|
On March 03 2022 09:32 SpecKROELLchen wrote:
I didn't read all the posts but most. I think what was ignored a little bit is, no matter which mappool. The longer the mappool stayed the same, the better for zerg because they could learn to deflect all kind of bo's. I remember Maru stating that the mappool (it was this one), while winning the tournament but after the next few tournaments results went worse. For serral it was the other way around after each years big change.
This is of course an hypothesis and it would be cool but also a little bit of effort to test it. How does the win ratio for each race evolve after map changes.
Oh, I agree with you. I've said elsewhere that the map pool and the format, and the long lead up time to Katowice will mean that it is almost certainly a Zerg winner. This map pool is Zerg favoured, and the longer that we stayed on this map pool the stronger the Zerg players become. The format also does not allow the players to rest and develop strategies given how long the days are. In Katowice 2022, I can visibly see the players getting tired, and their play suffered going towards the end of the day.
Lastly, there was close to two months in the lead up to Katowice from DH Last Chance. I knew when Maru won Last Chance that he will most likely not win Katowice, simply because his playstyle will be studied, esp in this map pool, and countered, which was exactly what we saw.
Something needs to be done about the format of IEM Katowice, and the map pool, otherwise we'll keep getting Zerg winners over and over. (I think over the past 5 years, Zergs have won all IEM Katowices and Blizzcons). By Ro12, I knew immediately that a Zerg will win Katowice, and I completely lost interest in the tournament. There simply wasn't any chance for any other non-Zerg player.
They should change up the map pool, maybe using Rotti's suggestions a while back, by using the favourite maps (chosen by the players) over the past year, instead of sticking to the same map pool. This way, it eliminates a potentially race-favoured map pool, and also lets the players decide more strategies.
|
Northern Ireland26265 Posts
On March 03 2022 13:20 buzz_bender wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2022 09:32 SpecKROELLchen wrote:
I didn't read all the posts but most. I think what was ignored a little bit is, no matter which mappool. The longer the mappool stayed the same, the better for zerg because they could learn to deflect all kind of bo's. I remember Maru stating that the mappool (it was this one), while winning the tournament but after the next few tournaments results went worse. For serral it was the other way around after each years big change.
This is of course an hypothesis and it would be cool but also a little bit of effort to test it. How does the win ratio for each race evolve after map changes. Oh, I agree with you. I've said elsewhere that the map pool and the format, and the long lead up time to Katowice will mean that it is almost certainly a Zerg winner. This map pool is Zerg favoured, and the longer that we stayed on this map pool the stronger the Zerg players become. The format also does not allow the players to rest and develop strategies given how long the days are. In Katowice 2022, I can visibly see the players getting tired, and their play suffered going towards the end of the day. Lastly, there was close to two months in the lead up to Katowice from DH Last Chance. I knew when Maru won Last Chance that he will most likely not win Katowice, simply because his playstyle will be studied, esp in this map pool, and countered, which was exactly what we saw. Something needs to be done about the format of IEM Katowice, and the map pool, otherwise we'll keep getting Zerg winners over and over. (I think over the past 5 years, Zergs have won all IEM Katowices and Blizzcons). By Ro12, I knew immediately that a Zerg will win Katowice, and I completely lost interest in the tournament. There simply wasn't any chance for any other non-Zerg player. They should change up the map pool, maybe using Rotti's suggestions a while back, by using the favourite maps (chosen by the players) over the past year, instead of sticking to the same map pool. This way, it eliminates a potentially race-favoured map pool, and also lets the players decide more strategies.
I think I may go to my deathbed but the pool is too small, especially for how long it’s in rotation. And extra especially given how maps are so similar, in general.
You don’t have much room to get it wrong, even 2 or 3 maps that are experiments that don’t ultimate play out well and the pool is fucked for a long period. It’s understandable therefore that the maps are chosen through quite a risk averse process, but that is forced by not having a bigger pool to accommodate more experimentation.
Also obligatory complaint that the one interesting map that gave for really interesting pro games departed after one season. #BringBackTheWall
By the time Katowice rolls round Zergs have been asked similar questions on similar maps so many times that they’ve got the answers. It’s how the race works, both a lack of patches as well as a lack of variety just accelerates the process of them (largely) figuring out how to deal with whatever Terrans and Toss can throw at them.
