|
On June 11 2019 05:22 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 04:57 renaissanceMAN wrote:On June 11 2019 04:39 Charoisaur wrote: I think Viking + 5 hp would fix the matchup and save esports are you david kim Is bunker being changed again? Anyways, are we just looking for ways to make the match-ups more *fun*? Because that's subjective, and the game is already incredibly balanced at high level play: http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ and if you're in lower level play, then there are other things one can focus on to improve.
I mean, people are throwing some ideas out that definitely feel more 'fun' than necessarily game-fixing, but regardless of that, it's hard to judge the game based on a single source of information (even if that source is a particularly good one).
How would you explain pros who are openly saying that PvZ is broken and there was only a single Terran in the RO8 based on that chart?
(definitely not trying to argue how good/bad Aligulac is, just playing devil's advocate)
|
On June 11 2019 05:39 renaissanceMAN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 05:22 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 11 2019 04:57 renaissanceMAN wrote:On June 11 2019 04:39 Charoisaur wrote: I think Viking + 5 hp would fix the matchup and save esports are you david kim Is bunker being changed again? Anyways, are we just looking for ways to make the match-ups more *fun*? Because that's subjective, and the game is already incredibly balanced at high level play: http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ and if you're in lower level play, then there are other things one can focus on to improve. I mean, people are throwing some ideas out that definitely feel more 'fun' than necessarily game-fixing, but regardless of that, it's hard to judge the game based on a single source of information (even if that source is a particularly good one). How would you explain pros who are openly saying that PvZ is broken and there was only a single Terran in the RO8 based on that chart? (definitely not trying to argue how good/bad Aligulac is, just playing devil's advocate)
Of course more data and more sources is great, but anecdotal evidence isn't. I think compiling win/loss data at the pro level- rather than appealing to a few complaints- would make for a much stronger argument. There's variation to consider as well. For example, if several recent top tier tournaments had a reasonably balanced distribution of races but one or two of those tournaments had an underrepresented race, that may not be a big deal. It might, but it might not.
On topic though: Warp prism energy would be way too limiting imo. They can't heal like medivacs can, so they need to still have some useful functionality.
|
PvZ is a bigger issue than PvT but it seems like it's a similar issue- Protoss has a lot of ways to straight up just get the W, and they're hard to scout accurately and then still hard to hold.
Seeing the way that Stats is getting tooled over lately, it's easy to understand why the aggressive Protoss are playing the way they do. If you want to fix PvX, you need to incentive longer games and not just nerf the all-ins. This is kind of what Blizzard seemed to be trying to do with the most recent Immortal changes.
In the current state of the game, you are getting hit by warp prism harass fairly early which there's no realistic chance of shutting down because a warp prism + [matchupUnit] is more mobile and effective than whatever units Terran and Zerg are fielding at that point. Battlemech is getting popular because Cyclones can tell a prism to fuck off for a minute. This pressure is extremely consistent and transitions smoothly into whatever attack Protoss wants to do, which could be any number of lethal things depending on the matchup. Zest's stream is a clinic.
Oracles and Phoenix are highly mobile harassers, but they can't outmaneuver and kill your defensive units while you're in the process of defending without taking damage.
Personally I think the warp prism pickup distance should be reduced back to pre-changes, maybe a small speed nerf, and maybe increasing the build time. Reduce the P players' ability to globetrot around what should be a competent defense, decrease the margin of error for controlling the prism, and increase the punishment for losing it by taking time from the robo.
|
On June 10 2019 21:53 SC2RandomPotatoe wrote: I'm very much aware that this will probably be disregarded, but thought I'll give it a try anyway.
1) Slight HP Buff to the Siege Tank in Tank mode
Similar to the Hellion/Hellbat, it would only make sense if the tank is given an hp buff in its less vulnerable state (aka Tank Mode). This would help Terran to defend early aggression from Protoss (Blink Stalkers, Warp Prism Pressure) by making Tanks more durable. On the other hand, this would hardly affect TvZ at all, since unsieged Tanks never really played a significant role there due to the plethora of counters available.
