|
On April 13 2020 13:01 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 02:15 Nakajin wrote:On April 12 2020 21:10 MockHamill wrote:
Protoss are fine - they just lack players at the very top compared to Zerg and Terran.
Tournament results reflect this, as they should. I'd say it's pretty true across the board, there's some good EU toss but they never do shit compare to the zerg and lately the terran. But even if it's a case of a lack of protoss at the very top, I personally think it wouldn't be crazy to buff toss anyway to give a chance for some player to grow. We still haven't had a WESG/IEM/WCS world champ since sOs and next Katowice come to pass there's a good chance Neeb will be the only protoss to have win any kind of event since 2016. balance arguments have long obscured the simple reality that the pool of top sc2 players is almost completely stagnant. race distribution in tournaments means literally nothing. the combination of effort and skill required to go from being a high GM level player to a championship class player are immense, and there isn't a vacuum of winnings motivating players to take that step if you buff toss for the purpose of giving players "a chance to grow" it won't improve the talent pool, it's more likely to just create a situation like the old pvt blink meta where B-tier veterans start racking up wins against A-tier players without expending any more effort or becoming better. the missing link in motivating new players to rise up is a wider spread of money and winnings being made available not a single top player would be as good as they are if they weren't all in the narrow bracket of players making steady money from sc2. they would all still be skilled gamers, but they wouldn't be playing on the same level because of the small, unchanging pool of players, balance is actually ridiculously hard to measure in a meaningful way. at this point it's bordering on statistically impossible to determine whether pro winrates represent racial dynamics or just specific players being well or poorly matched against specific other players
Exactly, bring Back Code A! And flattern the price money Distribution curve!
I couldn t care less about how much the dinner of a tournament makes, I care about how many pros can make a sustainable living of their sport
|
On April 13 2020 13:01 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 02:15 Nakajin wrote:On April 12 2020 21:10 MockHamill wrote:
Protoss are fine - they just lack players at the very top compared to Zerg and Terran.
Tournament results reflect this, as they should. I'd say it's pretty true across the board, there's some good EU toss but they never do shit compare to the zerg and lately the terran. But even if it's a case of a lack of protoss at the very top, I personally think it wouldn't be crazy to buff toss anyway to give a chance for some player to grow. We still haven't had a WESG/IEM/WCS world champ since sOs and next Katowice come to pass there's a good chance Neeb will be the only protoss to have win any kind of event since 2016. balance arguments have long obscured the simple reality that the pool of top sc2 players is almost completely stagnant. race distribution in tournaments means literally nothing. the combination of effort and skill required to go from being a high GM level player to a championship class player are immense, and there isn't a vacuum of winnings motivating players to take that step if you buff toss for the purpose of giving players "a chance to grow" it won't improve the talent pool, it's more likely to just create a situation like the old pvt blink meta where B-tier veterans start racking up wins against A-tier players without expending any more effort or becoming better. the missing link in motivating new players to rise up is a wider spread of money and winnings being made available not a single top player would be as good as they are if they weren't all in the narrow bracket of players making steady money from sc2. they would all still be skilled gamers, but they wouldn't be playing on the same level because of the small, unchanging pool of players, balance is actually ridiculously hard to measure in a meaningful way. at this point it's bordering on statistically impossible to determine whether pro winrates represent racial dynamics or just specific players being well or poorly matched against specific other players
i agree with a lot of this...at what point would there be statistical significance to confidently say that the game is balanced? SC is a complex adaptive system and it's always changing with new players, new metas, new maps, patches, etc. in a weird way, the game is always going to be self balancing i.e. if a player figures out how to win "too much" then other players can and will copy. then boom, balance patch. it's an interesting dynamic in that to be at the top you must not only have the best mechanics, strategy, executive, etc, but you also must be be adaptable. i love this game
|
On April 13 2020 15:28 dbRic1203 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 13:01 brickrd wrote:On April 13 2020 02:15 Nakajin wrote:On April 12 2020 21:10 MockHamill wrote:
Protoss are fine - they just lack players at the very top compared to Zerg and Terran.
