The new strenght and diversity in Terran all ins and a more efficient mine combined with a more multitask-demanding playstyle make TvZ very hard.
Korean Terran representation in foreign tournaments IS stronger than P or Z. I can point that out for you tomorrow, if you want me to.
|
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
|
On December 01 2014 04:40 Maniak_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:27 SC2Toastie wrote:
Balance being slightly over 50% in the initial tournaments is normal.
Balance being in favor of Terran on the S3 map pool is understandable.
Some tournaments simply had stronger Terran representation.
This might be a worrysome trend, I'm not fully sure this warrants balance changes yet, but it is certainly something to keep a very, very close eye on. Hence the idea to start with a (much) better map pool and see where it goes from there. Though if a new map pool ends up being again made of mostly terran favored maps, maybe the issue will be more that it's too easy for maps to be terran favored and less the map themselves. Of course the usual suspects who keep repeating that everything is fine, that whatever numbers are not statistically relevant (except their own) and who don't even recognize any issue with the current map pool... well... that's where an ignore function would be pretty useful It was only 4 months ago that they were saying the exact opposite (terrans were completely disappearing from the game right?). They'll go back to that soon enough. Hopefully new (and better) maps will come soon, and if the current trend continues, blizzard won't wait another 4 months to do something about it.
Patching in Dreampool would be stupid. Maps become Terran favored in case of open 3rd to 2nd bases with agressive attack paths connecting them, hard 4rth bases and large, dropable mains and naturals. Map distance doesn't matter that much for Terran anymore, as Terran is very versatile in speed of growing tech and economy.
Maps first. Evaluate balance at the end of like februari.
|
On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
GM is too small a sample size and not mobile enough, masters includes low to mid masters which has a ton of bad players and as such, cannot mean a thing to high level KR balance. You can only use GM and high Masters stats to notice a slow trend, but really not as evidence.
|
Season 3 Mappool was made to give Terran a better edge of the game because it was the weakest race. Shortly after this Mappool Blizzard patched the race and to state where it is at the same lvl or maybe ( what needs alot of more games on non terran maps ) a bit better.
So we got a clear "make Terran stronger" mappool with a new balance patch. And because Season 4 has this crappy "old school" mappool we see all Offlineevents using the S3 Mappool. This will lead to a stronger Terran in the MUs.
When we have Season 4 Mappool and we still got MU with clear unproportional victory where the maps arent imba, we can rethink about patching. Since then, ask the turnaments to use a mappool with outboxer, habitation, overgrowth, frost, whirlwind, star station and King Sejong, because they are allowed to use that pool during the offseason and still give WCS Points.
|
On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
Take the KR server for example:
Terran 38.07%
Zerg 27.41%
Protoss 32.99%
Random 1.52%
You chose EU, I chose KR, and tbh the KR server is more reliable than both the NA and the EU server combined.
|
On December 01 2014 04:50 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
Take the KR server for example: Terran 38.07% Zerg 27.41% Protoss 32.99% Random 1.52% You chose EU, I chose KR, and tbh the KR server is more reliable than both the NA and the EU server combined.
Why? I thought foreigners are just as good as Koreans?
|
On December 01 2014 04:50 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
Take the KR server for example: Terran 38.07% Zerg 27.41% Protoss 32.99% Random 1.52% You chose EU, I chose KR, and tbh the KR server is more reliable than both the NA and the EU server combined.
and still worthless for reasons mentionedOn December 01 2014 04:45 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
GM is too small a sample size and not mobile enough, masters includes low to mid masters which has a ton of bad players and as such, cannot mean a thing to high level KR balance. You can only use GM and high Masters stats to notice a slow trend, but really not as evidence.
|
On December 01 2014 04:51 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:50 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
Take the KR server for example: Terran 38.07% Zerg 27.41% Protoss 32.99% Random 1.52% You chose EU, I chose KR, and tbh the KR server is more reliable than both the NA and the EU server combined. Why? I thought foreigners are just as good as Koreans?
Hahaha, I knew you would make that comment :D. Poor SoulmaN_.
|
On December 01 2014 04:48 Clonester wrote:
Season 3 Mappool was made to give Terran a better edge of the game because it was the weakest race. Shortly after this Mappool Blizzard patched the race and to state where it is at the same lvl or maybe ( what needs alot of more games on non terran maps ) a bit better.
So we got a clear "make Terran stronger" mappool with a new balance patch. And because Season 4 has this crappy "old school" mappool we see all Offlineevents using the S3 Mappool. This will lead to a stronger Terran in the MUs.
When we have Season 4 Mappool and we still got MU with clear unproportional victory where the maps arent imba, we can rethink about patching. Since then, ask the turnaments to use a mappool with outboxer, habitation, overgrowth, frost, whirlwind, star station and King Sejong, because they are allowed to use that pool during the offseason and still give WCS Points.
Nitpick: Season 4 pool IS Dreampool. 2015S1 is the first new competitive pool.
|
If a race is underpowered and then becomes balanced, naturally it will have higher win rates for a while in leagues where you qualify (such as WCS) since newly buffed players that are of "equal skill" are at a too low skill level for them. Basically their MMR is too high for challenger league. Same is sort of true for events that had qualifiers that took place before the patch.
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up!
|
On December 01 2014 04:52 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:48 Clonester wrote:
Season 3 Mappool was made to give Terran a better edge of the game because it was the weakest race. Shortly after this Mappool Blizzard patched the race and to state where it is at the same lvl or maybe ( what needs alot of more games on non terran maps ) a bit better.
So we got a clear "make Terran stronger" mappool with a new balance patch. And because Season 4 has this crappy "old school" mappool we see all Offlineevents using the S3 Mappool. This will lead to a stronger Terran in the MUs.
When we have Season 4 Mappool and we still got MU with clear unproportional victory where the maps arent imba, we can rethink about patching. Since then, ask the turnaments to use a mappool with outboxer, habitation, overgrowth, frost, whirlwind, star station and King Sejong, because they are allowed to use that pool during the offseason and still give WCS Points. Nitpick: Season 4 pool IS Dreampool. 2015S1 is the first new competitive pool.
Dreampool is competitive as hell! :D
|
On December 01 2014 04:51 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:50 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
Take the KR server for example: Terran 38.07% Zerg 27.41% Protoss 32.99% Random 1.52% You chose EU, I chose KR, and tbh the KR server is more reliable than both the NA and the EU server combined. Why? I thought foreigners are just as good as Koreans?
I said the 3 foreigners mentioned could make Code S, that doesn't mean your average ladder hero on EU and NA is as good as Code S level. You should know that.
|
On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up!
I gathered the stats for the last 4 months.
|
On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months.
What is your reason for collecting the stats?
From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed.
|
On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months.
Lol I thought July was 6 months ago. Not so good with time apparently 
Well my point still stands. I guess what I'm looking for is stats for tournaments that had no prior qualifications. It's hard obviously since a lot base invites on former results, either tournament placements or WCS pts.
Nice data gather anyway, thank you for this!
|
On December 01 2014 03:45 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do? I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D
If so then.
On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:
viewers will whine that the map is boring
|
On December 01 2014 05:03 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months. What is your reason for collecting the stats? From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed.
Yes, but I also want to raise awareness about this. Terran players always seem to feel like victims when it comes to starcraft 2 balance, and this is simply here to show them that it's not always bad for them.
And of course, I wanna see Terran nerfed. These kinds of stats in a sample size of 300+ games are unacceptable.
|
On December 01 2014 05:19 Uvantak wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:45 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do? I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D If so then. Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:
viewers will whine that the map is boring
I know, but you are trying to fix something that isn't in your power.
|
On December 01 2014 05:23 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:19 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 03:45 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do? I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D If so then. On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:
viewers will whine that the map is boring I know, but you are trying to fix something that isn't in your power.
I will not cater to players only, Starcraft is an E-Sport and as such i must think of the viewership aspect of the game just as i do of the meta, balance and gameplay, if cater to the big chunk of the western player base, then we wouldn't see earlygame action on maps because early game tactics are "cheap" and "annoying" while playing the game, but they are an important part of the game, they shouldn't be killed by maps because they are incredibly exiting while spectating, this is a huge issue, i have to cater to the player base as well as the spectators, and both have very conflicting views, not to mention all the issues that pop up when you dissect the player base into different skill levels.
|
On December 01 2014 05:19 Uvantak wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:45 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do? I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D If so then. Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:
viewers will whine that the map is boring
But KSS is actually an awesome map with a twist that doesn't play out stupid at all.
|
On December 01 2014 05:21 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:03 SC2Toastie wrote:On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months. What is your reason for collecting the stats? From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed. Yes, but I also want to raise awareness about this. Terran players always seem to feel like victims when it comes to starcraft 2 balance, and this is simply here to show them that it's not always bad for them. And of course, I wanna see Terran nerfed. These kinds of stats in a sample size of 300+ games are unacceptable.
Problem is your stats do not show any trends, divide it into monthly data and then we can make any conlcusions, which im preety sure will be :TvZ ok currently, TvP significantly T favoured
In short data from 4 months ago is not as important as last moth's for CURRENT balance discussion.
