EPTNothing to do with balance. But Protoss never had players as skilled as MVP, Life, Innovation, Maru or Serral in their prime.
Community Update - March 12, 2019 - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
This thread is starting to get out of hand. From this point on, if you are going to post statistics and/or data as a way to back up your statements about racial imbalances, then please post the sources as well. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
Nothing to do with balance. But Protoss never had players as skilled as MVP, Life, Innovation, Maru or Serral in their prime. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao. All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL. sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence ya hear that protoss players? get gud | ||
Poopi
France12758 Posts
On March 17 2019 01:05 BerserkSword wrote: wow so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao. All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL. sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence ya hear that protoss players? get gud I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I! To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race. The results are: Terran: 688k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac  Maru: 370kTY: 58kINnoVation: 42kGuMiho: 24kuThermal 31kCure 9kBunny 15kaLive 11kSpeCial 86kFanTaSy 0kHeRoMaRinE 42k370+58+42+24+31+9+15+11+86+42 Zerg: 1282k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac  Serral 478kDark 150kRogue 216ksoO 44kSolar 41kReynor 34kScarlett 100kElazer 46kImpact 23kRagnaroK 7kBly 23kLambo 36kSnute 15kLeenock 12kiAsonu 19kNerchio 38k478+150+216+44+41+34+100+46+23+7+23+36+15+12+19+38 Protoss: 783k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac  Zest 71kNeeb 125kClassic 151kShoWTimE 47kStats 191ksOs 89kHerO 27kDear 23kTrap 25kMaNa 17kPartinG 4kCreator 5kPtitDrogo 8k125+71+151+47+191+89+27+23+25+17+4+5+8 So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings. I conclude that your whinings are unfounded. | ||
NonY
8748 Posts
| ||
|
franzji
United States581 Posts
On March 16 2019 23:42 MockHamill wrote: Protoss have never had any genius level player in SC2. Nothing to do with balance. But Protoss never had players as skilled as MVP, Life, Innovation, Maru or Serral in their prime. lol User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
TrashPanda
69 Posts
On March 17 2019 01:49 Poopi wrote: I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I! To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race. The results are: Terran: 688k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac Maru: 370kTY: 58kINnoVation: 42kGuMiho: 24kuThermal 31kCure 9kBunny 15kaLive 11kSpeCial 86kFanTaSy 0kHeRoMaRinE 42k370+58+42+24+31+9+15+11+86+42 Zerg: 1282k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac Serral 478kDark 150kRogue 216ksoO 44kSolar 41kReynor 34kScarlett 100kElazer 46kImpact 23kRagnaroK 7kBly 23kLambo 36kSnute 15kLeenock 12kiAsonu 19kNerchio 38k478+150+216+44+41+34+100+46+23+7+23+36+15+12+19+38 Protoss: 783k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac Zest 71kNeeb 125kClassic 151kShoWTimE 47kStats 191ksOs 89kHerO 27kDear 23kTrap 25kMaNa 17kPartinG 4kCreator 5kPtitDrogo 8k125+71+151+47+191+89+27+23+25+17+4+5+8 So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings. I conclude that your whinings are unfounded. And I think he won't care. All he cares about is 1st place; that Protoss has by far the most 2nd places or was the most represented race in almost every international tournament does not matter. Maru and Serral are obviously scrubs who just won because their respective races are broken. Otherwise the players that counted as the best in HotS (how long ago was that again?) would still be the best today. | ||
|
WaesumNinja
210 Posts
I started playing some Protoss lately after barely playing as them since beta, and feel overwhelmed with options. I'm not even sure which race is supposed to be the strongest but it's not apparent in casual diamond level games. | ||
|
DomeGetta
480 Posts
Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31% | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
On March 17 2019 05:58 DomeGetta wrote: Thought this was interesting - is Toss the most popular race (thought Zerg was?) Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31% Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top? I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance. Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On March 17 2019 01:49 Poopi wrote: I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I! To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race. The results are: Terran: 688k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac Maru: 370kTY: 58kINnoVation: 42kGuMiho: 24kuThermal 31kCure 9kBunny 15kaLive 11kSpeCial 86kFanTaSy 0kHeRoMaRinE 42k370+58+42+24+31+9+15+11+86+42 Zerg: 1282k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac Serral 478kDark 150kRogue 216ksoO 44kSolar 41kReynor 34kScarlett 100kElazer 46kImpact 23kRagnaroK 7kBly 23kLambo 36kSnute 15kLeenock 12kiAsonu 19kNerchio 38k478+150+216+44+41+34+100+46+23+7+23+36+15+12+19+38 Protoss: 783k in 2018 among top 40 aligulac Zest 71kNeeb 125kClassic 151kShoWTimE 47kStats 191ksOs 89kHerO 27kDear 23kTrap 25kMaNa 17kPartinG 4kCreator 5kPtitDrogo 8k125+71+151+47+191+89+27+23+25+17+4+5+8 So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings. I conclude that your whinings are unfounded. LOL wtf? what do earnings have to do with game balance? On March 17 2019 04:45 TrashPanda wrote: And I think he won't care. All he cares about is 1st place; that Protoss has by far the most 2nd places or was the most represented race in almost every international tournament does not matter. Maru and Serral are obviously scrubs who just won because their respective races are broken. Otherwise the players that counted as the best in HotS (how long ago was that again?) would still be the best today. I never said Maru and Serral are scrubs. They are being made out to be head and shoulders above the best Protoss players though. And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race. | ||
|
pvsnp
7676 Posts
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race. ............. That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all. Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On March 17 2019 08:10 pvsnp wrote: ............. That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all. Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play. Yes I understand I am not talking about peaks and slumps though. I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019 A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc | ||
|
Pursuit_
United States1330 Posts
On March 17 2019 08:20 BerserkSword wrote: Yes I understand I am not talking about peaks and slumps though. I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019 A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc I'm sorry, but your one arbitrary metric is basically the only one that supports Protoss slumping in 2018. Tournament Wins: Terran: 4 Zerg: 8 Protoss: 2 Tournament Finals: Terran: 5 Zerg: 11 Protoss: 12 Unique Players Winning a Tournament: Terran: 1 Zerg: 3 Protoss: 2 Unique Players Making a Final: Terran: 2 Zerg: 5 Protoss: 8 Protoss winning only 2 tournaments was more a factor of Maru and Serral winning everything than Protoss under performing. | ||
|
Z3nith
485 Posts
On March 17 2019 06:36 MockHamill wrote: Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top? I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance. Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations. I think the suggestion that there are few Protoss at the extreme top is quite fallacious. If we're looking at premier events while yes Protoss only won 2 tournaments in 2018, they made the finals in 11. For some context Zerg were in the finals in 10 and Terran in 4. Yes, there wasn't someone necessarily on the tier of a Maru or a Serral last year, the closest being Stats but both of those two were setting records that hadn't been previously done in the game. I think the other element is the fact that generally within the Protoss pros there is less of an obvious no. 1 generally speaking in the same way there is for Terran and Zerg. Take a look last year for instance, Stats came into 2018 having had a stellar year and winning both SSL and GSL. However, he was soon replaced by Classic as the no. 1 Protoss for a time it was between them for best player. Then Zest got a finals at GSL and it became a three horse race. While Stats did eventually win out, it was a lot less clear cut than say Serral or Maru as to who the best was until around the time of GSL vs The World. This lack of one dominant player, I would argue is perhaps what plays into part of the thinking that Protoss does have the lower skill ceiling. Now the argument about whether or not Protoss is the easiest to play is interesting. It does make you wonder whether or not a player like sOs would be able to play to anywhere the near the standard he can if he was playing Zerg or Terran and honestly I doubt it. I do think that maybe as a result of players like sOs and herO and even MC to an extent that you could very much suggest that one's ability to play Protoss is least defined by how limited one's mechanics are (although herO is a possible exception in this case due to how fantastic his micro has historically been). This is because playing smart is a lot more highly valued to Protoss than either Terran or Zerg. If you look at the great players for Protoss there are two strains of thought. There are the great macro protoss in the vein of say Rain or Stats and then there are the Protoss thinkers/bullshitters depending on your opinion of the likes of sOs and MC. These are players that don't always have fantastic micro or even macro ability but that are nonetheless able to win outside the normal balance of the game/ all common sense. I think very rarely has a player ever been able to fuse both these schools of thought perhaps the only one being Zest in his period of dominance although his macro wasn't always great even then. Coming back to the skill ceiling of Protoss I think that that lack of ability to balance the two ways of thinking of protoss is what has meant that there can often appear to be a lack of absolutely god-tier players among the Protoss. There is usually at least one major flaw that the great Protoss have historically had that isn't present among their Terran and Zerg counterparts. sOs has historically been weak mechanically, Zest has never had the best macro, Stats is incredible but is far from infallible. I think if a protoss player could truly marry these two schools of thought together than the skill ceiling of protoss would easily be on a par with both races. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On March 17 2019 08:52 Pursuit_ wrote: I'm sorry, but your one arbitrary metric is basically the only one that supports Protoss slumping in 2018. Tournament Wins: Terran: 4 Zerg: 8 Protoss: 2 Tournament Finals: Terran: 5 Zerg: 11 Protoss: 12 Unique Players Winning a Tournament: Terran: 1 Zerg: 3 Protoss: 2 Unique Players Making a Final: Terran: 2 Zerg: 5 Protoss: 8 Protoss winning only 2 tournaments was more a factor of Maru and Serral winning everything than Protoss under performing. I dont know if you realize this or not, but Protoss only winning 2 tournaments out of 14 is the definition of under performing. On March 17 2019 09:22 Z3nith wrote: I think the suggestion that there are few Protoss at the extreme top is quite fallacious. If we're looking at premier events while yes Protoss only won 2 tournaments in 2018, they made the finals in 11. For some context Zerg were in the finals in 10 and Terran in 4. Yes, there wasn't someone necessarily on the tier of a Maru or a Serral last year, the closest being Stats but both of those two were setting records that hadn't been previously done in the game. I think the other element is the fact that generally within the Protoss pros there is less of an obvious no. 1 generally speaking in the same way there is for Terran and Zerg. Take a look last year for instance, Stats came into 2018 having had a stellar year and winning both SSL and GSL. However, he was soon replaced by Classic as the no. 1 Protoss for a time it was between them for best player. Then Zest got a finals at GSL and it became a three horse race. While Stats did eventually win out, it was a lot less clear cut than say Serral or Maru as to who the best was until around the time of GSL vs The World. This lack of one dominant player, I would argue is perhaps what plays into part of the thinking that Protoss does have the lower skill ceiling. Now the argument about whether or not Protoss is the easiest to play is interesting. It does make you wonder whether or not a player like sOs would be able to play to anywhere the near the standard he can if he was playing Zerg or Terran and honestly I doubt it. I do think that maybe as a result of players like sOs and herO and even MC to an extent that you could very much suggest that one's ability to play Protoss is least defined by how limited one's mechanics are (although herO is a possible exception in this case due to how fantastic his micro has historically been). This is because playing smart is a lot more highly valued to Protoss than either Terran or Zerg. If you look at the great players for Protoss there are two strains of thought. There are the great macro protoss in the vein of say Rain or Stats and then there are the Protoss thinkers/bullshitters depending on your opinion of the likes of sOs and MC. These are players that don't always have fantastic micro or even macro ability but that are nonetheless able to win outside the normal balance of the game/ all common sense. I think very rarely has a player ever been able to fuse both these schools of thought perhaps the only one being Zest in his period of dominance although his macro wasn't always great even then. Coming back to the skill ceiling of Protoss I think that that lack of ability to balance the two ways of thinking of protoss is what has meant that there can often appear to be a lack of absolutely god-tier players among the Protoss. There is usually at least one major flaw that the great Protoss have historically had that isn't present among their Terran and Zerg counterparts. sOs has historically been weak mechanically, Zest has never had the best macro, Stats is incredible but is far from infallible. I think if a protoss player could truly marry these two schools of thought together than the skill ceiling of protoss would easily be on a par with both races. That's an awfully convoluted way to say that you think Protoss players are just inherently less skilled. You even went so far as to invent two protoss schools of thought LOL sOs wouldnt be able to play anywhere near the standard he can if he played Zerg or Terran? The man won several premier tournaments including multiple blizzcons for fucks sake. The fact that he's written off as a "thinker"/bullshitter who wouldnt achieve what he did with Zerg or Terran is incredibly biased lol....and insulting to sOs if he were here to read it. Mechanics and "playing smart" are both necessary in ALL races. The reason Protoss players never seem to to achieve the heights of Terran or Zerg players is because the race is so inconsistent and punishing. The same thing happened in Brood War. Protoss could never achieve much for years on end. All the bonjwas were Terran with the exception of savior who played zerg......zero protoss bonjwas. Then people realized that the game/maps were balanced against protoss, changes were made, and Protoss became more successful at the top levels | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20275 Posts
