|
On February 13 2017 02:14 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +1. This buff will help Zerg defeat Skytoss even though Skytoss will remain OP as always. (At least they can run away from storm a little bit faster)
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should go through.
I never said it was my logic. It's just what I've seen across most of the posts here/reddit/bnet. Show nested quote +
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
4M vs Muta/Ling/Bane seems quite balanced to me. Just like in the old days of HotS. Also TvZ balance has been +/- 3% of 50% for months now on Aligulac, ever since 3.8. Terran is certainly favored against Protoss, but Zerg?
Lots of intelligent people have commented to stop using aligulac for balance discussions..
There's so much wrong with it it is ridiculous. Does aligulac account for the fact that there is only 1 good terran in Europe who hasn't even been practicing the last few months (Uthermal)?
|
I have been seeing some SH plays vP on streams from the likes of Snute and True. Personally I have been trying to incorporate them into vP as well at a lower level. Maybe people should quit bitching about SH and actually try making the units instead of qq-ing.
The corrupter buff is welcomed, but unnecessary. Would a small health buff to the viper break the game? (maybe +5 to 10 health)
Widow mines splash change is great, for PvT mainly.
I like the hydra buff, but I think Zergs will be in a really comfortable place if this goes though (as in slightly OP).
|
Lots of intelligent people have commented to stop using aligulac for balance discussions..
There's so much wrong with it it is ridiculous. Does aligulac account for the fact that there is only 1 good terran in Europe who hasn't even been practicing the last few months (Uthermal)?
I know. I've read those posts. And in almost all of the intelligent ones (meaning not the counter-whine l2p/i-don't-like-aligulac-when-it-disagrees-with-me ones) they say that Aligulac is a useful but not perfect tool.
I know there are tons of flaws with Aligulac. But is there some mythical perfect algorithm that accounts for player skill, reaction time, thought process, and has all the data on every game ever played?
Aligulac isn't perfect or even close. But it's the best we've got. The alternative is solely basing balance off of totally subjective individual experiences. And if you want that, bnet has plenty of rage threads already.
EDIT: I agree with you that there's a problem with Aligulac and Terran. Specifically that the Koreans have disproportionately dominant Terrans while the rest of the world has disproportionately feeble ones. This problem is only worsened when someone like Innovation goes on a killing spree and triggers a dozen balance whine threads on his own (like he has been recently).
|
aligulac is pretty meaningless
balance is a feeling not a number boyz
|
It would be nice if there was a place to check win rates of every major & premier tournaments, its very easy to do as well.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
What i can do is to check every premier tournaments win rates by clicking them one by one.
I checked like last 10 premier tournaments and its always terran favoured, some of them drastically. And its been like this even before 3.8.
Considering that Aligulac wouldn't lie, i guess there are lots of zerg wins in minor events to cover this imbalance in the statistics.
|
It would be nice if there was a place to check win rates of every major & premier tournaments, its very easy to do as well.
(Wiki)Premier_Tournaments
What i can do is to check every premier tournaments win rates by clicking them one by one.
I checked like last 10 premier tournaments and its always terran favoured, some of them drastically. And its been like this even before 3.8.
Considering that Aligulac wouldn't lie, i guess there are lots of zerg wins in minor events to cover this imbalance in the statistics.
Yeah, that's useful too. But is that really an indication of balance? Tournament stats suffer from the opposite problem of aligulac; instead of too many samples of dubious quality, they have too few samples of high quality.
Like I said in a previous post, who wins in a tournament setting is dependent on a lot of variables besides balance. For instance, Dark was knocked out of GSL yesterday. But he was in the Group of Death. If he had been in Group C or D, perhaps he could go on to win GSL altogether. Bracket luck plays a huge role in who wins tournaments. Not to mention, Classic hardcountered his greedy ling/bane build with great forcefields and splits. Is this an indication of imbalance, or just good play by Classic? The answer is obvious.
Currently Innovation is hailed as the greatest player in the world. Before 3.8, ByuN was called the same. Both of them participate in as many Premier Tournaments as they can, and obviously won a lot of tournament matches. Does this mean their race is imba solely because one player is successful? I hardly think so.
Brackets, skill, builds, all these factors exert great influence over who wins and who loses in tournaments. In the end, taking ~100 games divided over six matchups means that the sample sizes are minuscule. Far too small to draw any meaningful conclusions about balance by relying on Premier Tournaments alone.
I guess my point is: There's no reliable source from which to measure balance. Aligulac and tournaments are handy tools but in the end asserting one race is imbalanced because of subjective interpretation is exactly that: subjective.
|
On February 13 2017 02:14 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +1. This buff will help Zerg defeat Skytoss even though Skytoss will remain OP as always. (At least they can run away from storm a little bit faster)
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
Therefore, it's pretty easy to draw the conclusion that: This buff should go through.