To say nothing of players, pro or casual alike getting sick of playing the same maps for aeons.
I’d like to see some XvX non-standard maps in rotation. I’d also like to see some experimentation in making maps for specific matchups to see how that looks.
This is simply not possible with the current map pool, you’d end up with a few standard maps, a weird map and PvZ/PvT/TvZ maps and not enough vetos to filter them down to would be built for general standard play, or your race’s specific matchups
|
On March 03 2022 09:01 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 22:54 honorablemacroterran wrote:On March 02 2022 21:26 Balnazza wrote:On March 02 2022 13:21 honorablemacroterran wrote:
Comparing the records of Cure and Byun to any of the top zergs is copium. Look at the tournament winnings. Byun was champion literally 6 years ago. Cure has won ONE premier tournament in his career. I don't think you could be any more completely wrong. Let's take a look at the average earnings of the top 4 players of each race since 2018.
2021 2020 2019 2018
P $68,473.75 $70,459.50 $91,533.00 $136,504.25
T $65,443.50 $75,244.50 $111,540.25 $143,009.00
Z $81,724.50 $108,476.75 $225,199.50 $240,882.75
Although the prize pools have been shrinking especially since Covid, these are quite ridiculous differences. And no, it's not all the same players. This proves that Zerg is just expected to win more money, which is an injustice. No, it isn't. You people still completly ignore skill and think, there is a hard-coded rule that every race should win the same amount, but there isn't. Zerg literally survives through four outstanding players, that are dominant for years by now. If Zerg was overpowered, why isn't Lambo just playing GSL, smashing everyone easily and then goes out in a ZvZ? Saying "Zerg is so OP because there are four players winning a lot, even though the rest is kinda meh" is the same as "Italy and Finland are the two strongest nations in Starcraft 2 because they won the last two IEMs". It's literally not the same four players. You can look at the winnings history on liquipedia, dummy. By the logic of this thread: Do you know the last time a Zerg that wasn't Rogue, Dark, Serral or Reynor has won a Premier tournament (according to Liquipedia), not counting the regional DreamHack Masters? It was soO in 2020. Do you want to know the last one before soO? Freaking Elazer in 2017 (WCS Valencia). And before that...Snute in 2016, WCS Intercontinental. If you go back to Elazers win (2017), you have terran wins from Innovation, Cure, ByuN and TY. For Protoss names like Trap, Classic, Stats, herO or even Patience and Neeb pop up. Notice something? Most of those winning terrans and protoss retired, while the Zergs stayed the same or rather actually got reinforced with Serral and Reynor. So while a lot of high-ranking terran and protoss S-Tier players retired, Zerg was in the very lucky position that two more players just reached that level (or rather that age) at that time. Sorry, but I really can't get behind your logic, that seems to be that if there are four S-Tier Zergs, there HAS to be four S-Tier Protoss and Terrans at all time. Like Bunny magically gets better at the game as soon as Innovation retires, because he needs to fill in the slot...
I don't know how much simpler you can make it than if you're a top zerg you're likely to make a significantly larger amount of money than a top terran or top protoss.
|
On March 03 2022 14:06 honorablemacroterran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2022 09:01 Balnazza wrote:On March 02 2022 22:54 honorablemacroterran wrote:On March 02 2022 21:26 Balnazza wrote:On March 02 2022 13:21 honorablemacroterran wrote:
Comparing the records of Cure and Byun to any of the top zergs is copium. Look at the tournament winnings. Byun was champion literally 6 years ago. Cure has won ONE premier tournament in his career. I don't think you could be any more completely wrong. Let's take a look at the average earnings of the top 4 players of each race since 2018.