2) Making Warp Ins via Warp Prism require energy
By limiting the number of warp ins available per Warp Prism (25 energy per warp in would equal 8 units max, 20 would equal 10 etc.) it would become what it was originally intended to be: a tool for harassment rather than for warping in entire armies. Additionally, the time period between each harassment would be drastically increased, since waiting until enough energy has been replenished would become a necessity. This would allow new methods of counterplay (e.g. EMPs) as well. The Warp Prism strength in PvP and PvZ would be weakend, too, so one has to keep a close eye on that.
3) Thor's Targeting Priority in High Impact Payload Mode
This is more of a QOL change than an actual balance suggestion. Thors have become a useful tool in defending Carriers due to their superior range. When in High Impact Payload Mode they still prioritize to attack Interceptors rather than the Carrier, which makes little to no sense. Considering Carriers require barely any focus during a battle, it would only be fair, if Thors would require a similar level of attention.
Thank you for reading!
Hi, I just really hate your second suggestion and here is why: I used to play Protoss. I enjoyed playing Protoss, I now have switched to Zerg. In 7 years I never played Terran for more than ~10 games. I do not enjoy their design, their mechanics, neither their macro nor their micro. But some people do, so it is their main race, because they enjoy it the most. So if you make suggestion 1 and 3 to the race you actually play, then these designs reflect designs you already enjoy, but your suggestion, even if I don't play Protoss mainly these days, would make me never want to play Protoss again, WP with energy would be so cumbersome, it would feel so ... Terran.
|
United States32479 Posts
On June 11 2019 04:56 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 03:30 SSNYC77 wrote:On June 11 2019 03:11 deacon.frost wrote:On June 11 2019 01:55 yyltyler wrote: This PvT recorded 53% win rate in season 2, 43% in season 1, below 50% in WCS spring, below 50% in super tournament (I didn’t count qualifiers)
Why do all the suggestions involve nerfing protoss in the matchup when it is clearly not overpowered judging by the numbers? If anything, the number is tilted in terran’s favour (though I think it is balanced) I don’t get why PvT is a tragedy.
If something needs to be fixed it is PvZ. All the recent tournaments record above 50% protoss win rate by a large margin, including super tournament, WCS and GSL. RO12 IEM - 1 Terran, eliminated. GSL ST 1T 7P, for the first time in history we broke the record and made a new history record with 7 people of the same race in the RO8. This broke GOMTvT and BLInfestor era. BW included according to many. Code S RO16 - 8P, 4T 4Z. Those are 3 top tournaments with the top players(Except Classic @ IEM) without proper Terran representation. The only saving grace of Terrans was Maru in the Code S and that's not happening either. Maybe that's the reason? 1 or 2 tournaments can be an exception, 3 tournaments? How long will we close eyes? What was the most zergs ever in top8/16? + Show Spoiler [Big breakdown] +Looking at purely the Korean tournaments
The current era: ST 2019 1 - Ro16: 9P, 2T, 5Z, Ro8: 7P, 1Z (Note: I think it's worthwhile to point out that a large racial number in a prior round will often follow into the subsequent rounds, so it's not unusual to see a large number of P in the Ro8. However, 7P in a ro8 is quite strange) GSL - Ro16: 8P, 4T, 4Z, Ro8: 5P, 1T, 2Z (For an era where one race is stronger than another, 5 of any race in the Ro8 is quite common, though 8 in the round of 16 was among the higher ones overall, though lower in the bigger imbalanced tournaments)
The purported Z-favoured era (Note: I really don't know when this era started, but whenever it was, it was really quite short, as it lasted from around mid-2012 to early-2013, and then we switched to Heart of the Swarm)