Tournament results reflect this, as they should. I'd say it's pretty true across the board, there's some good EU toss but they never do shit compare to the zerg and lately the terran. But even if it's a case of a lack of protoss at the very top, I personally think it wouldn't be crazy to buff toss anyway to give a chance for some player to grow. We still haven't had a WESG/IEM/WCS world champ since sOs and next Katowice come to pass there's a good chance Neeb will be the only protoss to have win any kind of event since 2016. balance arguments have long obscured the simple reality that the pool of top sc2 players is almost completely stagnant. race distribution in tournaments means literally nothing. the combination of effort and skill required to go from being a high GM level player to a championship class player are immense, and there isn't a vacuum of winnings motivating players to take that step if you buff toss for the purpose of giving players "a chance to grow" it won't improve the talent pool, it's more likely to just create a situation like the old pvt blink meta where B-tier veterans start racking up wins against A-tier players without expending any more effort or becoming better. the missing link in motivating new players to rise up is a wider spread of money and winnings being made available not a single top player would be as good as they are if they weren't all in the narrow bracket of players making steady money from sc2. they would all still be skilled gamers, but they wouldn't be playing on the same level because of the small, unchanging pool of players, balance is actually ridiculously hard to measure in a meaningful way. at this point it's bordering on statistically impossible to determine whether pro winrates represent racial dynamics or just specific players being well or poorly matched against specific other players Exactly, bring Back Code A! And flattern the price money Distribution curve! I couldn t care less about how much the dinner of a tournament makes, I care about how many pros can make a sustainable living of their sport
If they bring back Code A in its old form and flattened the prize money distribution it would just go to the "B-tier veterans".
The only way to grow new talent would be actually make tournaments for or give qualifier/tournament spots to younger players.
There have been a few tournaments like that in the western scene but nothing in korea that I know of.
|
On April 13 2020 17:55 leublix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 15:28 dbRic1203 wrote:On April 13 2020 13:01 brickrd wrote:On April 13 2020 02:15 Nakajin wrote:On April 12 2020 21:10 MockHamill wrote:
Protoss are fine - they just lack players at the very top compared to Zerg and Terran.
Tournament results reflect this, as they should. I'd say it's pretty true across the board, there's some good EU toss but they never do shit compare to the zerg and lately the terran. But even if it's a case of a lack of protoss at the very top, I personally think it wouldn't be crazy to buff toss anyway to give a chance for some player to grow. We still haven't had a WESG/IEM/WCS world champ since sOs and next Katowice come to pass there's a good chance Neeb will be the only protoss to have win any kind of event since 2016. balance arguments have long obscured the simple reality that the pool of top sc2 players is almost completely stagnant. race distribution in tournaments means literally nothing. the combination of effort and skill required to go from being a high GM level player to a championship class player are immense, and there isn't a vacuum of winnings motivating players to take that step if you buff toss for the purpose of giving players "a chance to grow" it won't improve the talent pool, it's more likely to just create a situation like the old pvt blink meta where B-tier veterans start racking up wins against A-tier players without expending any more effort or becoming better. the missing link in motivating new players to rise up is a wider spread of money and winnings being made available not a single top player would be as good as they are if they weren't all in the narrow bracket of players making steady money from sc2. they would all still be skilled gamers, but they wouldn't be playing on the same level because of the small, unchanging pool of players, balance is actually ridiculously hard to measure in a meaningful way. at this point it's bordering on statistically impossible to determine whether pro winrates represent racial dynamics or just specific players being well or poorly matched against specific other players Exactly, bring Back Code A! And flattern the price money Distribution curve! I couldn t care less about how much the dinner of a tournament makes, I care about how many pros can make a sustainable living of their sport If they bring back Code A in its old form and flattened the prize money distribution it would just go to the "B-tier veterans". The only way to grow new talent would be actually make tournaments for or give qualifier/tournament spots to younger players. There have been a few tournaments like that in the western scene but nothing in korea that I know of.
Plenty of opportunity to practice in ESL Cup this year.
|
There's an inherent advantage for a race if the talent pool for that race is small: It means that if you play that race, your opponents of differing races have less opportunity to practice against yours. Teams will also covet you more.
|
On April 12 2020 21:10 MockHamill wrote:
Protoss are fine - they just lack players at the very top compared to Zerg and Terran.