I never said it was my logic. It's just what I've seen across most of the posts here/reddit/bnet. Show nested quote +
2. This buff won't affect TvZ adversely, which is still terran favoured anyway.
4M vs Muta/Ling/Bane seems quite balanced to me. Just like in the old days of HotS. Also TvZ balance has been +/- 3% of 50% for months now on Aligulac, ever since 3.8. Terran is certainly favored against Protoss, but Zerg?
4M vs Muta/Bling is not balanced like it was. It can't be as new economy model with more workers at the start favors Terran (Bio is mineral based composition. And second but more important reason is macro nerf that was much more painful for Zerg than for Terran. Mules are almost as strong as they were but 3 larva instead of 4 is huge as it snowballs from early game to late midgame.
|
4M vs Muta/Bling is not balanced like it was. It can't be as new economy model with more workers at the start favors Terran (Bio is mineral based composition. And second but more important reason is macro nerf that was much more painful for Zerg than for Terran. Mules are almost as strong as they were but 3 larva instead of 4 is huge as it snowballs from early game to late midgame.
Certainly there have been chances from HotS, I'm not saying the MU is exactly the same. But it's not as though Zerg has only received nerfs and Terran only buffs. Marauders have split attacks now, Banes have +5 health, burrowed fungals are a thing, etc.
My point was that TvZ is balanced right now, or as close as any MU is ever going to be. One side is not clearly dominant and, like in HotS, there is enormous micro potential on both sides, so the more skilled player typically wins.
To be sure, at the very top Terrans seem to be doing better right now. Watching GSL, INnoVation is invincible against Zergs, but really, that says more about INnoVation than it does about Zerg. Like Artosis said:
"I don't think that TvZ is imbalanced but INnoVation vs Z certainly is."
|
My point was that TvZ is balanced right now, or as close as any MU is ever going to be. Unlike say TvP one side is not clearly dominant and, like in HotS, there is enormous micro potential on both sides, so the more skilled player typically wins.
The game should be balanced around best players - as they are the only persons who represent what the game really offers. True? Well already above someone mentioned how it looks in premier tournaments - and results are heavily Terran favored.
Aligulac - lets look at ratings of best Terran players vs Zerg.
Innovation - 2839
Byun - 2730
Maru - 2788
TY 2580
Compared to best Zerg ratings vs Terran
Dark - 2532
Solar - 2415 etc. (EU ratings are incomparable to Korea ratings)
There is a huge difference which is very apparent. Almost 400 points between best Terran and best Zergs - which clearly indicates the balance is very far off target. If you take 5 best Terrans and 5 best Zergs you will get win ratio of 70-30 in favor of Terran.
By the way - herO with a rating of 2736 vs Zerg.(best Zerg vs P rating 2495 is also indicative of a problem)
So no, the game is not balanced and it is very far from being balanced. You may not see this but a minor change like the reaper buff might change the whole MU dramatically, as apart from giving a possibility of a straight win, it gives a huge economic advantage with no plausible counter - unless you consider some wild all-in strategy as a plausible counter.
|
The game should be balanced around best players - as they are the only persons who represent what the game really offers. True? Well already above someone mentioned how it looks in premier tournaments - and results are heavily Terran favored.
Aligulac - lets look at ratings of best Terran players vs Zerg.
Innovation - 2839
Byun - 2730
Maru - 2788
TY 2580
Compared to best Zerg ratings vs Terran
Dark - 2532
Solar - 2415 etc. (EU ratings are incomparable to Korea ratings)
There is a huge difference which is very apparent. Almost 400 points between best Terran and best Zergs - which clearly indicates the balance is very far off target. If you take 5 best Terrans and 5 best Zergs you will get win ratio of 70-30 in favor of Terran.
By the way - herO with a rating of 2736 vs Zerg.(best Zerg vs P rating 2495 is also indicative of a problem)
So no, the game is not balanced and it is very far from being balanced. You may not see this but a minor change like the reaper buff might change the whole MU dramatically, as apart from giving a possibility of a straight win, it gives a huge economic advantage with no plausible counter - unless you consider some wild all-in strategy as a plausible counter.
Dude I LITERALLY just finished talking about how Aligulac is flawed. It takes in data from a broad spread of sources (GSL to Masters-level), between players of vastly differing skill (NationWars), and as a result ranks people who play larger quantities of games higher than they ought to be (Nerchio, who plays a lot online, is ranked higher than Dark, who doesn't).
Irony of ironies, a second ago I was defending aligulac as a useful (but flawed) tool and here I am now pointing out that it is a flawed (but useful) one. Don't want to sound tetchy, but c'mon dude, read the previous posts.
I think I have whiplash. Medic!