2021 2020 2019 2018
P $68,473.75 $70,459.50 $91,533.00 $136,504.25
T $65,443.50 $75,244.50 $111,540.25 $143,009.00
Z $81,724.50 $108,476.75 $225,199.50 $240,882.75
Although the prize pools have been shrinking especially since Covid, these are quite ridiculous differences. And no, it's not all the same players. This proves that Zerg is just expected to win more money, which is an injustice. No, it isn't. You people still completly ignore skill and think, there is a hard-coded rule that every race should win the same amount, but there isn't. Zerg literally survives through four outstanding players, that are dominant for years by now. If Zerg was overpowered, why isn't Lambo just playing GSL, smashing everyone easily and then goes out in a ZvZ? Saying "Zerg is so OP because there are four players winning a lot, even though the rest is kinda meh" is the same as "Italy and Finland are the two strongest nations in Starcraft 2 because they won the last two IEMs". It's literally not the same four players. You can look at the winnings history on liquipedia, dummy. By the logic of this thread: Do you know the last time a Zerg that wasn't Rogue, Dark, Serral or Reynor has won a Premier tournament (according to Liquipedia), not counting the regional DreamHack Masters? It was soO in 2020. Do you want to know the last one before soO? Freaking Elazer in 2017 (WCS Valencia). And before that...Snute in 2016, WCS Intercontinental. If you go back to Elazers win (2017), you have terran wins from Innovation, Cure, ByuN and TY. For Protoss names like Trap, Classic, Stats, herO or even Patience and Neeb pop up. Notice something? Most of those winning terrans and protoss retired, while the Zergs stayed the same or rather actually got reinforced with Serral and Reynor. So while a lot of high-ranking terran and protoss S-Tier players retired, Zerg was in the very lucky position that two more players just reached that level (or rather that age) at that time. Sorry, but I really can't get behind your logic, that seems to be that if there are four S-Tier Zergs, there HAS to be four S-Tier Protoss and Terrans at all time. Like Bunny magically gets better at the game as soon as Innovation retires, because he needs to fill in the slot... I don't know how much simpler you can make it than if you're a top zerg you're likely to make a significantly larger amount of money than a top terran or top protoss.
Because they won the very prizepool heavy world championships? Sorry, but if three different Zergs win the GSL in a year, but Maru wins Worlds, terran would still made double the money Zerg did in that year. But would terran be imba then? No, of course not, because that is a stupid way to look at it.
Honestly, what is your thing? Like...what is your basis? As far as I'm gathered from your comments, it seem to be "Maru is like the best player ever and he isn't winning everything, Zerg is imba"? Can you maybe tone done the bias a tad?
|
On March 03 2022 23:51 Balnazza wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2022 14:06 honorablemacroterran wrote:On March 03 2022 09:01 Balnazza wrote:On March 02 2022 22:54 honorablemacroterran wrote:On March 02 2022 21:26 Balnazza wrote:On March 02 2022 13:21 honorablemacroterran wrote:
Comparing the records of Cure and Byun to any of the top zergs is copium. Look at the tournament winnings. Byun was champion literally 6 years ago. Cure has won ONE premier tournament in his career. I don't think you could be any more completely wrong. Let's take a look at the average earnings of the top 4 players of each race since 2018.
2021 2020 2019 2018
P $68,473.75 $70,459.50 $91,533.00 $136,504.25
T $65,443.50 $75,244.50 $111,540.25 $143,009.00
Z $81,724.50 $108,476.75 $225,199.50 $240,882.75
Although the prize pools have been shrinking especially since Covid, these are quite ridiculous differences. And no, it's not all the same players. This proves that Zerg is just expected to win more money, which is an injustice. No, it isn't. You people still completly ignore skill and think, there is a hard-coded rule that every race should win the same amount, but there isn't. Zerg literally survives through four outstanding players, that are dominant for years by now. If Zerg was overpowered, why isn't Lambo just playing GSL, smashing everyone easily and then goes out in a ZvZ? Saying "Zerg is so OP because there are four players winning a lot, even though the rest is kinda meh" is the same as "Italy and Finland are the two strongest nations in Starcraft 2 because they won the last two IEMs". It's literally not the same four players. You can look at the winnings history on liquipedia, dummy. By the logic of this thread: Do you know the last time a Zerg that wasn't Rogue, Dark, Serral or Reynor has won a Premier tournament (according to Liquipedia), not counting the regional DreamHack Masters? It was soO in 2020. Do you want to know the last one before soO? Freaking Elazer in 2017 (WCS Valencia). And before that...Snute in 2016, WCS Intercontinental. If you go back to Elazers win (2017), you have terran wins from Innovation, Cure, ByuN and TY. For Protoss names like Trap, Classic, Stats, herO or even Patience and Neeb pop up. Notice something? Most of those winning terrans and protoss retired, while the Zergs stayed the same or rather actually got reinforced with Serral and Reynor. So while a lot of high-ranking terran and protoss S-Tier players retired, Zerg was in the very lucky position that two more players just reached that level (or rather that age) at that time. Sorry, but I really can't get behind your logic, that seems to be that if there are four S-Tier Zergs, there HAS to be four S-Tier Protoss and Terrans at all time. Like Bunny magically gets better at the game as soon as Innovation retires, because he needs to fill in the slot... I don't know how much simpler you can make it than if you're a top zerg you're likely to make a significantly larger amount of money than a top terran or top protoss. Because they won the very prizepool heavy world championships? Sorry, but if three different Zergs win the GSL in a year, but Maru wins Worlds, terran would still made double the money Zerg did in that year. But would terran be imba then? No, of course not, because that is a stupid way to look at it. Honestly, what is your thing? Like...what is your basis? As far as I'm gathered from your comments, it seem to be "Maru is like the best player ever and he isn't winning everything, Zerg is imba"? Can you maybe tone done the bias a tad?