Can you at least divide your data for particular tournaments so we can doubcle check your calculations?
|
On December 01 2014 05:21 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:03 SC2Toastie wrote:On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months. What is your reason for collecting the stats? From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed. Yes, but I also want to raise awareness about this. Terran players always seem to feel like victims when it comes to starcraft 2 balance, and this is simply here to show them that it's not always bad for them. And of course, I wanna see Terran nerfed. These kinds of stats in a sample size of 300+ games are unacceptable.
The tournaments you selected have a population of 112 Protoss, 89 Terrans, and 115 Zergs. When Terran was struggling it wasn't just about win rates, it was about how few terrans there were. A win rate of 50% doesn't matter if terran is only 10% of the population, for instance.
|
On December 01 2014 04:57 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:51 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 04:50 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:42 StaN.de wrote:
You better should have a look at the race distribution statistics, they are more reliable & meaningful than winrates from selected tournaments (aka biased/small sample size). Take for example the EU server:
GM:
28,6% Terran
33,2% Zerg
37,8% Protoss
Master:
28,9% Terran
36,3% Zerg
33,0% Protoss
Source: Nios.kr
Given the fact that the player-basis accross all races are/should be equally skilled you can clearly see, that terran is too weak OR harder to play on a relatively high level (master+).
Take the KR server for example: Terran 38.07% Zerg 27.41% Protoss 32.99% Random 1.52% You chose EU, I chose KR, and tbh the KR server is more reliable than both the NA and the EU server combined. Why? I thought foreigners are just as good as Koreans? I said the 3 foreigners mentioned could make Code S, that doesn't mean your average ladder hero on EU and NA is as good as Code S level. You should know that.
So all players are equal, except some foreigners are more foreign than others. Are Bunny's results relevant to top player balance? Dayshi's? Major's? Kas's? Neeb's? Masa's? KoMA's?
Where do you draw the line? Assuming for a moment that you truly don't understand what's wrong with what you're doing: a lot of Europeans and North Americans who scrape by into ro32 are bad by the standards of top-tier meta. While some top Europeans can play very well, the skill gap between Zest and the worst European who gets into a ro32 is much, much, much wider than the skill gap between Zest and the worst Korean who gets into a ro32.
Cut out every non-Korean, and you lower the risk of ridiculously skewed results. The proof is in the pudding, look at the difference between your results and mine. Which better reflect that Leenock just beat Taeja 2-1? Find me that time Gumiho beat Zest six months ago and we'll talk.
|
On December 01 2014 05:45 Uvantak wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:23 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 05:19 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 03:45 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do? I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D If so then. On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:
viewers will whine that the map is boring I know, but you are trying to fix something that isn't in your power. I will not cater to players only, Starcraft is an E-Sport and as such i must think of the viewership aspect of the game just as i do of the meta, balance and gameplay, if cater to the big chunk of the western player base, then we wouldn't see earlygame action on maps because early game tactics are "cheap" and "annoying" while playing the game, but they are an important part of the game, they shouldn't be killed by maps because they are incredibly exiting while spectating, this is a huge issue, i have to cater to the player base as well as the spectators, and both have very conflicting views, not to mention all the issues that pop up when you dissect the player base into different skill levels.
I was more talking about how it isn't possible to have greatly interesting features given how the game is balanced. It's not in your power to make maps that achieve that, for that you need to use the data editor.
Maps like KSS or Habitation Station are in my opinion the maximum that can be achieved.
|
On December 01 2014 05:03 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months. What is your reason for collecting the stats? From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed.
Funny. From your responses, I see only a wish to not see Terran nerfed.
See, that argument can go both ways.
One has to be extremely biased at this point not to see that Terran is too strong, especially vs. Protoss.
|
One thing I'd like to discuss a little more about:
Do your really think a change to the mappool will completely balance out the vs.T matchups?
Because I honestly think that the amount of openers Terran can do in TvZ has nothing to do with map balance, and I also think widow mines are so strong against Protoss that, even if a map would be horrible for drops and good for Zealot templar openings, it wouldn't matter, they would still be murdered.
Opinions? Something else than "Wait and see" would be nice...
|
On December 01 2014 06:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:45 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 05:23 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 05:19 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 03:45 Big J wrote:On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:On December 01 2014 02:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 02:19 ZeromuS wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:
[quote]
It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes.
In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. I wouldn't be surprised if they thought the open spaces on Catallena and MGR were just balancing out the fact that they're bigger than Whirlwind. No. Maps were chosen that were less "standard" than the maps in Season 2 and offered a little more variation. Here is some insight: TLMC lead to the current map pool through community maps. What TL strat chose for final voting were very much - break away from the norm maps that didn't emphasize blink or easy split map swarmhost strategies. Both of which were big problems in the first half of 2014. I also put an emphasis on maps that would be a little bit terran favoured in TvP when vetting the maps and creating a shortlist from which the finalists were chosen. Thanks for the elaboration. However, I'm not sure what you were saying "no" to. Your point that "we found out how much air space is too much" just furthers mine that Blizzard can't shoulder all the blame for not foreseeing this situation. Agreed about Templar openers. Actually, had they taken into account the new maps when releasing patches most of the issues we are seeing today wouldn't have developed in the first place :/ I have said it previously, as a mapmaker i do not what to do now, because i don't know how will Blizzard balance the game 4 months from now, do i take the balance of the game into my hands and release a map that is not as favorable for terran like foxtrot was? What happens if Blizzard then decides to nerf Terran based on old S3/S4 tournament stats without accounting for the new maps again? Or if i make a map that hinders Terran and in 7 months Blizzard decides to buff them based on 2015 S1/S2 data where Terran underperformed because of my map? A ladder map should be balanced, so i must take the future balance of the game into account and predict how will the metagame change on my map, but this becomes impossible if Blizzard releases balance patches while the map is being played. A map has a limited lifespan where it will be considered balanced and dynamic, the WCS seasons are quite the stretch for nonstandard maps which tend to have around 3 to 4 months of continuous play life span max. Now add to this that you can't make a full standard map because viewers will whine that the map is boring or that players have no incentive to be aggressive in the early game leading to dead time. So guys, honestly, tell me, what do i do? I think your best bet is to do a little bit of everything. Make a very standard 1-2-3 base setup (like Overgrowth), make it just a little bit blink-affine (like KSS), make standard aggression towards 4th bases a little bit more favored (like Merry Go Round) and then just make it very pretty. :D If so then. On December 01 2014 03:28 Uvantak wrote:
viewers will whine that the map is boring I know, but you are trying to fix something that isn't in your power. I will not cater to players only, Starcraft is an E-Sport and as such i must think of the viewership aspect of the game just as i do of the meta, balance and gameplay, if cater to the big chunk of the western player base, then we wouldn't see earlygame action on maps because early game tactics are "cheap" and "annoying" while playing the game, but they are an important part of the game, they shouldn't be killed by maps because they are incredibly exiting while spectating, this is a huge issue, i have to cater to the player base as well as the spectators, and both have very conflicting views, not to mention all the issues that pop up when you dissect the player base into different skill levels. I was more talking about how it isn't possible to have greatly interesting features given how the game is balanced. It's not in your power to make maps that achieve that, for that you need to use the data editor. Maps like KSS or Habitation Station are in my opinion the maximum that can be achieved.
Oh yes BigJ, and i do not mean to alter the data on my maps, they are melee maps after all, i'm talking about examples such as Foxtrot, the imbalances that can be seen on the data are caused by some very specific design decisions that were aimed to help Terran when the map designed but backfired when Terran got buffed based on old seasons data, the way the center of the map was lay out to help in TvZ with the weak widowmines and hellbat+bio styles vs ling+bling+muta, sacrificing ZvP a bit. The way the main bases are exposed around the edges of the map to help with drops, the ledges on top of the bases so stimmed bio coming from drops on them can be more efficient vs defensive zealot warpins, etc, etc, etc.
KSS and HS are not the maximum that can be achieved by a long shot, there are many many core layouts and main->third set ups that can be stabilized and used for competitive play, nonetheless i have to agree that having the chance to use data editing or at least being able to use nonstandard mineral counts on bases would allow for an even greater variety of possible layouts and maps.
|
Im just going to wait for herO and Rain to destroy IEM and how the Ro8 of Hot6Cup turns out in two days. We have two highest level TvPs there.
|
On December 01 2014 06:52 SoulmaN__ wrote:
One thing I'd like to discuss a little more about:
Do your really think a change to the mappool will completely balance out the vs.T matchups?
Because I honestly think that the amount of openers Terran can do in TvZ has nothing to do with map balance, and I also think widow mines are so strong against Protoss that, even if a map would be horrible for drops and good for Zealot templar openings, it wouldn't matter, they would still be murdered.
Opinions? Something else than "Wait and see" would be nice...