Oh, and you are making the same mistake I see all the time from balance whiners. Yes, the game should be balanced. Yes, top-level play gives the best indication whether or not the game is balanced. NO the top-level players should NOT always have 50% winrates in all matchups.
The more skilled player should consistently win.
Nobody has exactly the same skill at the top; the best Zerg does not equal the best Protoss does not equal the best Terran. If you're telling me Innovation, currently the best player in the world, should be winning 50% of his games otherwise "Terran imba!" then you clearly have no understanding of balance.
So no, the game is not balanced and it is very far from being balanced.
I am not saying the game is balanced. I want to make this clear: I am saying your argument that the game is imbalanced is based on untenable evidence. There is a difference.
|
Dude I LITERALLY just finished talking about how Aligulac is flawed. It takes in data from a broad spread of sources (GSL to Masters-level), between players of vastly differing skill (NationWars), and as a result ranks people who play larger quantities of games higher than they ought to be (Nerchio, who plays a lot online, is ranked higher than Dark, who doesn't).
Irony of ironies, a second ago I was defending aligulac as a useful (but flawed) tool and here I am now pointing out that it is a flawed (but useful) one. Don't want to sound tetchy, but c'mon dude, read the previous posts.
I read your post and I know it is flawed, especially if you take all results into consideration, like Koreans playing cross server, all EU tournaments where best protoss and terrans do not participate. It is hardly flawed if you only take results of best players from Korea into consideration. The mentioned players do not play in hundreds of tournaments, they mainly play between each other. If you want to look at balance you have to look at results and even if a rating may be a bit off - a difference of several hundred Aligulac points is indicative of balance issues. If this does not help you - take a look at results between the best players, as I did.
If you have a group of players from a given race that is better than the best players from other races by a huge margin - it is nothing less than obvious.
|
I read your post and I know it is flawed, especially if you take all results into consideration, like Koreans playing cross server, all EU tournaments where best protoss and terrans do not participate. It is hardly flawed if you only take results of best players from Korea into consideration. The mentioned players do not play in hundreds of tournaments, they mainly play between each other. If you want to look at balance you have to look at results and even if a rating may be a bit off - a difference of several hundred Aligulac points is indicative of balance issues. If this does not help you - take a look at results between the best players, as I did.
Ok, if you read my posts, then sorry for getting annoyed.
Still, I disagree that the Aligulac top ten list is valid evidence for imbalance. Dark, for instance, is the best Zerg but he rarely if ever participates in online tourneys. ByuN on the other hand is a great Terran who jumps into nearly every small online cup there is, even the ones in Australia and America. It is only natural that their Aligulac scores place ByuN higher than Dark when their actual skill level is far closer.
Furthermore, if you look only at the best players then you run headlong into the problem I mentioned above. The best of each race are not equals. Sometimes they aren't even close; look at how TY beat Stats in Group A or how Inno beat soO in Group B, those games were laughably one-sided. But does that serve as proof Terran is imbalanced? Hardly.
To claim that people like TY and Innovation are only good because of their race is not only false but grossly insulting to the years of work that they've put into mastering the game. (Not to mention ridiculous in its premise; if players' races were truly the massive crutch that Twitch GMs claim, then why is there only one Dark, or herO, or Innovation?)
I'd like to reiterate: I am not saying the game is balanced. It's entirely possible that Terran is in fact favored in the current meta, and I actually think so myself (to a slight degree). I'm saying that using Aligulac's top ten list doesn't prove imbalance.
|
The fact that neeb is top 10 just cries ridiculousness. GSL rankings are more relevant.
It honestly looks like a starcraft version of any sport betting site. A hoax.
|
On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote:
Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
Honestly if Blizzard just implemented everything written here the game would be much better for it. Everyone knows that Swarm Hosts are broken, auto turrets are too strong and interceptors should go back to their old price.
Why delay a change that would improve the game.
|
On February 12 2017 21:36 Extenz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 16:09 avilo wrote:
Ok, time to bring in the real talk here.
1) Swarmhosts are currently ridiculously overpowered versus mech.
This is a fact. You can ask any mech player or even Zerg players themselves, or infested Terrans like myself that play both races. This unit was removed from the game (essentially) for a reason before, and it's because it generates free income.
It needs to be toned down massively. Mech will be viable after that. Increase the price of swarmhosts to double the current price, change swarmhosts to LIGHT TAG so they can be chased down by hellions, and give them less health so that they can be caught and killed.
These nerfs might seem heavyhanded and too many, but this unit honestly does not belong in Starcraft.
2) Along with the above, once swarmhosts are fixed, ravens are the next counter part on the list. Auto-turrets are just as bad as locusts currently, allowing ravens to infinitely scale as they produce free income from energy. My suggestion for this is simply blizzard should increase auto-turret energy to 75 energy.