Zerg has not made more purely because of world championships. You can subtract both the Blizzcon and Katowice first place prizes from their totals in 2019 and 2018 and Zerg still won the most money both of those years. That's with a Terran winning $200k at WESG both years. Even with how top loaded world championships are overall prize money is still more about the average performance of a race than who wins the world championships. Unless it's really close to start with.
Another example of this is that despite never winning the 6 figure prizes Toss was still finishing ahead of Terran despite Maru and Inno winning $200k each.
|
On March 03 2022 13:40 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2022 13:20 buzz_bender wrote:On March 03 2022 09:32 SpecKROELLchen wrote:
I didn't read all the posts but most. I think what was ignored a little bit is, no matter which mappool. The longer the mappool stayed the same, the better for zerg because they could learn to deflect all kind of bo's. I remember Maru stating that the mappool (it was this one), while winning the tournament but after the next few tournaments results went worse. For serral it was the other way around after each years big change.
This is of course an hypothesis and it would be cool but also a little bit of effort to test it. How does the win ratio for each race evolve after map changes. Oh, I agree with you. I've said elsewhere that the map pool and the format, and the long lead up time to Katowice will mean that it is almost certainly a Zerg winner. This map pool is Zerg favoured, and the longer that we stayed on this map pool the stronger the Zerg players become. The format also does not allow the players to rest and develop strategies given how long the days are. In Katowice 2022, I can visibly see the players getting tired, and their play suffered going towards the end of the day. Lastly, there was close to two months in the lead up to Katowice from DH Last Chance. I knew when Maru won Last Chance that he will most likely not win Katowice, simply because his playstyle will be studied, esp in this map pool, and countered, which was exactly what we saw. Something needs to be done about the format of IEM Katowice, and the map pool, otherwise we'll keep getting Zerg winners over and over. (I think over the past 5 years, Zergs have won all IEM Katowices and Blizzcons). By Ro12, I knew immediately that a Zerg will win Katowice, and I completely lost interest in the tournament. There simply wasn't any chance for any other non-Zerg player. They should change up the map pool, maybe using Rotti's suggestions a while back, by using the favourite maps (chosen by the players) over the past year, instead of sticking to the same map pool. This way, it eliminates a potentially race-favoured map pool, and also lets the players decide more strategies. I think I may go to my deathbed but the pool is too small, especially for how long it’s in rotation. And extra especially given how maps are so similar, in general. You don’t have much room to get it wrong, even 2 or 3 maps that are experiments that don’t ultimate play out well and the pool is fucked for a long period. It’s understandable therefore that the maps are chosen through quite a risk averse process, but that is forced by not having a bigger pool to accommodate more experimentation. Also obligatory complaint that the one interesting map that gave for really interesting pro games departed after one season. #BringBackTheWall By the time Katowice rolls round Zergs have been asked similar questions on similar maps so many times that they’ve got the answers. It’s how the race works, both a lack of patches as well as a lack of variety just accelerates the process of them (largely) figuring out how to deal with whatever Terrans and Toss can throw at them. To say nothing of players, pro or casual alike getting sick of playing the same maps for aeons. I’d like to see some XvX non-standard maps in rotation. I’d also like to see some experimentation in making maps for specific matchups to see how that looks. This is simply not possible with the current map pool, you’d end up with a few standard maps, a weird map and PvZ/PvT/TvZ maps and not enough vetos to filter them down to would be built for general standard play, or your race’s specific matchups
I'm in full agreement. I loved the games on Golden Wall! Such a fun map!