2012 GSL 2 - Ro16: 7P, 7T, 2Z, Ro8: 5P, 3T (This was the season of the famous MVP/Squirtle finals, and it happened right before I think the famous Broodlord/Infestor era, and this season is rather striking when compared to how people tend to remember 2012 as being about the Broodlord/Infestor time)
2012 GSL 5 - Ro16: 2P, 6T, 8Z, Ro8: 1P, 3T, 4Z (This season was the infamous "IMBA, IMBA, IMBA" note from Ryung, and even with a ZvZ finals, it still only had 4Z in the ro8, though it did have 8Z in the ro16) 2012 Blizzard Cup - Ro10: 4P, 1T, 5Z, Ro6: 1P, 5Z (This tournament was a final of finals of sort, and it also had a strange Ro10, which was rarely, if ever, seen in a premier tournament ever again) 2013 GSL 1 - Ro16: 3P, 5T, 8Z, Ro8: 2P, 2T, 2Z (Again, despite having a ZvZ finals, it had relatively fewer Zs in the Ro8/16 compared to more imbalanced seasons. Also, this was the final GSL before the HotS switch)
The infamous GOMTvT era 2011 GSL January - Ro16: 4P, 9T, 3Z, Ro8: 2P, 4T, 2Z (Interestingly, despite having 9T in the ro16, there were only 4T in the ro8. However, there were 3T in the ro4, and it was a TvT finals) 2011 GSL ST - Ro16: 1P, 9T, 6Z, Ro8: 1P, 6T, 1Z (This tournament tied for the most T in the ro8. Also, of note is this had 4T in the Ro4) 2011 GSL August - Ro16: 4P, 9T, 3Z, Ro8: 2P, 5T, 1Z (This tournament again had a TvT finals) 2011 GSL October - Ro16: 1P, 10T, 5Z, Ro8: 6T, 2Z (This was one of the few tournaments noted in this list where one race did not show up in the ro8, the other one being in 2012 season 2. Also of note, this was the largest number of a single racial group I found in the ro16, and it also had 6T in the ro8. Once more, it had 4T from the ro4 on) 2011 GSL November - Ro16: 5P, 8T, 3Z, Ro8: 2P, 5T, 1Z (Balance had obviously shifted at this point, and there were more races in the Ro8/Ro4, despite the overrepresentation of T in the Ro16/8).
This does not look at all Korean tournaments (and it ignores foreign tournaments), and it focuses primarily on either the biggest offenders of racial representation or during the eras of known imbalance. I didn't find any really large groups during the 2014 GSLs, and aside from this year, LotV has been remarkably balanced compared to prior versions.
Looking at this, it seems that the current GSL season, although it overrepresents P in the Ro16/8, 8/5 respectively are among the lower numbers of the overrepresented seasons, though of course, it is still in a category of overrepresentation. The outlier seems to be 2019 GSL ST 1, with of course, the 7P in the ro8. During a time of imbalance, it's not unusual to see a similar number, and I'm not sure if 1 more person over the 6 that we've seen in the past is really that huge. It might be, but it might not be.
The other note on this is that the biggest overall time of overrepresentation was in 2011 GSL October, with 10T in the ro16, which we have never seen before or since and the 6T in the ro8, which even this season does not surpass. Additionally, this was about almost a full year's worth of tournaments in the TvT era, whereas we have only seen 2 tournaments that were like this. In terms of eras of overrepresentation, this does count among them, but we'd need more tournaments to conclusively tell that it was worse/better compared to prior times. TL;DR: 2019 ST with 7P was definitely bad, but the GSL season is relatively tame compared to prior times of overrepresentation. However, this past season does indeed fall into the category of having one racial group overrepresented over the other.
Thanks for the summary :O!
I had the same gut feeling that this wasn't that different from GomTvT in 2011 or BL-Infestor in late 2012~early 2013. However, I think one could draw the conclusion that even if Protoss dominance in GSL isn't unprecedented, it's still analogous to past game-states that the community disliked and wanted to see fixed.