According to the stats on page 4, TvP is already at 50% on 3 out of the 7 tournament maps. For sure different maps could make protoss even favored!
|
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
|
On December 01 2014 07:16 HEADD wrote:
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
Pros have a lot more personal gain in their race being imbalanced compared to us random forum scrubs. Wasn't it Rain that complained about terrans when protoss was doing really well? Or maybe it was at the start of the rise of terran, I can't remember for sure.
|
On December 01 2014 07:20 DJHelium wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 07:16 HEADD wrote:
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
Pros have a lot more personal gain in their race being imbalanced compared to us random forum scrubs. Wasn't it Rain that complained about terrans when protoss was doing really well? Or maybe it was at the start of the rise of terran, I can't remember for sure.
yea Pro's career depends on this, so P and Z might say T is imbalanced
If Koreans terrans also say Terran is more powerful than P or Z...well maybe it might be true lol
hmmm so Season 3, the top 4 players of each WCS region x 3 regions (KR, EU, NA) = 7/12 are Terrans which isnt too unbalanced
this past season Terrans won WCS KR, WCS NA, and WCS EU, lets see of that trend continues before doing anything drastic...
|
On December 01 2014 05:21 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:03 SC2Toastie wrote:On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months. What is your reason for collecting the stats? From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed. Yes, but I also want to raise awareness about this. Terran players always seem to feel like victims when it comes to starcraft 2 balance, and this is simply here to show them that it's not always bad for them. And of course, I wanna see Terran nerfed. These kinds of stats in a sample size of 300+ games are unacceptable.
Excuse me very much, firstly, the term whiner is stupid, non-appropriate, hypocritical and popularistic.
And raise awareness for what? A situation we already know of and can explain?
Your poor choice of hyperbole and the blatant lack of discussions and conclusions in the OP makes your intentions and unbiasedness (which you should be aiming for when presenting statistics) very questionable at best.
Secondly, you ignore ALL of the posts explaining why these statistics might actually be acceptable considering the past and the current state of balance combined with a set of maps made for Terran doing well.
Asking for a nerf because of a very flawed statistic of approx. 300 games without considering all other factors people have pointed out to you is nothing more but a (poorly) conceiled whine (to put it in your own terms).
|
On December 01 2014 06:36 ReMinD_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 05:03 SC2Toastie wrote:On December 01 2014 04:58 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 04:55 DJHelium wrote:
What are the stats for the latest say 3 months?
And I feel the maps are a big part of it, especially Nimbus, Catallena and Merry Go Round. Cool to see some stats backing it up! I gathered the stats for the last 4 months. What is your reason for collecting the stats? From your responses I mostly sense frustration and a wish to see Terran nerfed. Funny. From your responses, I see only a wish to not see Terran nerfed. See, that argument can go both ways. One has to be extremely biased at this point not to see that Terran is too strong, especially vs. Protoss.
Funny, from your response, I only see a wish to see Terran nerfed.
See, that argument can go both ways.
One has to be extremely biased at this point not to see there is a number of good explanations for why Terran has high winrates.
Ok. Serious now.
Firstly, stats favor TvP over TvZ, so that ends your last comment and probably also gives away your favored race.
Let me start by mentioning I've been playing Random exclusively since before Hots. I know the matchups. I wish to not see Terran get shafted again as a result of poorly disguised whine and missinterpretation/forging of statistics. There's a number of reasons mentioned already: maps are and important factor; a recent patch; tournaments stabilizing; Terran recently having develloped a new playstyle which relies on intense dropping which both Z and P haven't had the time yet to figure out.
Asking for a nerf at this stage is beyond comprehension, complwtely unwarranted. If you think that way, I can do nothing but suggest you got spoiled too much in the first two thirds of the year and are now frustrated when you can't win games you weren't supposed to in the first place.
Edit: sorry, I recalled the stats wrong. Ignore that sentence.
|
On December 01 2014 07:20 DJHelium wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 07:16 HEADD wrote:
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
Pros have a lot more personal gain in their race being imbalanced compared to us random forum scrubs. Wasn't it Rain that complained about terrans when protoss was doing really well? Or maybe it was at the start of the rise of terran, I can't remember for sure.
Rain complained about TvP being more imbalanced in Terrans favor than Broodlord Infestor era. Meanwhile, 60% wins for P > T and 3 Terrans in the next months.
Pro opinions are probably the most unreliable determination of balance.
|
A single pros opinion is usually not worth much, but when pros of other races all complain about the same race, you got something there.
But yea, tournaments should have swapped maps already at least.
|
On December 01 2014 03:19 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. That's really an awful idea. Sc2 has massive restrictions on map design as it is, we don't need more.
You're arguing as if the map pool we have here is unrestricted, and I'm adding restrictions. I would say it's the opposite. The map pool that we have now is mostly designed to help terran. We need to remove that restriction.
|
On December 01 2014 08:10 sibs wrote:
A single pros opinion is usually not worth much, but when pros of other races all complain about the same race, you got something there.
But yea, tournaments should have swapped maps already at least.
Without changing maps there is no useful conclusion to be drawn.
|
This thread deserves to be closed. Everyone knows what this is coming to again and nothing is to be gained from this discussion.
|
On December 01 2014 04:25 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:12 Taronar wrote:On December 01 2014 04:06 TheWinks wrote:
Win rates aren't everything. True, but the same inbalance from before this patch (P wins everything) now shows in T. I haven't really played a lot this season but as a P myself I am having an awful time against Terrans where I would crush them before. The winrates show the same differentation and the state of T is just not where it should be right now... The imbalance that existed for T included only 3 and 4 terrans in Code S. Last season there were still 16 protoss in Code S.
Yes, but the Code A that got 16 Protoss into Code S was on the Season 3 map pool before the widow mine patch. Judging by how Code S went, it seems reasonable to say the patch did more than the map pool.
|
On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons.
Bullshit.
NOBODY "easily" makes Code S and I doubt any of the afore mentioned could qualify regularly. Sure, if they were all in Korea, one of them would occasionally reach the Ro16...but that's it.
There are no Korean's in Code S that any foreigner would be favoured against. Have a great chance against? Absolutely, but there's no foreigner who would be likely to get out of any GSL Ro32 group from this year.
Foreigners aren't as good as Korean's (though this is obviously not a genetic thing), so suck it up!
|
On December 01 2014 07:29 mikumegurine wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 07:20 DJHelium wrote:On December 01 2014 07:16 HEADD wrote:
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
Pros have a lot more personal gain in their race being imbalanced compared to us random forum scrubs. Wasn't it Rain that complained about terrans when protoss was doing really well? Or maybe it was at the start of the rise of terran, I can't remember for sure. yea Pro's career depends on this, so P and Z might say T is imbalanced If Koreans terrans also say Terran is more powerful than P or Z...well maybe it might be true lol hmmm so Season 3, the top 4 players of each WCS region x 3 regions (KR, EU, NA) = 7/12 are Terrans which isnt too unbalanced this past season Terrans won WCS KR, WCS NA, and WCS EU, lets see of that trend continues before doing anything drastic...
and narrowly losing out of on Blizzcon as well. We all know how it would have gone if Taeja beat Life. Even a TvT finals.
And HSCX... Flash won that. PartinG's unreal micro gave him the victory.
good thread, thanks for putting in stats what many are saying and feeling.
On December 01 2014 09:39 althaz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons. Bullshit. NOBODY "easily" makes Code S and I doubt any of the afore mentioned could qualify regularly. Sure, if they were all in Korea, one of them would occasionally reach the Ro16...but that's it. There are no Korean's in Code S that any foreigner would be favoured against. Have a great chance against? Absolutely, but there's no foreigner who would be likely to get out of any GSL Ro32 group from this year. Foreigners aren't as good as Korean's (though this is obviously not a genetic thing), so suck it up!
Naniwa would like to have a word with you.
He was close as anyone ever got to closing the gap to Koreans, at a time when SC2 was finally more explored and a shitton of good Koreans were on it to train like mad.
Nothing against Jinro who is a legend by himself, but I don't think those 2 runs in the GSL are comparable.
|
On December 01 2014 09:49 Doublemint wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 07:29 mikumegurine wrote:On December 01 2014 07:20 DJHelium wrote:On December 01 2014 07:16 HEADD wrote:
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
Pros have a lot more personal gain in their race being imbalanced compared to us random forum scrubs. Wasn't it Rain that complained about terrans when protoss was doing really well? Or maybe it was at the start of the rise of terran, I can't remember for sure. yea Pro's career depends on this, so P and Z might say T is imbalanced If Koreans terrans also say Terran is more powerful than P or Z...well maybe it might be true lol hmmm so Season 3, the top 4 players of each WCS region x 3 regions (KR, EU, NA) = 7/12 are Terrans which isnt too unbalanced this past season Terrans won WCS KR, WCS NA, and WCS EU, lets see of that trend continues before doing anything drastic... and narrowly losing out of on Blizzcon as well. We all know how it would have gone if Taeja beat Life. Even a TvT finals. And HSCX... Flash won that. PartinG's unreal micro gave him the victory..
Lol. Even when Terran loses, Terran wins. Astonishing logic.
|
On December 01 2014 10:05 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 09:49 Doublemint wrote:On December 01 2014 07:29 mikumegurine wrote:On December 01 2014 07:20 DJHelium wrote:On December 01 2014 07:16 HEADD wrote:
I dont know why ppl even discus here.
Top pro zergs like Soo, soulkey and others says TvZ is imbalanced in favor of terran at blizzcon.Smix says that in one of the HSCX interview.