|
I agree with many of the sentiments in this thread. Zerg isn't op. It's just that the maps favor zerg, the gameplay favors zerg, zerg players perform the best, zerg players earn the most money. I know by every measure people have put forward it looks like zerg is a bit imba, but my feelings tell me that the zerg players are just better. They're probably practicing harder, and if not then they're practicing smarter. I mean the results speak to that. I think we should give the meta some time to settle before doing anything drastic. I do think the idea to have a larger map pool is a good one though.
|
Northern Ireland26265 Posts
On March 05 2022 04:28 AcrossFromTime wrote:
I agree with many of the sentiments in this thread. Zerg isn't op. It's just that the maps favor zerg, the gameplay favors zerg, zerg players perform the best, zerg players earn the most money. I know by every measure people have put forward it looks like zerg is a bit imba, but my feelings tell me that the zerg players are just better. They're probably practicing harder, and if not then they're practicing smarter. I mean the results speak to that. I think we should give the meta some time to settle before doing anything drastic. I do think the idea to have a larger map pool is a good one though.
I will get a bigger map pool if it kills me!
I’d disagree with letting the meta settle though, it tends to be the last few years that when the meta is basically fleshed out that Zergs are crushing it the most.
I don’t know what it is aside from maps that sees BW’s meta still evolve slightly after 20 years of no patches, and SC2 seems to (largely) settle within 6-12 months. Perhaps some of you guys, especially more knowledgeable about BW have theories.
I think part of it is how fast the game is in going from 1 base to 3, fully saturated, with tech and maxing, plus quite similar maps. Unlike in BW 1 base play outside of cheese is largely dead in SC2. You tend to get to the same place, a lot quicker by a similar route.
I think a natural consequence of that is metas settle quicker because the timings are pretty rigid and there’s only so much one can deviate and experiment without having just bad builds.
Most TvZs involve generally some harassment followed by some kind of attempt to push the Zerg’s 4th. TvP it tends to be harass and a timing to the Protoss’ 3rd. PvZ either the Protoss is aggressive or they’re digging in to hold their 3rd.
I still think the game is great and the meta’s not too terrible, so I’m not complaining too hardcore, but I think the pacing of eco and tech, especially in Legacy does tend to see things homogenise reasonably quickly.
I’m unsure what qualifies a player as better or worse, the game has so much that makes it up and different skill sets too.
But yeah the top four are clearly damn good, certainly in the group of the world’s best players, any hypothetical patch or set of maps where those guys aren’t featuring at the top end of tournaments reasonably consistently would likely be pretty broken.
|
I don't think you can look at BW meta without considering maps. Maps in bw vary a lot more compared to sc2.
|
On March 05 2022 04:28 AcrossFromTime wrote:
I agree with many of the sentiments in this thread. Zerg isn't op. It's just that the maps favor zerg, the gameplay favors zerg, zerg players perform the best, zerg players earn the most money. I know by every measure people have put forward it looks like zerg is a bit imba, but my feelings tell me that the zerg players are just better. They're probably practicing harder, and if not then they're practicing smarter. I mean the results speak to that. I think we should give the meta some time to settle before doing anything drastic. I do think the idea to have a larger map pool is a good one though.
I thought this was sarcasm until I got to the last sentence, and now I'm just confused about whether any of it was sarcastic at all.
|
On March 05 2022 07:05 honorablemacroterran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2022 04:28 AcrossFromTime wrote:
I agree with many of the sentiments in this thread. Zerg isn't op. It's just that the maps favor zerg, the gameplay favors zerg, zerg players perform the best, zerg players earn the most money. I know by every measure people have put forward it looks like zerg is a bit imba, but my feelings tell me that the zerg players are just better. They're probably practicing harder, and if not then they're practicing smarter. I mean the results speak to that. I think we should give the meta some time to settle before doing anything drastic. I do think the idea to have a larger map pool is a good one though. I thought this was sarcasm until I got to the last sentence, and now I'm just confused about whether any of it was sarcastic at all.