To quote David Kim back in 2016:
[TL.net]: I read an interesting post by an Overwatch designer where he talked about the "perception" of balance. This might just be me reading between the lines, but do you feel like you're forced to manage the community's perception of balance versus what the stats are telling you?
David Kim: Every game is different so I can’t really speak to Overwatch and what’s right for that, but for StarCraft what we think is that the perception is part of the balance. Like, if perception was bad and the data was good, then we would say that a part of balance is bad because community perception is such a huge part of getting balance right.
I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced.
|
I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced.
That's very true.
|
just nerf the prism. give it less health, remove the speed upgrade, make it cost 100 gas, make it slower in regular mode, make it an upgrade for pick up range. any one of these nerfs would help in both vz and vt
|
Northern Ireland20680 Posts
I actually like many of these ideas a lot, although I think PvT is actually pretty OK at the top level currently. Not 100% perfect, not actually that bad. If one was to gauge based on the vociferousness of complaining you'd think PvT was completely broken and PvZ wasn't that bad, I think it's the opposite there.
Other ideas I had myself was either slow warpins if they're done via a prism, increase gateway cooldowns if they've warped to a prism, or make units warped to a prism cost more.
|
On June 11 2019 07:14 SC2RandomPotatoe wrote:Show nested quote +I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced. That's very true.
I think my only fear is that in trying to change the perception of balance (as well as the actual balance itself), we end up shooting off into the other direction. An example I like to bring up is the 2014 Blink era. Truly, it was an imbalanced time, but after the nerfs to P and buffs to T, we had as many TvT finals during 2014 as PvP finals in addition to an abysmal PvT winrate.
|
I think the buff to tank hp in tank mode is actually not a terrible idea, the other two ideas I would file under terran wishful thinking.
|
Northern Ireland20680 Posts
On June 11 2019 07:19 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 07:14 SC2RandomPotatoe wrote:I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced. That's very true. I think my only fear is that in trying to change the perception of balance (as well as the actual balance itself), we end up shooting off into the other direction. An example I like to bring up is the 2014 Blink era. Truly, it was an imbalanced time, but after the nerfs to P and buffs to T, we had as many TvT finals during 2014 as PvP finals in addition to an abysmal PvT winrate. It's a dangerous road to go down, people can be idiots and their perceptions can be well, well off. Everyone has their biases, and I'm no exception.
I suck, suck, SUCK with Zerg, I'm bad at reacting to things smartly in game (to the degree Zergs have to anyway), Protoss was my main, at one stage in WoL my Terran was as good as my Protoss, actually probably better and my TvP was my best matchup.
From my experiences all the races have certain difficulties and strengths, they appeal to different mindsets and styles, or mechanical or strategic skills.
As a long time WC3 player for example, actually micro was, and still is absolutely my strength. So I was best at PvP in the 4 gate era because (on average) my micro was better than the competition, I initially switched to Terran not because I thought they were strong but because outside of early game small engagemeents, I didn't think I got enough out of being good at micro (relatively) with Protoss and Terran fit better, and at that time that proved to be largely correct.
For every 'oh my units require so much micro to be good', on the other side there are the occasions where your opponent (or you if you offace) wishes you could actually do more micro with your units.
I mean it sounds a bit BM to put it in such a way, but there's a segment of the Terran playerbase who think that because they have to micro bio (often badly tbh) that it's unfair and that the game needs to be rebalanced because 'Terran master race' or whatever.
This isn't to say the game is great balance wise currently, but the reality is that neither Protoss or Zerg, outside of smaller early game stuff, or lategame technical comps can possibly get as much out of their units from good micro as Terran can, it's always been the other side of the coin - effective A move comps that you can't really get more out of vs incredibly microable comps that are either stomped or stomp depending on how good your micro is.
|
just make prisms use the slow warpin, it would remove the problem of running a prism into your opponent's main when they're out of position and instantly warping in a ton of zealots, while still allowing you to reinforce your army provided you keep it well protected
|
On June 10 2019 21:58 DSh1 wrote: Personally, playing against siege tanks is one of the most annoying things in sc2. So I would be against a siege tank buff.