San says terran is also OP in TvP.
I think pros have better skill than anyone on this forum and if they says terran is OP i think it is true.
Pros have a lot more personal gain in their race being imbalanced compared to us random forum scrubs. Wasn't it Rain that complained about terrans when protoss was doing really well? Or maybe it was at the start of the rise of terran, I can't remember for sure. yea Pro's career depends on this, so P and Z might say T is imbalanced If Koreans terrans also say Terran is more powerful than P or Z...well maybe it might be true lol hmmm so Season 3, the top 4 players of each WCS region x 3 regions (KR, EU, NA) = 7/12 are Terrans which isnt too unbalanced this past season Terrans won WCS KR, WCS NA, and WCS EU, lets see of that trend continues before doing anything drastic... and narrowly losing out of on Blizzcon as well. We all know how it would have gone if Taeja beat Life. Even a TvT finals. And HSCX... Flash won that. PartinG's unreal micro gave him the victory.. Lol. Even when Terran loses, Terran wins. Astonishing logic.
oh hi there mon cheri 
|
On December 01 2014 09:49 Doublemint wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 09:39 althaz wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons. Bullshit. NOBODY "easily" makes Code S and I doubt any of the afore mentioned could qualify regularly. Sure, if they were all in Korea, one of them would occasionally reach the Ro16...but that's it. There are no Korean's in Code S that any foreigner would be favoured against. Have a great chance against? Absolutely, but there's no foreigner who would be likely to get out of any GSL Ro32 group from this year. Foreigners aren't as good as Korean's (though this is obviously not a genetic thing), so suck it up! Naniwa would like to have a word with you. He was close as anyone ever got to closing the gap to Koreans, at a time when SC2 was finally more explored and a shitton of good Koreans were on it to train like mad. Nothing against Jinro who is a legend by himself, but I don't think those 2 runs in the GSL are comparable.
Naniwa didn't make Code S, he was given a seed (he tried a bunch of times and failed, repeatedly getting knocked out in the first round of Code A, which he ALSO didn't qualify for but was granted seeds).
Naniwa was an amazing player who could take games off the top Korean's...but he couldn't consistently beat several of them in a row, which is why he never qualified for Code A or for Code S.
The only foreigners that have ever really showed that skill are Jinro (which was so early some discount his achievements), Stephano and Huk. Only Stephano played at the stupidly high level required to consistently beat top Korean's for more than a few months.
|
so you dismiss Naniwa but mention HuK and Stephano? who got Code S seeds as well. ok then.
only one going through a Code A qualifier is Jinro( maybe IdrA? no idea should check on that). and as said it was in the early days and a superb performance, but not comparable to later ones.
|
On December 01 2014 10:52 althaz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 09:49 Doublemint wrote:On December 01 2014 09:39 althaz wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons. Bullshit. NOBODY "easily" makes Code S and I doubt any of the afore mentioned could qualify regularly. Sure, if they were all in Korea, one of them would occasionally reach the Ro16...but that's it. There are no Korean's in Code S that any foreigner would be favoured against. Have a great chance against? Absolutely, but there's no foreigner who would be likely to get out of any GSL Ro32 group from this year. Foreigners aren't as good as Korean's (though this is obviously not a genetic thing), so suck it up! Naniwa would like to have a word with you. He was close as anyone ever got to closing the gap to Koreans, at a time when SC2 was finally more explored and a shitton of good Koreans were on it to train like mad. Nothing against Jinro who is a legend by himself, but I don't think those 2 runs in the GSL are comparable. Naniwa didn't make Code S, he was given a seed (he tried a bunch of times and failed, repeatedly getting knocked out in the first round of Code A, which he ALSO didn't qualify for but was granted seeds). Naniwa was an amazing player who could take games off the top Korean's...but he couldn't consistently beat several of them in a row, which is why he never qualified for Code A or for Code S. The only foreigners that have ever really showed that skill are Jinro (which was so early some discount his achievements), Stephano and Huk. Only Stephano played at the stupidly high level required to consistently beat top Korean's for more than a few months.
There is no universe in which Huk has the skill you're talking about here and Naniwa doesn't. Also you don't need to "consistently beat koreans" to qualify once. You're either too dismissive of what Naniwa did in Korea, or too impressed with what Huk and Stephano did in Korea; pick a side =)
|
On December 01 2014 10:58 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 10:52 althaz wrote:On December 01 2014 09:49 Doublemint wrote:On December 01 2014 09:39 althaz wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons. Bullshit. NOBODY "easily" makes Code S and I doubt any of the afore mentioned could qualify regularly. Sure, if they were all in Korea, one of them would occasionally reach the Ro16...but that's it. There are no Korean's in Code S that any foreigner would be favoured against. Have a great chance against? Absolutely, but there's no foreigner who would be likely to get out of any GSL Ro32 group from this year. Foreigners aren't as good as Korean's (though this is obviously not a genetic thing), so suck it up! Naniwa would like to have a word with you. He was close as anyone ever got to closing the gap to Koreans, at a time when SC2 was finally more explored and a shitton of good Koreans were on it to train like mad. Nothing against Jinro who is a legend by himself, but I don't think those 2 runs in the GSL are comparable. Naniwa didn't make Code S, he was given a seed (he tried a bunch of times and failed, repeatedly getting knocked out in the first round of Code A, which he ALSO didn't qualify for but was granted seeds). Naniwa was an amazing player who could take games off the top Korean's...but he couldn't consistently beat several of them in a row, which is why he never qualified for Code A or for Code S. The only foreigners that have ever really showed that skill are Jinro (which was so early some discount his achievements), Stephano and Huk. Only Stephano played at the stupidly high level required to consistently beat top Korean's for more than a few months. There is no universe in which Huk has the skill you're talking about here and Naniwa doesn't. Also you don't need to "consistently beat koreans" to qualify once. You're either too dismissive of what Naniwa did in Korea, or too impressed with what Huk and Stephano did in Korea; pick a side =)
this. for the record, they are all amazing players and show what foreigners are capable of. and to a certain degree I would put scarlett also in there, snute is close to but not quite yet on that list.
|
Why are we discussing foreigners? Naniwa did more than stephano in korea, but less in sc2 as a whole by a lot.
Life won blizzcon so terran did poorly on blizzconm and zerg dominated!
I don't understand why people say there's a map imbalance, and then at the same time pretend terran isn't doing fucking stellar, it's the fear of the nerf I guess?
|
On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance.
When are you going to post your follow up article to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460550-welcome-to-zparcraft-ii on the current state of balance? Can I suggest the title "Welcome to Tarcraft?"
|
On December 01 2014 11:10 sibs wrote:
Why are we discussing foreigners? Naniwa did more than stephano in korea, but less in sc2 as a whole by a lot.
Life won blizzcon so terran did poorly on blizzconm and zerg dominated!
I don't understand why people say there's a map imbalance, and then at the same time pretend terran isn't doing fucking stellar, it's the fear of the nerf I guess?
And Jinro did more than any other foreigner ever, but nobody mentions it.
But yeah I don't understand what foreigners have to do with the current discussion
|
On December 01 2014 11:14 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. When are you going to post your follow up article to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460550-welcome-to-zparcraft-ii on the current state of balance? Can I suggest the title "Welcome to Tarcraft?"
rofl. what a burn :D
|
On December 01 2014 11:14 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. When are you going to post your follow up article to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460550-welcome-to-zparcraft-ii on the current state of balance? Can I suggest the title "Welcome to Tarcraft?"
When there are 3 Protoss and 16 Terrans in Code S for two seasons in a row, I expect.
|
On December 01 2014 10:58 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 10:52 althaz wrote:On December 01 2014 09:49 Doublemint wrote:On December 01 2014 09:39 althaz wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried, they just don't want to for obvious reasons. Bullshit. NOBODY "easily" makes Code S and I doubt any of the afore mentioned could qualify regularly. Sure, if they were all in Korea, one of them would occasionally reach the Ro16...but that's it. There are no Korean's in Code S that any foreigner would be favoured against. Have a great chance against? Absolutely, but there's no foreigner who would be likely to get out of any GSL Ro32 group from this year. Foreigners aren't as good as Korean's (though this is obviously not a genetic thing), so suck it up! Naniwa would like to have a word with you. He was close as anyone ever got to closing the gap to Koreans, at a time when SC2 was finally more explored and a shitton of good Koreans were on it to train like mad. Nothing against Jinro who is a legend by himself, but I don't think those 2 runs in the GSL are comparable. Naniwa didn't make Code S, he was given a seed (he tried a bunch of times and failed, repeatedly getting knocked out in the first round of Code A, which he ALSO didn't qualify for but was granted seeds). Naniwa was an amazing player who could take games off the top Korean's...but he couldn't consistently beat several of them in a row, which is why he never qualified for Code A or for Code S. The only foreigners that have ever really showed that skill are Jinro (which was so early some discount his achievements), Stephano and Huk. Only Stephano played at the stupidly high level required to consistently beat top Korean's for more than a few months. There is no universe in which Huk has the skill you're talking about here and Naniwa doesn't. Also you don't need to "consistently beat koreans" to qualify once. You're either too dismissive of what Naniwa did in Korea, or too impressed with what Huk and Stephano did in Korea; pick a side =)
Naniwa was NEVER a dominant player. He was a fantastic player, able to compete ably with the best Korean's. Huk and Stephano wrecked the top Korean's and were expected to win most tournaments they entered (remember when Huk won nearly everything for three months and Stephano was the scariest zerg for almost a year).