On March 16 2019 23:42 MockHamill wrote: Nothing to do with balance. But Protoss never had players as skilled as MVP, Life, Innovation, Maru or Serral in their prime. That's an incredibly biased and arrogant statement. There have been plenty of protoss legends! | ||
|
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On March 17 2019 09:49 BerserkSword wrote: I dont know if you realize this or not, but Protoss only winning 2 tournaments out of 14 is the definition of under performing. That's an awfully convoluted way to say that you think Protoss players are just inherently less skilled. You even went so far as to invent two protoss schools of thought LOL sOs wouldnt be able to play anywhere near the standard he can if he played Zerg or Terran? The man won several premier tournaments including multiple blizzcons for fucks sake. The fact that he's written off as a "thinker"/bullshitter who wouldnt achieve what he did with Zerg or Terran is incredibly biased lol....and insulting to sOs if he were here to read it. Mechanics and "playing smart" are both necessary in ALL races. The reason Protoss players never seem to to achieve the heights of Terran or Zerg players is because the race is so inconsistent and punishing. The same thing happened in Brood War. Protoss could never achieve much for years on end. All the bonjwas were Terran with the exception of savior who played zerg......zero protoss bonjwas. Then people realized that the game/maps were balanced against protoss, changes were made, and Protoss became more successful at the top levels Honestly give it a rest bro rofl. You make a statement that "protoss winning 2 tournaments is the definition of underperforming". Serral and Maru won everything..so by that logic literally everyone else is the definition of underperforming? There have been at least 4 posts with other metrics that show evidence to the contrary and you just keep parroting the same thing. If by your logic only winning a tournament is success then 99 percent of all players of all races are the definition of underperforming. Ignore all the actual reasons they are patching the matchup and just hold o to "only 2 first place last year  " please make a 14th post about it. | ||
|
the caz dog
Australia17 Posts
On March 17 2019 12:42 Cyro wrote: That's an incredibly biased and arrogant statement. There have been plenty of protoss legends! This is an underlying issue that we as a community have let persist for too long. There is seemingly a pretty vocal element of our community who believe the following: 1. Protoss takes less skill to play than Terran 2. A Terran must play significantly better than a Protoss to win 3. If you lose as Terran you got 'Protossed', but if you win as Terran it's because the Protoss made mistakes It's pretty clear that Blizzard is pandering to this vocal element more and more. I mean, nerfing Air upgrades as well? And not even addressing the potential effects in PvZ? It will slow down a Protoss' upgrade advantage, so perhaps it will make a difference. The question is - is it even needed? I get that the matchup feels frustrating, but significantly imbalanced? Pro level play isn't showing it, and few people can agree on what the 'problem' is. It's also interesting to see the response to the meta. Protoss starts getting 2-based, and we try and adapt to deal with it. When we start to hold such pushes, some Terrans immediately turn to whining...which makes sense in many ways. Maru and friends will win more GSLs (reinforcing how much more awesome Terran players all are), and ladder Terran players don't actually have to look at themselves and how they can improve their play. As Incontrol says, when some Terrans lose, it's like you've kicked over their sandcastle! So Protoss will take the nerf, if only to placate Terran dissatisfaction. But it won't be enough, because it never is. Just add it to the ever-growing list of Protoss nerfs. Some people carry on about mech - but we've seen what happens when we buff mech units; they get used to make bio even more powerful. Something does need to change, because the current trajectory of Protoss isn't looking pretty - and that applies to PvZ too, where Infestor/Broodlord is making lategame pretty untenable. I think some elements of Protoss are a bit of a mess at the moment, and many units need reexamination (particularly Stargate units). But I'm guessing the time and effort isn't available within Blizzard anymore to do the kind of detailed and thorough analysis to make the game better for everyone. I think they should create a consulting panel (of players from all races, and informed observers like Artosis, for example) who can provide input for balance and design changes. Hell, maybe they already do that and this is the best they can do. I think balancing this game will be even harder now, thanks to the memes and twitch chat and so on. We are living in an era of instant, visceral and polarising debate. Nuance, patience and moderation are virtues, and it'd be nice to see some more Terrans (particularly leading streamers) embody them more. TLDR - Let's wait till GSL finishes (I hear Terrans are doing ok there) | ||