Regarding Warp Prisms: I didn't know it was not intended for reinforcing armies. I thought this was primarily the purpose as opposed to harassment.
The Thor change sounds nice, though I don't know if that's easy to do or consistent with other targetting rules.
The problem with warpins is that being able to fly a prity cheep (200 mineral unit) into your oponents main should not be a mid or late game win condition. But it is. If terran trys to fly 40 supply of army into your main yeah its scary but at least their is an inehrint risk that they lose a medivac or sevral of them for free and the opponent gets a strong trade. The problem with warprism is that thier is very little risk involved in loosing it in mid or late game situations. Yet if it does make it into the main its devistating. protoss should not be able to so easly put 30 o 40 supply of zelots in your main without more risk involved if they fail. Imagine what happens to terran or zerg if they lose 30 to 40 supply of units in drop ships, protoss just does not have that kind of risk involved in their drops. yes nydus is also strong but past midgame it has way more counter play. nydus can be shut down by an observant player with only like 12 supply of units at home. Where as for toss to counter prism terran or zerg have to make walls of static d any where they might want to warpin. its an utterly ridiculous unit. But wait it does more. Not only is it a 200 mineral win condition, it also gives protoss extermly powerfull micro potential that in the right hands makes their pvz pushes almost unstopable. This is why the unit needs nerfs. Iether the other races need counters, or the unit needs to be tuned down. If blizz does not want to nerf it than at least give us counter play. maybes give terran and zergs a somewhat expensive statci d structure that denies warpins from occurring in an area about the size of your main, make it fairly costly so that you cant use it offensively.
|
On June 11 2019 07:36 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 07:19 FrkFrJss wrote:On June 11 2019 07:14 SC2RandomPotatoe wrote:I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced. That's very true. I think my only fear is that in trying to change the perception of balance (as well as the actual balance itself), we end up shooting off into the other direction. An example I like to bring up is the 2014 Blink era. Truly, it was an imbalanced time, but after the nerfs to P and buffs to T, we had as many TvT finals during 2014 as PvP finals in addition to an abysmal PvT winrate. It's a dangerous road to go down, people can be idiots and their perceptions can be well, well off. Everyone has their biases, and I'm no exception. I suck, suck, SUCK with Zerg, I'm bad at reacting to things smartly in game (to the degree Zergs have to anyway), Protoss was my main, at one stage in WoL my Terran was as good as my Protoss, actually probably better and my TvP was my best matchup. From my experiences all the races have certain difficulties and strengths, they appeal to different mindsets and styles, or mechanical or strategic skills. As a long time WC3 player for example, actually micro was, and still is absolutely my strength. So I was best at PvP in the 4 gate era because (on average) my micro was better than the competition, I initially switched to Terran not because I thought they were strong but because outside of early game small engagemeents, I didn't think I got enough out of being good at micro (relatively) with Protoss and Terran fit better, and at that time that proved to be largely correct. For every 'oh my units require so much micro to be good', on the other side there are the occasions where your opponent (or you if you offace) wishes you could actually do more micro with your units. I mean it sounds a bit BM to put it in such a way, but there's a segment of the Terran playerbase who think that because they have to micro bio (often badly tbh) that it's unfair and that the game needs to be rebalanced because 'Terran master race' or whatever. This isn't to say the game is great balance wise currently, but the reality is that neither Protoss or Zerg, outside of smaller early game stuff, or lategame technical comps can possibly get as much out of their units from good micro as Terran can, it's always been the other side of the coin - effective A move comps that you can't really get more out of vs incredibly microable comps that are either stomped or stomp depending on how good your micro is.
is this really the case though? I would say that well microed terran late game is even at best with protoss air armada. yamoto on bcs is prity good, but toss have started to figure out counter play to the yamato and jump away strats. Mainly just pouncing on terran as soon as they get collsi+ storm and straight up ending the game id say any tech below that and terran army only goes even with a toss army if terran is fully set up and sieged and toss fights into it.
vs zerg I totally agree the cost efficiency can just get absurd but vs toss Im less convinced.
|
#3 would be amazing for Mech in TvP.