This fix alone will address ravens without making the unit useless. You'll have to think more carefully about how you allocate energy, since you won't be able to PDD/seeker/mass turret anymore.
3) Tempests/Carriers need to be toned down.
People saying Zerg AA is too weak might not have tried mass burrow neural/fungal + corruptor etc. Zerg AA is fine imo (i play a ton of Zerg) what is not fine are how bullshit carriers are atm. We all know objectively interceptors should be 25 minerals as they originally were, so you can now fungal interceptors or use mines on interceptors to fight the carriers. This alone will fix the carrier issue that everyone knows is a problem, including blizzard.
Just revert interceptors to 25 minerals, and carriers are most likely fixed and not a balance issue anymore.
You forgot to mention that Protoss has no counter to BC/Pdd.
It's called iteration. You change/fix the parameters that are currently showing to be a problem. Once those are addressed, then i agree BCS could be looked at, but not until the current issues are fixed, because those being solved might show that BCS are NOT a problem. Or they may show they ARE a problem.
The SC2 dev team needs to learn iteration though. Make changes that are relevant, then make a new set of changes. They barely make any changes at all, and when they do it's to irrelevant non-sense such as hydralisks.
They need to pin point the core problems like i did in that post above and address those immediately. Everything else is irrelevant until those are fixed.
|
To claim that people like TY and Innovation are only good because of their race is not only false but grossly insulting to the years of work that they've put into mastering the game.
TY: Prior to his quarterfinals matches, TY was in a losing streak in Proleague, losing four games in a row to Bunny, Maru, ByuL and Trap. Contrary to his rather disappointing previous result, TY won his GSL Ro8 match with a set score of 3-0. His semifinals opponent was Cure. Many expected this series to be closer than his previous series, however TY won with a set score of 4-0, not dropping a single map since Ro8 to go his first finals in 3060 days.
Innovation: In an interview, he mentioned that he saw 2016 as a "year taken off".[5] INnoVation said that he played a lot of League of Legends (after his practicing sessions), and that it affected his focus on the game.
It does not appear Innovation the most focused hard working SC2 player around. But maybe Terran players are just more talented than players from other races who practice consistently hard and who do not have instant surges of form while being semi-retired.
|
On February 13 2017 07:30 Kafka777 wrote:
It does not appear Innovation the most focused hard working SC2 player around. But maybe Terran players are just more talented than players from other races who practice consistently hard and who do not have instant surges of form while being semi-retired.
I don't really know what you're trying to say here. Neither about TY (especially about TY tbh, I'm at a loss there, quoting his LP entry only served to confuse me), nor about INnoVation. While INnoVation essentially "took a year off", he is one of the hardest working players right now. He has played almost 400 tournament games since patch 3.8.0 came out and who knows how many hours of ladder he has streamed and played off-stream.
|
Im referring to TY's exceptional form - best in 8 years. While Innovation by his own words, did not take the last 12 months very seriously and nevertheless is in the best form of his life. Not unlike many other Terrans at the moment. Im not saying they are bad players - they are exceptionally good, but the patches implemented over the last several months have greatly helped them find themselves in this spot.
|
On February 13 2017 08:24 Kafka777 wrote:
Im referring to TY's exceptional form - best in 8 years. While Innovation by his own words, did not take the last 12 months very seriously and nevertheless is in the best form of his life. Not unlike many other Terrans at the moment. Im not saying they are bad players - they are exceptionally good, but the patches implemented over the last several months have greatly helped them find themselves in this spot.
TY has been a top 3 Terran for all of LotV, certainly the best at times. He's such a very different case from INnoVation who had a terrible first year in LotV and is now back to peak form.
|
Im referring to TY's exceptional form - best in 8 years. While Innovation by his own words, did not take the last 12 months very seriously and nevertheless is in the best form of his life. Not unlike many other Terrans at the moment. Im not saying they are bad players - they are exceptionally good, but the patches implemented over the last several months have greatly helped them find themselves in this spot.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
More commonly known as the correlation vs causation fallacy.
Though I am happy to see that you do at least recognize the exceptional skill of players like TY and Innovation.
It does not appear Innovation the most focused hard working SC2 player around. But maybe Terran players are just more talented than players from other races who practice consistently hard and who do not have instant surges of form while being semi-retired.
You don't seem to understand what I've been saying. Aside from the fact that 'hardest work = best results' is obviously false in both Starcraft and life in general, there is still no proof that Terran (vs Zerg) imbalance exists in anything you have said.
Aligulac's top ten don't prove it. You saying so doesn't prove it. Until you have proof, getting outraged at "Terran imba!" is just immature (not to mention premature) whining.
And in case you were wondering what I meant by proof, I meant consistently lopsided results at every level of the matchup, across a sample of thousands of players.
....yknow, the kind that has been exhibited by TvP in the past few months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