Tournament results reflect this, as they should.
Strong delusion lol
The reality of the situation is that Protoss has been.....drastically changed....over the last two years
The last Protoss player to win a big time premier tournament was stats in 2017. After that no Protoss player won a Code S or big payday tournament (IEM, WESG, blizzcon). It's been Neeb farming north america and kespa era Koreans in classic and stats taking turns winning some smaller tournaments.
Immensely talented players like zest, sos, classic, stats, and hero who have dominated before can no longer take it all the way in big tournaments (classic and hero have obviously retired)
Enough with the myth that the Protoss players are simply less talented. Unfortunately Blizzard listens to the widespread anti-protoss whine among the sc2 community and it's going to kill the game. To be honest if Blizzard keeps up with this nonsense of making one race non trophy viable, the game deserves to die.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint.
|
On April 13 2020 21:56 Dave4 wrote:
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint.
Just to expand on this, you can look at the ESL opens for a direct representation of tournaments without serral:
 ESL Open Cups
Specifically: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/illFhR1.png)
Now if you take those really quite balanced results, and then insert serral, it would be a pretty safe bet they would swing violently in favor of zerg.
|
On April 13 2020 22:06 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 21:56 Dave4 wrote:
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint. Just to expand on this, you can look at the ESL opens for a direct representation of tournaments without serral: ESL Open CupsSpecifically: Now if you take those really quite balanced results, and then insert serral, it would be a pretty safe bet they would swing violently in favor of zerg.
What people have been commenting about above regarding the winners of the last year or two in bigger tournaments are perhaps a bigger issue than the results in the weekly cup this year....
If a new, young, talented players started to improve a lot and loved the game and decided to go all in for trying to make it as a pro then choosing toss would be an insane choice. The wins for toss are very few these last couple of years (and now i dont refer to weekly cups).
|
On April 13 2020 22:06 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 21:56 Dave4 wrote:
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint. Just to expand on this, you can look at the ESL opens for a direct representation of tournaments without serral: ESL Open CupsSpecifically: Now if you take those really quite balanced results, and then insert serral, it would be a pretty safe bet they would swing violently in favor of zerg.
And without dark, rogue, Soo, and reynor (for the majority).
That chart shows nothing other than B tier Zergs are favorites over A tier protoss. Think about that-second rate zergs are more successful than the best of the best for protoss.
|
On April 12 2020 22:31 Waxangel wrote:Lots of matches have outside circumstances--bad ping, jet lag, illness, having the booth collapse on top of your head, etc. I don't know that time zones are more interesting than the others 
For some reason the starcraft community always seems to discredit these things compared to other esports. Even if cases were you can clearly see someones up till 5AM playing or just flew in from a different timezone.
Especially with travel, no one in sc2 seems to give players any leeway for results when they just spent 12 hours flying across the world (this goes for both koreans and foreigners).
|
On April 13 2020 22:06 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 21:56 Dave4 wrote:
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint. Just to expand on this, you can look at the ESL opens for a direct representation of tournaments without serral: ESL Open CupsSpecifically: Now if you take those really quite balanced results, and then insert serral, it would be a pretty safe bet they would swing violently in favor of zerg.
Insert Serral, Reynor, Dark, Rogue, and soO* btw
|
Serral is the best player of all time. Nobody is on his level right now. There has never been a player that has dominated in the scene as much as he has in any video game ever. Serral truly is the greatest esport athlete the world has ever seen.
User was warned for this post
|
On April 14 2020 01:18 serralfan18 wrote:
Serral is the best player of all time. Nobody is on his level right now. There has never been a player that has dominated in the scene as much as he has in any video game ever. Serral truly is the greatest esport athlete the world has ever seen.
Well, dude's gotta be doing something right to inspire the amount of trolls he does. But hey, you live your best quarantine life, bro.
Also I know it's the internet, but the "truly" was a little over-the-top sarcasm-wise.
|
I have to thank Serral here for drastically bumping my report statistics.
|
On April 14 2020 02:22 Ej_ wrote:
I have to thank Serral here for drastically bumping my report statistics.