On June 11 2019 10:56 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 07:36 Wombat_NI wrote:On June 11 2019 07:19 FrkFrJss wrote:On June 11 2019 07:14 SC2RandomPotatoe wrote:I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced. That's very true. I think my only fear is that in trying to change the perception of balance (as well as the actual balance itself), we end up shooting off into the other direction. An example I like to bring up is the 2014 Blink era. Truly, it was an imbalanced time, but after the nerfs to P and buffs to T, we had as many TvT finals during 2014 as PvP finals in addition to an abysmal PvT winrate. It's a dangerous road to go down, people can be idiots and their perceptions can be well, well off. Everyone has their biases, and I'm no exception. I suck, suck, SUCK with Zerg, I'm bad at reacting to things smartly in game (to the degree Zergs have to anyway), Protoss was my main, at one stage in WoL my Terran was as good as my Protoss, actually probably better and my TvP was my best matchup. From my experiences all the races have certain difficulties and strengths, they appeal to different mindsets and styles, or mechanical or strategic skills. As a long time WC3 player for example, actually micro was, and still is absolutely my strength. So I was best at PvP in the 4 gate era because (on average) my micro was better than the competition, I initially switched to Terran not because I thought they were strong but because outside of early game small engagemeents, I didn't think I got enough out of being good at micro (relatively) with Protoss and Terran fit better, and at that time that proved to be largely correct. For every 'oh my units require so much micro to be good', on the other side there are the occasions where your opponent (or you if you offace) wishes you could actually do more micro with your units. I mean it sounds a bit BM to put it in such a way, but there's a segment of the Terran playerbase who think that because they have to micro bio (often badly tbh) that it's unfair and that the game needs to be rebalanced because 'Terran master race' or whatever. This isn't to say the game is great balance wise currently, but the reality is that neither Protoss or Zerg, outside of smaller early game stuff, or lategame technical comps can possibly get as much out of their units from good micro as Terran can, it's always been the other side of the coin - effective A move comps that you can't really get more out of vs incredibly microable comps that are either stomped or stomp depending on how good your micro is. is this really the case though? I would say that well microed terran late game is even at best with protoss air armada. yamoto on bcs is prity good, but toss have started to figure out counter play to the yamato and jump away strats. Mainly just pouncing on terran as soon as they get collsi+ storm and straight up ending the game id say any tech below that and terran army only goes even with a toss army if terran is fully set up and sieged and toss fights into it. vs zerg I totally agree the cost efficiency can just get absurd but vs toss Im less convinced.
Maru seems able to play it against Protoss efficiently. Gumiho can if he gets a good map and a good start, Not sure about TY and Inno wants to pull the boys or hit some sharp timing. This makes me think about something Polt said yesterday on stream. ''I don't think Protoss is imbalanced in TvP, i just think Protoss is too easy in TvP.''
|
So once again. The solution is "Remove Protoss from the Game"
I expect you'll be on the Blizzard balance team in about a week.
|
Just reduce Warp Prism's pick up range and have it do slow warp-ins should fix a lot of the problems. Right now it provides too much utility for a unit that doesn't cost gas.
|
On June 11 2019 06:24 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2019 04:56 FrkFrJss wrote:On June 11 2019 03:30 SSNYC77 wrote:On June 11 2019 03:11 deacon.frost wrote:On June 11 2019 01:55 yyltyler wrote: This PvT recorded 53% win rate in season 2, 43% in season 1, below 50% in WCS spring, below 50% in super tournament (I didn’t count qualifiers)
Why do all the suggestions involve nerfing protoss in the matchup when it is clearly not overpowered judging by the numbers? If anything, the number is tilted in terran’s favour (though I think it is balanced) I don’t get why PvT is a tragedy.