No current player is equal to what Naniwa did (including Huk, who is still active and one of the best double-handful of foreigners), but what Naniwa did was NOT equal to what Huk and Stephano did in their primes. Naniwa was probably a better player than at least Huk at his very best, but the competition was fiercer and so he was a lot less scary (Scarlett has probably played better than all of those mentioned, but hasn't come close to dominating the scene or even stealing a lot of thunder from Koreans).
|
This isn't a surprise at all. Everyone knows what is happening. This thread is just going to be Terrans who are trying to justify Terran not getting nerfed against Zerg/Protoss who want it to happen. Blizzard is going to nerf terran or buff the other races eventually, but whether the pendulum ends up swinging the other way entirely or not really depends on the timing of LotV.
|
On December 01 2014 09:15 Cheren wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:25 TheWinks wrote:On December 01 2014 04:12 Taronar wrote:On December 01 2014 04:06 TheWinks wrote:
Win rates aren't everything. True, but the same inbalance from before this patch (P wins everything) now shows in T. I haven't really played a lot this season but as a P myself I am having an awful time against Terrans where I would crush them before. The winrates show the same differentation and the state of T is just not where it should be right now... The imbalance that existed for T included only 3 and 4 terrans in Code S. Last season there were still 16 protoss in Code S. Yes, but the Code A that got 16 Protoss into Code S was on the Season 3 map pool before the widow mine patch. Judging by how Code S went, it seems reasonable to say the patch did more than the map pool.
This!Map are imbalanced but Protoss players were winning on them...then the patch came and the win rates changed drastically
|
On December 01 2014 12:15 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
This isn't a surprise at all. Everyone knows what is happening. This thread is just going to be Terrans who are trying to justify Terran not getting nerfed against Zerg/Protoss who want it to happen. Blizzard is going to nerf terran or buff the other races eventually, but whether the pendulum ends up swinging the other way entirely or not really depends on the timing of LotV.
Nothing is going to change tho, not with LotV on the horizon, just see what happened with WoL and BL/Infestor, if you enter B.net and change your game client to WoL BL/Infetsor is as broken as always.
I'm not saying terran is broken, but that maps are a realistic solution rather than asking for random buffs/nerfs that people aren't even sure what they should be.
|
On December 01 2014 02:59 Wertheron wrote:
I think Blizz made the good choice. Terrans players are the most powerful lobby and whinners in Sc2 ^^. If P or Z are dominant we have shitstorms during months, but when T have stats like that, it's clearly not balance but T players think it is and forums are calm.
So, to save sc2 from balance drama, Blizz must make Terrans OP :p
^This. x1000. Terran players make the most shitstorm if things are slightly not going their way.
And then when its 52% in their favor "its only 52%."
If it's 55% in their favor "just this season, P and Z will adapt"
If its 59% in their favor "its the maps guys."
Some Terran players will never admit it though.
|
LOL i love this thread lol keep it coming people.
|
Nerf the mine again. Will help with both matchups
|
This thread has become such a whiny circlejerk it should just be closed. There's nothjng to be gained from this. Go complain in the designated balance discussion thread.
|
On December 01 2014 17:00 SC2Toastie wrote:
This thread has become such a whiny circlejerk it should just be closed. There's nothjng to be gained from this. Go complain in the designated balance discussion thread.
Totally agree.
Stop complaining about nerf and buffs, it's just maps, maps, maps, and maps again! Reposting the stats cause some still miss that point :
On December 01 2014 04:24 Gwavajuice wrote:
I'm surprised to see that some seem to think that maps are not the issue. So let's use TLPD.
From 31 july to 30 november, TvP records :
Balanced :
Deadwing : 34-36 (48.6%)
Overgrowth : 86-86 (50%)
King Sejong's station : 78-77 (50.3%)
Imbalanced :
Merry go round : 67-52 (56.3%)
Catallena : 37-27 (57.8%)
Foxtrot Labs : 32-22 (59.3%)
WTF :
Nimbus : 67-35 (65.7%)
So basically every bo5+ PvT since july has been imba, not because of mines or stuff, simply because of map pool.
Just replace Nimbus and Foxtrot by Frost and Habitation station, and the balance issue is solved.
|
agreed. change the map pool and let things go their course for a while.
if there are still some issues, address them then.
|
On December 01 2014 17:24 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 17:00 SC2Toastie wrote:
This thread has become such a whiny circlejerk it should just be closed. There's nothjng to be gained from this. Go complain in the designated balance discussion thread. Totally agree. Stop complaining about nerf and buffs, it's just maps, maps, maps, and maps again! Reposting the stats cause some still miss that point : Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 04:24 Gwavajuice wrote:
I'm surprised to see that some seem to think that maps are not the issue. So let's use TLPD.
From 31 july to 30 november, TvP records :
Balanced :
Deadwing : 34-36 (48.6%)
Overgrowth : 86-86 (50%)
King Sejong's station : 78-77 (50.3%)
Imbalanced :
Merry go round : 67-52 (56.3%)
Catallena : 37-27 (57.8%)
Foxtrot Labs : 32-22 (59.3%)
WTF :
Nimbus : 67-35 (65.7%)
So basically every bo5+ PvT since july has been imba, not because of mines or stuff, simply because of map pool. Just replace Nimbus and Foxtrot by Frost and Habitation station, and the balance issue is solved.
@Gwavajuice
How dare you analyse raw stats and give them a proper meaning ! This is a revert widow mine buff whine thread! Every single stats should be cherry picked out of its context and only serve the purpose of nerfing WM again. And you just come here and tell us we are wrong using some fancy statistic analysis ! I DON'T BELIEVE IN YOUR RELIGION !!
Nerf WM plz blizzard!
|
Minor changes, but I'd like to see:
WidowMine health nerf to 80, so that it dies to a single storm. +2 attack Banelings would then 2 shot Mines.
And If there were some way to nerf SCV pulls too that would be quite pleasant.
Other than that I think we should just play it out and let the weaker races adapt or learn to play towards a higher level.
|
If they announce LotV, they probably wont give a rats ass about the balance right now. Good luck on the battle field
|
diamond terran here
Yeah, Terrans are doing really good at the moment. I don't like the WM (in all MU), but I think the biggest factor for Terrans doing better is the map pool.
for example in season 2: Frost, Alterzim and Waystation were really bad maps for Terran (Frost was okay in TvP)
addition of Merry, Catallena, Foxtrot and even Nimbus (not too sure about Deadwing) are almost designed for Terrans.
Many drop options, but not offering too much surface for blinks and it's rather hard on them to secure the 3rd for P and Z too.
And the season 4 map pool, well it's a joke and rather good maps for terrans.
Problem back then about the MU was that playing Bio against Zerg on bigger maps was so hard to win if Z gets an easy 4th.
And with TvP: Terran still has not many early game options, needs to prepare for everything (well kinda learn it, too) and still hates lategame.
|
On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Since then, parts of Hot6ix and HSC V and all of DH:W were completed, for an additional 4-4 from Hot6ix, 7-6 from HSC V, and 23-21 from DH:W, both favoring Zerg, which brings my earlier total to 51.7% in favor of Zerg from a score of 90-84. I question the OP's methodology in using all games after the patch, because that suggests that all games after the patch fall under the same umbrella, that the situation today is the same as it was two months ago, and that simply isn't true. It takes time for responses to certain strategies to be figured out. Take the Hellbat push that Flash had such monstrous success with in Code S, yesterday ForGG tried it at least three times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure. My post isn't, strictly speaking, necessary, because everybody is being quite level headed about results that are much worse than the reality today. But the aims of the OP are suspect. Nowhere does he suggest that ZvT winrate has gone up consistently and considerably the longer the patch has been out. Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 01:27 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. They were, but since that time medivacs got a new free ability that allows them to zoom through any map pretty quickly They should maybe look at opening up the options of everyone else too. Whirlwind Innovation vs DRG had speedy Medivacs, and that was smaller than Deadwing and Catallena. I'm very glad that the community is willing to look at the maps first in this situation, I just don't think the mistake Blizzard made was a rookie one. As you go on to say, there are very many things to factor into map design. edit: updated with full HSC V results.
I agree with this methodology. All this stat gathering does not take skill disparity into account, and the skill disparity between foreigners and Koreans is huge right now. If Taeja were to beat five foreigner zerg players in a single tournament, it would skew the stats towards 'terran is OP' while arguably there isn't a single foreign zerg that even comes close to Taeja's level at the moment, including Snute. The situation is even worse for foreign Protoss players.
From a spectator's perspective, I don't mind Terran being a bit OP. They are the most fun to watch by a large margin because unlike Z and P, they cannot afford to turtle because they can neither match Zerg's economy and tech-switching ability, or Protoss' army strength. They have to be active and out on the map from the moment their first unit spawns.
|
|
|
I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped
to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong.
|
WM nerf is only a matter of time now.
|
|
|
On December 01 2014 19:14 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 19:07 NEEDZMOAR wrote:I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong. Do you have any evidence to back up that? If Chargelot/Archon (not even Templar?) was so strong then why were Colossi openings still so popular..?