Not only a champion for the foreign SC2 competitive scene, but also the foreign SC2 moderator scene. A true hero that one.
|
On April 14 2020 09:34 Kitai wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2020 02:22 Ej_ wrote:
I have to thank Serral here for drastically bumping my report statistics. Not only a champion for the foreign SC2 competitive scene, but also the foreign SC2 moderator scene. A true hero that one.
Just sucks that only trolls get banned while actually delusional people that bring down post quality way more get to stay.
|
On April 12 2020 22:31 Waxangel wrote:Lots of matches have outside circumstances--bad ping, jet lag, illness, having the booth collapse on top of your head, etc. I don't know that time zones are more interesting than the others
"...having a booth collapse on top of your head" lol. I was gonna say Gumiho will never live this down, but arguably that was one of his most triumphant victories. What a LEGEND.
It's entertaining to see this convo turn into a debate over the science of sleep deprivation (FWIW, you can parse a particular study to support whatever thesis you're going for, but there have been so many studies on this and sleep deprivation is pretty much good for nothing other than partying like a bawler).
All jokes aside, as much as I'd like to see others from the foreign scene step up, you gotta give Serral credit for another great win. I say this as a huge Maru fan who also prefers the way Rogue, Reynor, and others play Zerg to Serral's style.
How many does the guy gotta win to get a little love?
And to the defensive Serral fans out there: no need. Your boy is killing it. Enjoy it while it lasts! Don't mind the haters.
Us Maru fans are just jealous about having to live in perpetual fear of another random major tournament group stage exit.
|
United States33518 Posts
On April 13 2020 22:06 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 21:56 Dave4 wrote:
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint. Just to expand on this, you can look at the ESL opens for a direct representation of tournaments without serral: ESL Open CupsSpecifically: Now if you take those really quite balanced results, and then insert serral, it would be a pretty safe bet they would swing violently in favor of zerg.
While it might seem weird, I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting the game to be balanced around the very top competitive level. After all, if Blizz clearly does some balance tweaks focused at the higher skill-levels, why can't that approach scale up to the very highest levels of play? Basically, it's as valid to say you want the game to be balanced for the top 10 players as it is to say you want it to be balanced for the top 100, or the top 1000.
I'm not saying I'm advocating for this right now, but from the POV of an esports fan and viewer (the majority of these forums), I don't see anything wrong with wanting the game to be balanced around the championship-tier.
|
On April 14 2020 18:47 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 22:06 InfCereal wrote:On April 13 2020 21:56 Dave4 wrote:
Just came to read why Serrals latest championship doesn't mean anything like every other one he wins; thread did not disappoint. Just to expand on this, you can look at the ESL opens for a direct representation of tournaments without serral: ESL Open CupsSpecifically: Now if you take those really quite balanced results, and then insert serral, it would be a pretty safe bet they would swing violently in favor of zerg. While it might seem weird, I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting the game to be balanced around the very top competitive level. After all, if Blizz clearly does some balance tweaks focused at the higher skill-levels, why can't that approach scale up to the very highest levels of play? Basically, it's as valid to say you want the game to be balanced for the top 10 players as it is to say you want it to be balanced for the top 100, or the top 1000. I'm not saying I'm advocating for this right now, but from the POV of an esports fan and viewer (the majority of these forums), I don't see anything wrong with wanting the game to be balanced around the championship-tier.
The problem basically boils down to what brickrd wrote: No one knows if it's balance, or if the zerg players are actually better.
Serral and Dark are 2 standout players. I wouldn't put rogue or soo on the same level as them. If you balance the game around bringing players like Serral and Dark down, are you balancing the game, or "balancing" the players?
How does buffing a race to be able to beat Serral/Dark improve the game? Would tuning into a tournament to see Skillous bop Serral really be what players want to see?
I don't know how many people watched the Inno vs Serral replays, but Serrals macro was unbelievable. Innovation is famous before being a macro machine, and Serral out-macro'd him. He didn't do anything special or abusive, he just... played better
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