If something needs to be fixed it is PvZ. All the recent tournaments record above 50% protoss win rate by a large margin, including super tournament, WCS and GSL. RO12 IEM - 1 Terran, eliminated. GSL ST 1T 7P, for the first time in history we broke the record and made a new history record with 7 people of the same race in the RO8. This broke GOMTvT and BLInfestor era. BW included according to many. Code S RO16 - 8P, 4T 4Z. Those are 3 top tournaments with the top players(Except Classic @ IEM) without proper Terran representation. The only saving grace of Terrans was Maru in the Code S and that's not happening either. Maybe that's the reason? 1 or 2 tournaments can be an exception, 3 tournaments? How long will we close eyes? What was the most zergs ever in top8/16? + Show Spoiler [Big breakdown] +Looking at purely the Korean tournaments
The current era: ST 2019 1 - Ro16: 9P, 2T, 5Z, Ro8: 7P, 1Z (Note: I think it's worthwhile to point out that a large racial number in a prior round will often follow into the subsequent rounds, so it's not unusual to see a large number of P in the Ro8. However, 7P in a ro8 is quite strange) GSL - Ro16: 8P, 4T, 4Z, Ro8: 5P, 1T, 2Z (For an era where one race is stronger than another, 5 of any race in the Ro8 is quite common, though 8 in the round of 16 was among the higher ones overall, though lower in the bigger imbalanced tournaments)
The purported Z-favoured era (Note: I really don't know when this era started, but whenever it was, it was really quite short, as it lasted from around mid-2012 to early-2013, and then we switched to Heart of the Swarm)
2012 GSL 2 - Ro16: 7P, 7T, 2Z, Ro8: 5P, 3T (This was the season of the famous MVP/Squirtle finals, and it happened right before I think the famous Broodlord/Infestor era, and this season is rather striking when compared to how people tend to remember 2012 as being about the Broodlord/Infestor time)
2012 GSL 5 - Ro16: 2P, 6T, 8Z, Ro8: 1P, 3T, 4Z (This season was the infamous "IMBA, IMBA, IMBA" note from Ryung, and even with a ZvZ finals, it still only had 4Z in the ro8, though it did have 8Z in the ro16) 2012 Blizzard Cup - Ro10: 4P, 1T, 5Z, Ro6: 1P, 5Z (This tournament was a final of finals of sort, and it also had a strange Ro10, which was rarely, if ever, seen in a premier tournament ever again) 2013 GSL 1 - Ro16: 3P, 5T, 8Z, Ro8: 2P, 2T, 2Z (Again, despite having a ZvZ finals, it had relatively fewer Zs in the Ro8/16 compared to more imbalanced seasons. Also, this was the final GSL before the HotS switch)
The infamous GOMTvT era 2011 GSL January - Ro16: 4P, 9T, 3Z, Ro8: 2P, 4T, 2Z (Interestingly, despite having 9T in the ro16, there were only 4T in the ro8. However, there were 3T in the ro4, and it was a TvT finals) 2011 GSL ST - Ro16: 1P, 9T, 6Z, Ro8: 1P, 6T, 1Z (This tournament tied for the most T in the ro8. Also, of note is this had 4T in the Ro4) 2011 GSL August - Ro16: 4P, 9T, 3Z, Ro8: 2P, 5T, 1Z (This tournament again had a TvT finals) 2011 GSL October - Ro16: 1P, 10T, 5Z, Ro8: 6T, 2Z (This was one of the few tournaments noted in this list where one race did not show up in the ro8, the other one being in 2012 season 2. Also of note, this was the largest number of a single racial group I found in the ro16, and it also had 6T in the ro8. Once more, it had 4T from the ro4 on) 2011 GSL November - Ro16: 5P, 8T, 3Z, Ro8: 2P, 5T, 1Z (Balance had obviously shifted at this point, and there were more races in the Ro8/Ro4, despite the overrepresentation of T in the Ro16/8).