I think it's more of a misconception than anyting else:
Before the widow mine was buffed blink all ins were ridiculously strong, mostly because maps just begged you to do it. Most Protosses, when didn't go 6 gate blink on 2 base, went for a small pressure, and could fall back really smoothly on Zealot templar because widow mines were so weak and as long as the Protoss did any damage, Terran couldn't really punish them with a counterattack (Photon Overcharge helped with drops). That way it seemed like templar openings were too good, when in reality, the maps were just too good for blink --> templar.
However now, blink pressure builds have to transition into collossi because of the insane strength of the widow mine.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 01 2014 18:54 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 02:16 pure.Wasted wrote:I'd like to throw out some different results I got doing something very similar earlier this month. Across MSI Beat It, Blizzcon, Hot6ix Qualifiers, and HSC V, counting only Korean vs Korean games (this impacted MSI and HSC V), TvZ was 51.3% in favor of Zerg from a score of 56-53. Since then, parts of Hot6ix and HSC V and all of DH:W were completed, for an additional 4-4 from Hot6ix, 7-6 from HSC V, and 23-21 from DH:W, both favoring Zerg, which brings my earlier total to 51.7% in favor of Zerg from a score of 90-84. I question the OP's methodology in using all games after the patch, because that suggests that all games after the patch fall under the same umbrella, that the situation today is the same as it was two months ago, and that simply isn't true. It takes time for responses to certain strategies to be figured out. Take the Hellbat push that Flash had such monstrous success with in Code S, yesterday ForGG tried it at least three times against Life over two series and failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. This despite Life's propensity to skip Roaches in defending early pressure. My post isn't, strictly speaking, necessary, because everybody is being quite level headed about results that are much worse than the reality today. But the aims of the OP are suspect. Nowhere does he suggest that ZvT winrate has gone up consistently and considerably the longer the patch has been out. On December 01 2014 01:27 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 01:08 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 01 2014 00:47 Maniak_ wrote:On December 01 2014 00:29 Nebuchad wrote:
The thread is doing better than expected, honestly. Most people recognize that the path that makes sense involves doing nothing and changing the maps. You would think that's obvious, but history tells us it's not. It would have been the thing to do in july instead of doing both. Doing only one now may not be enough to fix this mistake. Still it'd be a start and we'll see what happens afterwards. No need to rush things, we're already seeing what that accomplishes. In Blizzard's defense, they picked some HUGE maps for last season, which are traditionally the bane of a Terran's existence. They were, but since that time medivacs got a new free ability that allows them to zoom through any map pretty quickly They should maybe look at opening up the options of everyone else too. Whirlwind Innovation vs DRG had speedy Medivacs, and that was smaller than Deadwing and Catallena. I'm very glad that the community is willing to look at the maps first in this situation, I just don't think the mistake Blizzard made was a rookie one. As you go on to say, there are very many things to factor into map design. edit: updated with full HSC V results. I agree with this methodology. All this stat gathering does not take skill disparity into account, and the skill disparity between foreigners and Koreans is huge right now. If Taeja were to beat five foreigner zerg players in a single tournament, it would skew the stats towards 'terran is OP' while arguably there isn't a single foreign zerg that even comes close to Taeja's level at the moment, including Snute. The situation is even worse for foreign Protoss players. From a spectator's perspective, I don't mind Terran being a bit OP. They are the most fun to watch by a large margin because unlike Z and P, they cannot afford to turtle because they can neither match Zerg's economy and tech-switching ability, or Protoss' army strength. They have to be active and out on the map from the moment their first unit spawns.
Well, that is your view. I like only 2 Terrans, Maru and Bomber and they are both pretty rare nowadays. Then I like exactly 2 Zergs - soO and SoulKey(and, occasionally, Life, it depends on the mood). Then I love all the Protoss players, because I love Protoss. So I was watching CS:GO during Dreamhack, because TvT and TvZ are boring. I must say that it was a pleasure compared to SC2(reasons are not important, since it's not on topic).
Blizzard screwing pros with Dreampool didn't help with viewers experience(balance aside, we have the SAME map pool from July now, it is kinda boring now to watch the same things) and Terran won't save it at all too. 2/3 of players are not Terrans. We have to keep tourneys balanced, otherwise some of these people will stop watching. Also, if tournaments are easy to predict, there's no reason to watch it. It is the same as PvZ era, don't pretend it is different.
So I would be pretty careful saying things like Terran is the most fun to watch etc. when it is not True 
Balance wise the numbers - well, if we agree that Terran was recovering from weak era(and they were), we have to agree that they have to win more than other races to get back, so the numbers are supposed to be Terran favored. But last few tourneys showed Terran dominance, I mean - how do you want to play a macro game against Bbyong on KSS as a Protoss player? And that's not the worst map from the map pool... Or look at jjakji vs MC, game 6 - yes, MC was not supposed to win, but it showed everything what is wrong with PvT in a macro game from Protoss view, balance/design problems of P were shown, all of them.
|
On December 01 2014 19:14 SatedSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 19:07 NEEDZMOAR wrote:I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong. Do you have any evidence to back up that? If Chargelot/Archon (not even Templar?) was so strong then why were Colossi openings still so popular..?
You could play them on one gate till 9min.
Okay enough trolled.
As long as the Mappool does not change ( Eventused Mappool ), it is hard to say much about the Balance state: During other OP or weak times, we had at least 2 seasons (with 2 different pools) till balance issues were clear enough to adress.
With a new map and again a Season 1, where Terran dominates in facts of rates, events and race distribution, it has to be adressed. To adress anything now what is not the mappool, will lead to just a new mess. Yeah maybe a mess, where terran has to watch alot of ZPCraft again and Zerg and Protoss are happy again, but it will still be a mess.
Normally i would say the Offseason is the time for patching, but we had dreampool and this mappool is so worthless, that we cant conclude anythign from it ( and events dont use it anyway. )
And people who say "balance problems?", everything is fine: In such a game like SC, there will never be Balance, there can only be tried to ajust bits and bobs to get to a state near balance, but we will never see full balance between the races.
BW had never a balanced state, just a near balanced state. It had a rate of 54% in PvZ for example over all notified games.
Hell even chess is not balanced, white will allways have a advantage from the beginning. Thats why white plays for victory, black for stalemate.
And SC II, with his constant addons, the maps, the 3 different races, we will never see perfect balance, but we will see patches and map adjustments to come near to this state. But if we rush things, like we did last time, terran buff patch and map pool change ( one these were needed, who denies that shouldnt write in this thread ) maybe have been too much, but if we rush things again, we gain greater mess again. Dreampool ruined the map adjustment, so we have to wait till beginning of S1. Then watch S1, conclude and maybe act with a new patch to adress things.
|
just remove the +shield damage on widow mines.it's that easy.i dont know why terrans are so stubborn about this change.chargelots too strong? big deal.terrans have an easier tech path to hellbats now.
|
I think when 6 months have passed and Protoss are still losing, then it may be time to make changes to the maps. How long did Blink dominate the meta before they changed the maps to nerf the power of Blink pressure? That's exactly how long Protoss should have to try and figure out what to do about Widow Mines.
Funny thing is Terran isn't dominating the matchup in terms of win percent the way that Protoss was when the maps were Blink favored.
|
I think it's time for the classic "buff some race in a very boring way to eSportS killing status and screw Terran in the process until the next expansion" event.
It's what happened with Zerg at the end of WoL, maybe Protoss this time to prepare for their expansion, that would make sense?
Maybe range 11 for the colossus? Or is that too déjà-vu? Maybe a +25 starting energy for templars then, that should do it.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 01 2014 19:58 ZenithM wrote:
I think it's time for the classic "buff some race in a very boring way to eSportS killing status and screw Terran in the process until the next expansion" event.
It's what happened with Zerg at the end of WoL, maybe Protoss this time to prepare for their expansion, that would make sense?
Maybe range 11 for the colossus? Or is that too déjà-vu? Maybe a +25 starting energy for templars then, that should do it.
On more serious way - I would like to have the K.Amulet back for Templars who are not warped in. This way we can seriously buff Templar play and also make the gateway more reasonable than "it is there until the warpgate research finishes". We can introduce more buffs for units made from gateway with a mid game research. This way you can warp in unit and do not have the buff or ... eh, warp in unit from gateway(it is warping process too, terminology fail ) and have the boost. We can buff stalkers, zealots, sentries... whatever we can. I know that it will be messy, but it could fix a lot of problems with P design.
|
Maybe range 11 for the colossus? Or is that too déjà-vu? Maybe a +25 starting energy for templars then, that should do it.
You can say all you want about how imba Khaydarin Amulet is, but it advocates a fun playstyle.