|
fastr
France901 Posts
On March 17 2019 09:49 BerserkSword wrote: I dont know if you realize this or not, but Protoss only winning 2 tournaments out of 14 is the definition of under performing. That's an awfully convoluted way to say that you think Protoss players are just inherently less skilled. You even went so far as to invent two protoss schools of thought LOL sOs wouldnt be able to play anywhere near the standard he can if he played Zerg or Terran? The man won several premier tournaments including multiple blizzcons for fucks sake. The fact that he's written off as a "thinker"/bullshitter who wouldnt achieve what he did with Zerg or Terran is incredibly biased lol....and insulting to sOs if he were here to read it. Mechanics and "playing smart" are both necessary in ALL races. The reason Protoss players never seem to to achieve the heights of Terran or Zerg players is because the race is so inconsistent and punishing. The same thing happened in Brood War. Protoss could never achieve much for years on end. All the bonjwas were Terran with the exception of savior who played zerg......zero protoss bonjwas. Then people realized that the game/maps were balanced against protoss, changes were made, and Protoss became more successful at the top levels Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias.[1][2] Cherry picking may be committed intentionally or unintentionally. This fallacy is a major problem in public debate. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking) So in your case BerserkSword, this is evidently intentional. Like someone else said, you chose the only metric that supported your claim. When confronted with other metrics, which by the way are statistically more significant because their sample size is a lot larger (you can also google sample size to understand why it's so important), you just refuse to acknowledge them. I'm not going to keep arguing with you as you're not ready to change your position on the subject, and I believe Z3nith raised interesting points that I tend to agree with regarding the way we view top protoss players. I'll just say this. In the investment field, there's a common trope that is always given as advice for beginners: "Past performance is no guarantee of future results". It means that if a certain stock has been appreciating in value, there's no reason to believe that it will keep appreciating. While the analogy is not perfect for starcraft, it has some value when trying to understand how the player's skill and result can shift in such a quick time. Let's look at Blizzcon winners for the past 4 years. Blizzcon is now the biggest/most prestigious tournament of the year and every winner had a strong case for best player in the world at the time. 2015: sOs wins Blizzcon. He then fails to qualify for 2016 GSL Code S season 1 and has a really disappointing year except a lost code S final to byun, and finishes 13th in WCS point standings, failing to qualify for Blizzcon 2016. 2016: After winning Code S in September, ByuN wins Blizzcon 2016 in dominant fashion. Most rank him at best player in the world. He then proceeds to lose in the Ro32 in the 2017 GSL Code S season 1. After a disappointing year, ByuN finishes 10th in standings and fails to qualify for Blizzcon 2017. 2017: After an excellent year winning IEM Shanghai and super tournament 2, Rogue wins Blizzcon 2017 and is undisputably the best player in the world. He then gets knocked out in the subsequent Code S Ro32 by aLive and Scarlett. After a disappointing start, Rogue finishes the year strong and ends up qualifying in the 6th spot for Blizzcon 2018. 2018: After winning all WCS events, Serral goes 14-3 in maps and crushes top koreans on his way to win Blizzcon 2018. He is the first foreigner to be crowned best player in the world. After not losing an offline serie in almost a year, Serral loses 3 in a row from IEM Katowice to WESG. The obvious point I'm trying to make here is that from 2015 to 2017, the 3 blizzcon winners either failed to qualify or lost in the ro32 of the next GSL season, and all but one failed to qualify for next year's blizzcon. Balance was never the cause. The most obvious reason was complacency/lack of practice after winning it all. Starcraft can also be random sometimes and champions can lose to underdogs. Rogue losing to aLive and Scarlett after winning Blizzcon wasn't a balance issue. Stats losing to cure while surprising to most, isn't that surprising when you look at how Blizzcon winners/finalist performed the next GSL. | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
Youre right random stuff can happen, but that does not explain why it has been so widespread. You are the one trying to spin ridiculous narratives of why Protoss legends collectively got stomped throughout 2018 and into 2019 excuses I've heard in this thread -they inherently less skilled -Maru and serral are gods -Protoss players didnt practice as much -shit happens, it's a coincidence the "other metrics" that supposedly supersede the fact that only 2 out of 14 premier tournaments were won by protoss players are nowhere near as important. Second place is nice and all, but the point of these tournaments is to win them | ||
| ||