Haha yeah, exactly my feelings too 
|
On March 05 2022 18:26 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2022 07:05 honorablemacroterran wrote:On March 05 2022 04:28 AcrossFromTime wrote:
I agree with many of the sentiments in this thread. Zerg isn't op. It's just that the maps favor zerg, the gameplay favors zerg, zerg players perform the best, zerg players earn the most money. I know by every measure people have put forward it looks like zerg is a bit imba, but my feelings tell me that the zerg players are just better. They're probably practicing harder, and if not then they're practicing smarter. I mean the results speak to that. I think we should give the meta some time to settle before doing anything drastic. I do think the idea to have a larger map pool is a good one though. I thought this was sarcasm until I got to the last sentence, and now I'm just confused about whether any of it was sarcastic at all. Haha yeah, exactly my feelings too
I read it as all sarcasm apart from the last sentence, where AFT stopped joking.
Regarding the practice bit:
Years ago, when Solar won the first big tournament after BlizzCon (could have been DH winter, I don't remember) he was asked in the interview why he believed that he won and the rest lost. His answer was that the best players practiced for BlizzCon, which was on another patch. Solar claimed that he simply practiced more and will probably start losing when the rest get back to their normal level of practice on the current patch.
Just wanted to share this tidbit with those that missed it.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
I mean, can we just agree that zerg is too strong? And honestly it has been since 2018?
Also that Terran is the hardest race? And Protoss the most punishing of mistakes?
|
Can‘t believe people still waste their time even creating these threads or answearing them, including myself.
Its been 12 years guys. Its boring and pointless.
SC2 race circlejerk never ands for Z/T/P.
|
Just seeing the headline I can cleary state that this whole thread is ridiculous :D
Z>T>P and that's it, just check the win% of IEM Katowice ^^
|
On March 05 2022 06:43 loeblix wrote:
I don't think you can look at BW meta without considering maps. Maps in bw vary a lot more compared to sc2.
Definitely agree. I think we need a larger and more varied map pool to keep things interesting.
|
I do think that alot of TvZs came down to maps. If there was a second hardwire in the pool I could see Maru beating serral maybe reynor to. We had a better map pool for Terran last map rotation. Maybe we could cool it down a bit on having many large maps that are very wide. I think this is something not pointed out very often but in late game zvt Terran really struggles on any map where there army is unable to rotate quickly from one edge base to there center bases and the other edge base. This is why Maru looks invincible on hardwire but on other maps has more vulnerabilities.
Still I don’t think Zerg is massively op. It’s mainly just we need to ballance them with maps. Zerg is really only crazy on big, wide maps with many bases were there speed forces there opponent to split there army three ways while also covering nyduss and trying to deny zerg from grabbing all neutral bases, this just isn’t feasible even for the best in the world.. We can even have mostly big maps as long as they are tall but skinny. But more small maps would also do a lot for tvz and pvz ballance.
I think toss is a bigger problem for most of the player base since gm is so toss heavy. Yet they underperform at a pro level. If we ever get a balance patch I would hope we get changes that push toss to having a higher skill ceiling but also a higher skill floor. This way good toss players can push thier limits and mechanics further but bad toss players are less carried by easy to use mechanics and units.
|
France12909 Posts
On March 06 2022 03:51 Haku wrote:
Can‘t believe people still waste their time even creating these threads or answearing them, including myself.
Its been 12 years guys. Its boring and pointless.
SC2 race circlejerk never ands for Z/T/P.
ZombieGrub was hyping Wardi for an announcement on his Twitter coming today, and everyone thought it was a balance patch (would be weird if he was the one to announce it, but maybe balance patch tournament?). She actually had to tweet again saying it was not a balance patch.
To put it simply: a lot of people are still super hyped by the idea of a balance patch. Enough people still care to be hyped about it so that’s cool and threads like this are fine.
|
On March 06 2022 03:51 Haku wrote:
Can‘t believe people still waste their time even creating these threads or answearing them, including myself.
Its been 12 years guys. Its boring and pointless.
SC2 race circlejerk never ands for Z/T/P.
It’s always been like this since WOL with the terran fanboys
When P wins. A move Imba
When Z wins. Imba op
When T terrans. godlike, other races need to l2p.
I do admit the terran tears after every big tournament is highly entertaining though. Mental gymnastics
|
On March 06 2022 04:14 CaRn1FeX wrote:
Just seeing the headline I can cleary state that this whole thread is ridiculous :D
Z>T>P and that's it, just check the win% of IEM Katowice ^^
More like Z > T, and P > T right now. That's why Terran has performed the worst in Premier tournaments over the last year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