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On December 01 2014 19:30 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 19:14 SatedSC2 wrote:On December 01 2014 19:07 NEEDZMOAR wrote:I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong. Do you have any evidence to back up that? If Chargelot/Archon (not even Templar?) was so strong then why were Colossi openings still so popular..? You could play them on one gate till 9min. Okay enough trolled. As long as the Mappool does not change ( Eventused Mappool ), it is hard to say much about the Balance state: During other OP or weak times, we had at least 2 seasons (with 2 different pools) till balance issues were clear enough to adress. With a new map and again a Season 1, where Terran dominates in facts of rates, events and race distribution, it has to be adressed. To adress anything now what is not the mappool, will lead to just a new mess. Yeah maybe a mess, where terran has to watch alot of ZPCraft again and Zerg and Protoss are happy again, but it will still be a mess. Normally i would say the Offseason is the time for patching, but we had dreampool and this mappool is so worthless, that we cant conclude anythign from it ( and events dont use it anyway. ) And people who say "balance problems?", everything is fine: In such a game like SC, there will never be Balance, there can only be tried to ajust bits and bobs to get to a state near balance, but we will never see full balance between the races. BW had never a balanced state, just a near balanced state. It had a rate of 54% in PvZ for example over all notified games. Hell even chess is not balanced, white will allways have a advantage from the beginning. Thats why white plays for victory, black for stalemate. And SC II, with his constant addons, the maps, the 3 different races, we will never see perfect balance, but we will see patches and map adjustments to come near to this state. But if we rush things, like we did last time, terran buff patch and map pool change ( one these were needed, who denies that shouldnt write in this thread ) maybe have been too much, but if we rush things again, we gain greater mess again. Dreampool ruined the map adjustment, so we have to wait till beginning of S1. Then watch S1, conclude and maybe act with a new patch to adress things.
black doesn't really play for stalemate in tournaments anymore.
|
On December 01 2014 21:00 KelsierSC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 19:30 Clonester wrote:On December 01 2014 19:14 SatedSC2 wrote:On December 01 2014 19:07 NEEDZMOAR wrote:I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong. Do you have any evidence to back up that? If Chargelot/Archon (not even Templar?) was so strong then why were Colossi openings still so popular..? You could play them on one gate till 9min. Okay enough trolled. As long as the Mappool does not change ( Eventused Mappool ), it is hard to say much about the Balance state: During other OP or weak times, we had at least 2 seasons (with 2 different pools) till balance issues were clear enough to adress. With a new map and again a Season 1, where Terran dominates in facts of rates, events and race distribution, it has to be adressed. To adress anything now what is not the mappool, will lead to just a new mess. Yeah maybe a mess, where terran has to watch alot of ZPCraft again and Zerg and Protoss are happy again, but it will still be a mess. Normally i would say the Offseason is the time for patching, but we had dreampool and this mappool is so worthless, that we cant conclude anythign from it ( and events dont use it anyway. ) And people who say "balance problems?", everything is fine: In such a game like SC, there will never be Balance, there can only be tried to ajust bits and bobs to get to a state near balance, but we will never see full balance between the races. BW had never a balanced state, just a near balanced state. It had a rate of 54% in PvZ for example over all notified games. Hell even chess is not balanced, white will allways have a advantage from the beginning. Thats why white plays for victory, black for stalemate. And SC II, with his constant addons, the maps, the 3 different races, we will never see perfect balance, but we will see patches and map adjustments to come near to this state. But if we rush things, like we did last time, terran buff patch and map pool change ( one these were needed, who denies that shouldnt write in this thread ) maybe have been too much, but if we rush things again, we gain greater mess again. Dreampool ruined the map adjustment, so we have to wait till beginning of S1. Then watch S1, conclude and maybe act with a new patch to adress things. black doesn't really play for stalemate in tournaments anymore.
Whoever introduced the fucking queen is a fucking fool and couldn't even wait for 800years of metagame development. Pretty sure black is soon going to win everything once they find out how to defend knights with their pawns and what then? All our aggressive tools are gone and we will never win against unbeatable lategame compositions of black.
And to those who say "just play turtle with your high tech pieces", the Sowjets dismantled that years ago. Of course, Russian White players may still win a tournament because they are just way better, but when every finals is India or Norway you fucking know there is something wrong.
|
On December 01 2014 21:44 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 21:00 KelsierSC wrote:On December 01 2014 19:30 Clonester wrote:On December 01 2014 19:14 SatedSC2 wrote:On December 01 2014 19:07 NEEDZMOAR wrote:I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong. Do you have any evidence to back up that? If Chargelot/Archon (not even Templar?) was so strong then why were Colossi openings still so popular..? You could play them on one gate till 9min. Okay enough trolled. As long as the Mappool does not change ( Eventused Mappool ), it is hard to say much about the Balance state: During other OP or weak times, we had at least 2 seasons (with 2 different pools) till balance issues were clear enough to adress. With a new map and again a Season 1, where Terran dominates in facts of rates, events and race distribution, it has to be adressed. To adress anything now what is not the mappool, will lead to just a new mess. Yeah maybe a mess, where terran has to watch alot of ZPCraft again and Zerg and Protoss are happy again, but it will still be a mess. Normally i would say the Offseason is the time for patching, but we had dreampool and this mappool is so worthless, that we cant conclude anythign from it ( and events dont use it anyway. ) And people who say "balance problems?", everything is fine: In such a game like SC, there will never be Balance, there can only be tried to ajust bits and bobs to get to a state near balance, but we will never see full balance between the races. BW had never a balanced state, just a near balanced state. It had a rate of 54% in PvZ for example over all notified games. Hell even chess is not balanced, white will allways have a advantage from the beginning. Thats why white plays for victory, black for stalemate. And SC II, with his constant addons, the maps, the 3 different races, we will never see perfect balance, but we will see patches and map adjustments to come near to this state. But if we rush things, like we did last time, terran buff patch and map pool change ( one these were needed, who denies that shouldnt write in this thread ) maybe have been too much, but if we rush things again, we gain greater mess again. Dreampool ruined the map adjustment, so we have to wait till beginning of S1. Then watch S1, conclude and maybe act with a new patch to adress things. black doesn't really play for stalemate in tournaments anymore. Whoever introduced the fucking queen is a fucking fool and couldn't even wait for 800years of metagame development. Pretty sure black is soon going to win everything once they find out how to defend knights with their pawns and what then? All our aggressive tools are gone and we will never win against unbeatable lategame compositions of black. And to those who say "just play turtle with your high tech pieces", the Sowjets dismantled that years ago. Of course, Russian White players may still win a tournament because they are just way better, but when every finals is India or Norway you fucking know there is something wrong.
Best Post this Thread.
|
On December 01 2014 11:14 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. When are you going to post your follow up article to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460550-welcome-to-zparcraft-ii on the current state of balance? Can I suggest the title "Welcome to Tarcraft?"
Sure. When Protoss:
- has less Code S representation in one year than the dominant race in any single season;
- has his very best players (Rain, Zest) lying in Code B to 3 buttons strategies;
- is the least played race at pro level since 2.5 years;
- passively starts the game behind on any map (including the most "standard" ones) against the dominant race;
- has 5% of the options of the dominant race;
- doesn't even have the small way-out of low-skill all-ins to dodge macro games;
- is robbed of the areas where it's supposed to shine by design;
- has the smallest margin of error and the weakest comeback potential;
- is the race that loses the most against inferior players, and in particular repeatedly gets coinflipped to death by the dominant race playing unscoutable low-skill builds with smooth transitions;
- doesn't get a single Premier title in 7 months;
- has only one man who keeps winning against all odds;
- is still declared fine by legions of tools who don't understand its winrates no longer mean anything because its subtop has been erased from existence in the first place;
Then I'm sure you will go through the small effort to write 40 pages based on 8 months of data to plead your case. From personal experience I can guarantee you will have ton of fun.
But don't worry, you won't have to. What will happen is that Blizzard will put 7 Overgrowth clones for WCS 2015 S1, Protoss will play colo dual forge again and people will realize that nope, Terran isn't structurally stronger than Protoss (which is the big difference with Zparcraft).