This does not look at all Korean tournaments (and it ignores foreign tournaments), and it focuses primarily on either the biggest offenders of racial representation or during the eras of known imbalance. I didn't find any really large groups during the 2014 GSLs, and aside from this year, LotV has been remarkably balanced compared to prior versions.
Looking at this, it seems that the current GSL season, although it overrepresents P in the Ro16/8, 8/5 respectively are among the lower numbers of the overrepresented seasons, though of course, it is still in a category of overrepresentation. The outlier seems to be 2019 GSL ST 1, with of course, the 7P in the ro8. During a time of imbalance, it's not unusual to see a similar number, and I'm not sure if 1 more person over the 6 that we've seen in the past is really that huge. It might be, but it might not be.
The other note on this is that the biggest overall time of overrepresentation was in 2011 GSL October, with 10T in the ro16, which we have never seen before or since and the 6T in the ro8, which even this season does not surpass. Additionally, this was about almost a full year's worth of tournaments in the TvT era, whereas we have only seen 2 tournaments that were like this. In terms of eras of overrepresentation, this does count among them, but we'd need more tournaments to conclusively tell that it was worse/better compared to prior times. TL;DR: 2019 ST with 7P was definitely bad, but the GSL season is relatively tame compared to prior times of overrepresentation. However, this past season does indeed fall into the category of having one racial group overrepresented over the other. Thanks for the summary :O! I had the same gut feeling that this wasn't that different from GomTvT in 2011 or BL-Infestor in late 2012~early 2013. However, I think one could draw the conclusion that even if Protoss dominance in GSL isn't unprecedented, it's still analogous to past game-states that the community disliked and wanted to see fixed. To quote David Kim back in 2016: Show nested quote +[TL.net]: I read an interesting post by an Overwatch designer where he talked about the "perception" of balance. This might just be me reading between the lines, but do you feel like you're forced to manage the community's perception of balance versus what the stats are telling you?
David Kim: Every game is different so I can’t really speak to Overwatch and what’s right for that, but for StarCraft what we think is that the perception is part of the balance. Like, if perception was bad and the data was good, then we would say that a part of balance is bad because community perception is such a huge part of getting balance right.
I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced. Yeah, it's such a mature idea. David Kim was a wise man indeed. But the truth is, certain people are just whiny in their nature. All they crave for is the opportunity to jump out of the bushes to start lobbying their interests. Even the slightest change in the meta, a single occasion - everything will work. And those childish threats - "i'll quit the game, dont even try to convince me otherwise" - man, those are awesome. The first mistake is to think that those people are the majority (or even close). The second is to think that their opinions actually matter and that imaginary balance issues negatively affect the game's online. Nothing of this is true. David Kim (being the wise man) understood this and spoke "right" things but did what he truly wanted. And he was actually very stubborn with his views of balance. SH bs lasting for 1,5+ years - is that an example of listening to the community? And the "oracles" whine? It started since day 1 of hots. Did he adress that ever? There are tons of other examples. So yes, devs could imitate they listen, like DK proposed, and throw them another bone like upgrade timing increase. I lol'd hard at that one. So i guess that's the only thing that would stop the whiners. It's a good old politicians trick: do something that's formally "right" but doesnt change a thing in reality. So they will lose the formal reason to whine, and shut up.
|
The warp in energy mechanic I already adressed, briefly - this would require P gateway units to become stronger as reinforcements need to walk and the current balance meta is based around WP.
|
The obvious nerf to the warp prism (which is more the key unit in PvZ than PvT but regardless) is a speed nerf not this bizarre stuff with energy. Pick-up range nerf would also work most likely, but is less preferrable since viewers like to watch the fancy micro.
|
|
|
|