By the way, here are all the recent big tournaments including enough Koreans:
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_MSI_Beat_IT
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_WCS_Global_Finals
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/HomeStory_Cup/10
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_DreamHack_Open/Winter
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/32_Boys_1_Cup
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/PughCraft_Invitational_2
Waah, what a "Terrancraft" indeed… 1 title out of 6. Or probably 6 out of 6 with Doublemint's logic because A threw, plus if B does that, then C occurs and Terran wins anyway. (  )
Oh, and please follow http://challonge.com/leifengmf2 that is running as we speak; in particular pay attention to how Protoss got absolutely decimated so far, completely wiped by the extreme domination that TaeJa, Cure, Bbyong and Maru exerted against their Protoss opponents.
|
This is a horrible thread. All that needs to be fixed is the map pool. I hope the admins close this thread because it has spiraled out of control into a balance whining thread.
|
On December 01 2014 22:01 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 11:14 -_- wrote:On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. When are you going to post your follow up article to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460550-welcome-to-zparcraft-ii on the current state of balance? Can I suggest the title "Welcome to Tarcraft?" Sure. When Protoss: - has less Code S representation in one year than the dominant race in any single season; - has his very best players (Rain, Zest) lying in Code B to 3 buttons strategies; - is the least played race at pro level since 2.5 years; - passively starts the game behind on any map (including the most "standard" ones) against the dominant race; - has 5% of the options of the dominant race; - doesn't even have the small way-out of low-skill all-ins to dodge macro games; - is robbed of the areas where it's supposed to shine by design; - has the smallest margin of error and the weakest comeback potential; - is the race that loses the most against inferior players, and in particular repeatedly gets coinflipped to death by the dominant race playing unscoutable low-skill builds with smooth transitions; - doesn't get a single Premier title in 7 months; - has only one man who keeps winning against all odds; - is still declared fine by legions of tools who don't understand its winrates no longer mean anything because its subtop has been erased from existence in the first place; Then I'm sure you will go through the small effort to write 40 pages based on 8 months of data to plead your case. From personal experience I can guarantee you will have ton of fun. But don't worry, you won't have to. What will happen is that Blizzard will put 7 Overgrowth clones for WCS 2015 S1, Protoss will play colo dual forge again and people will realize that nope, Terran isn't structurally stronger than Protoss (which is the big difference with Zparcraft). By the way, here are all the recent big tournaments including enough Koreans: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_MSI_Beat_IThttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_WCS_Global_Finalshttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/HomeStory_Cup/10http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_DreamHack_Open/Winterhttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/32_Boys_1_Cuphttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/PughCraft_Invitational_2Waah, what a "Terrancraft" indeed… 1 title out of 6. Or probably 6 out of 6 with Doublemint's logic because A threw, plus if B does that, then C occurs and Terran wins anyway. ( ) Oh, and please follow http://challonge.com/leifengmf2 that is running as we speak; in particular pay attention to how Protoss got absolutely decimated so far, completely wiped by the extreme domination that TaeJa, Cure, Bbyong and Maru exerted against their Protoss opponents.
"Put your faith in the Dwf !"
Closing thread would be nice indeed ! TL did a great job concentrating every whine balance on a single thread! Hope it continues that way
|
Terran OP again. Nice to know that Blizzard is consistent.
I should note that this post was satire.
|
On December 01 2014 21:44 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 21:00 KelsierSC wrote:On December 01 2014 19:30 Clonester wrote:On December 01 2014 19:14 SatedSC2 wrote:On December 01 2014 19:07 NEEDZMOAR wrote:I for one loved the previous map-pool (not a terran) as a spectator its definitely the most fun Ive had in a while. plenty of aggression, various different strats, and the fact that protoss got their asses kicked really helped to the guy above me: chargelot archon was way too strong. Do you have any evidence to back up that? If Chargelot/Archon (not even Templar?) was so strong then why were Colossi openings still so popular..? You could play them on one gate till 9min. Okay enough trolled. As long as the Mappool does not change ( Eventused Mappool ), it is hard to say much about the Balance state: During other OP or weak times, we had at least 2 seasons (with 2 different pools) till balance issues were clear enough to adress. With a new map and again a Season 1, where Terran dominates in facts of rates, events and race distribution, it has to be adressed. To adress anything now what is not the mappool, will lead to just a new mess. Yeah maybe a mess, where terran has to watch alot of ZPCraft again and Zerg and Protoss are happy again, but it will still be a mess. Normally i would say the Offseason is the time for patching, but we had dreampool and this mappool is so worthless, that we cant conclude anythign from it ( and events dont use it anyway. ) And people who say "balance problems?", everything is fine: In such a game like SC, there will never be Balance, there can only be tried to ajust bits and bobs to get to a state near balance, but we will never see full balance between the races. BW had never a balanced state, just a near balanced state. It had a rate of 54% in PvZ for example over all notified games. Hell even chess is not balanced, white will allways have a advantage from the beginning. Thats why white plays for victory, black for stalemate. And SC II, with his constant addons, the maps, the 3 different races, we will never see perfect balance, but we will see patches and map adjustments to come near to this state. But if we rush things, like we did last time, terran buff patch and map pool change ( one these were needed, who denies that shouldnt write in this thread ) maybe have been too much, but if we rush things again, we gain greater mess again. Dreampool ruined the map adjustment, so we have to wait till beginning of S1. Then watch S1, conclude and maybe act with a new patch to adress things. black doesn't really play for stalemate in tournaments anymore. Whoever introduced the fucking queen is a fucking fool and couldn't even wait for 800years of metagame development. Pretty sure black is soon going to win everything once they find out how to defend knights with their pawns and what then? All our aggressive tools are gone and we will never win against unbeatable lategame compositions of black. And to those who say "just play turtle with your high tech pieces", the Sowjets dismantled that years ago. Of course, Russian White players may still win a tournament because they are just way better, but when every finals is India or Norway you fucking know there is something wrong.
We really need a Chess/SC2 analogy thread
But to stay on topic, i agree the map pool needs some work before any patch is done.
Some maps are pretty balanced and its ok to have a map favouring one race as long as maps favouring others are there.
What would be called a bad map for terran before can be just fine now, so we can avoid more patches like that.
If its still bad with toss and zerg favouring features on maps, then a patch should be on the way.
|
On December 01 2014 08:31 404AlphaSquad wrote:
This thread deserves to be closed. Everyone knows what this is coming to again and nothing is to be gained from this discussion.
but, but my popcorn...
|
I love that thedwf linked 32 boys and pughcraft.
The 3 premier's and most important tournaments he linked are pretty terran heavy on the top, the other actual important tournament that is going had 1 Zerg qualify and has 4 of 8 being terran on the ro8, lets also ignore that terran won all 3 wcs's, plz buff terran guyz.
Also maps are imba, but Terran is not winning anyways!
|
On December 01 2014 22:01 TheDwf wrote:
Then I'm sure you will go through the small effort to write 40 pages based on 8 months of data to plead your case. From personal experience I can guarantee you will have ton of fun.
I do hope that there won't be anyone to:
- take his own heavily biased opinions and present them as if they were objective, inarguable facts
- gather as many numbers as possible and find how to present them to 'prove' his points
- dismiss any other opinions because they obviously come from random noobs with no relevance whatsoever, or are heavily biased or simply stupid
- dismiss any other numbers on the basis that any number can be presented in a way to prove any point (except his own since they're facts)
- treat any disagreeing person as a hater or a stupid fanboy, whereas he himself is obviously right
Hopefully, no one else is sufficiently condescending, self-entitled and with enough time on his hands to submit TL to another 40 pages of "factual, objective and undisputable" whining for protoss or zerg.
In any case, we're stuck with the current state of the game until WCS 2015 S1, so not much to do until then.
I just wish Blizzard will stop listening to the amount of whining (on any side), since no matter what the results will be with new maps, some people will always find ways to turn anything into either a clear fact or an irrelevant detail depending on their bias and bullshit level.
|
On December 01 2014 22:01 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2014 11:14 -_- wrote:On December 01 2014 03:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 01 2014 03:13 SoulmaN__ wrote:
Just because someone's korean doesn't mean they're better. People like Bunny, Scarlett or Snute could easily make Code S if they tried Thanks for the good laugh, but no. Not a single chance. When are you going to post your follow up article to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/460550-welcome-to-zparcraft-ii on the current state of balance? Can I suggest the title "Welcome to Tarcraft?" Sure. When Protoss: - has less Code S representation in one year than the dominant race in any single season; - has his very best players (Rain, Zest) lying in Code B to 3 buttons strategies; - is the least played race at pro level since 2.5 years; - passively starts the game behind on any map (including the most "standard" ones) against the dominant race; - has 5% of the options of the dominant race; - doesn't even have the small way-out of low-skill all-ins to dodge macro games; - is robbed of the areas where it's supposed to shine by design; - has the smallest margin of error and the weakest comeback potential; - is the race that loses the most against inferior players, and in particular repeatedly gets coinflipped to death by the dominant race playing unscoutable low-skill builds with smooth transitions; - doesn't get a single Premier title in 7 months; - has only one man who keeps winning against all odds; - is still declared fine by legions of tools who don't understand its winrates no longer mean anything because its subtop has been erased from existence in the first place; Then I'm sure you will go through the small effort to write 40 pages based on 8 months of data to plead your case. From personal experience I can guarantee you will have ton of fun. But don't worry, you won't have to. What will happen is that Blizzard will put 7 Overgrowth clones for WCS 2015 S1, Protoss will play colo dual forge again and people will realize that nope, Terran isn't structurally stronger than Protoss (which is the big difference with Zparcraft). By the way, here are all the recent big tournaments including enough Koreans: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_MSI_Beat_IThttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_WCS_Global_Finalshttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/HomeStory_Cup/10http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_DreamHack_Open/Winterhttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/32_Boys_1_Cuphttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/PughCraft_Invitational_2Waah, what a "Terrancraft" indeed… 1 title out of 6. Or probably 6 out of 6 with Doublemint's logic because A threw, plus if B does that, then C occurs and Terran wins anyway. ( ) Oh, and please follow http://challonge.com/leifengmf2 that is running as we speak; in particular pay attention to how Protoss got absolutely decimated so far, completely wiped by the extreme domination that TaeJa, Cure, Bbyong and Maru exerted against their Protoss opponents.
yep. now it's really time to close this thread.
|
Germany25658 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
