This was about the topic, that RIGHT NOW, LOOKING AT ALL TOURNAMENTS, balance seems to be in a rather good state. It s obviously not perfect, but I belive it s actually pretty decent right now.
Top KR Balanced on Alligulac - Page 3
Forum Index > SC2 General |
dbRic1203
Germany2649 Posts
This was about the topic, that RIGHT NOW, LOOKING AT ALL TOURNAMENTS, balance seems to be in a rather good state. It s obviously not perfect, but I belive it s actually pretty decent right now. | ||
mounteast0
59 Posts
On September 22 2020 18:57 Shuffleblade wrote: Well firstly, the "50% winrate for equal skilled players" is pretty much impossible to measure because what really is equally skilled players. MMR is not an accurate measure of skill, especially not when we take into account that you can have one really strong matchup. The argument if zerg is op at the higest level or if many zerg players in general are just higher level that players of other races is an argument you simply cant disprove. Even if Zerg has a higher winrate overall it can be due to skill disparity, in theory. Secondly in that case what is even the point in discussing balance. By your definiton balance simply doesn't matter. If ZvT has 50% winrate 100% due to drone rush then that matchup will soon have a winrate way below 50% because terran players will learn to defend drone rush. When looking at the state of the game right now it is actually important to look at the state of the game longterm, it is fine if the winrates are bad right now if we can reasonably assume they will stabilize down the road. Equally if the winrates are perfectly balanced right now because of drone rush we should definitely discuss right now what we can do to fix the problem that is game state/entertainement but also the coming balance problem. So for what purpose are we even talking about this theoretical balance if it is overall unimportant to the state of the game and the future of the game. Yeah, sounds really important to find some kind of universal measurement of useless data. I did not mention the game state is not important, did I? My comment on drone rush example "Of course it is not going to be enjoyable for the player or the viewer." also implied a balanced game is not necessary enjoyable (not good game state), right? I totally agree with you in the sense that measuring "skill" with absolute quantifiable number might not be possible, as win rate always dependent on player skill and racial strength (balance). And trying to find 2 player with exactly the same level of skill, whatever it means, is very difficult, if not impossible. However, there is no point talking balance if there is a "significant" difference in skill, whatever "significant" means. For example, Maru win against Lambo, or Serral win against Soul is not considered imbalance. Nor any of my loss is related to imbalance (I am a wood league player in case you are curious). Whether a game should priorities balance or state of game is also a personal preference (or the game company's preference). While I am similar to you in the sense that I would rather have an enjoyable game (either as player or viewer) than a perfectly balanced game (win rate at 50.0000% for all match up), what you need to realize is that these are two different aspect, even though they are ultimately related and will affect each other. One example is the widow mine change (cloak), I heard a few of the casters / personalities talk about the widow mine change as bizarre / unnecessary etc. as a balance change, they don't seems to realize that is a change target to change the state of game rather than balance. If you put the state of game (entertainment value) into a balance discussion (achieving 50% win rate), it will get an already complicated discussion even more complicated. Of course that does not mean state of game, or future state of game should not be discussed. I certainly do not have any right or authority to stop you from putting state of game into balance discussion, nor my opinion is going to be "more correct / valid" than yours, so feel free to ignore my point. Well, if the community have no consensus to what is imbalance or how to measure imbalance, how do we have constructive discussion about that? Just like this post, the OP want to prove there is no balance problem at the top, but how many other poster agree with his method, or interpretation of the data? | ||
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
On September 24 2020 00:51 mounteast0 wrote: I did not mention the game state is not important, did I? My comment on drone rush example "Of course it is not going to be enjoyable for the player or the viewer." also implied a balanced game is not necessary enjoyable (not good game state), right? I totally agree with you in the sense that measuring "skill" with absolute quantifiable number might not be possible, as win rate always dependent on player skill and racial strength (balance). And trying to find 2 player with exactly the same level of skill, whatever it means, is very difficult, if not impossible. However, there is no point talking balance if there is a "significant" difference in skill, whatever "significant" means. For example, Maru win against Lambo, or Serral win against Soul is not considered imbalance. Nor any of my loss is related to imbalance (I am a wood league player in case you are curious). Whether a game should priorities balance or state of game is also a personal preference (or the game company's preference). While I am similar to you in the sense that I would rather have an enjoyable game (either as player or viewer) than a perfectly balanced game (win rate at 50.0000% for all match up), what you need to realize is that these are two different aspect, even though they are ultimately related and will affect each other. One example is the widow mine change (cloak), I heard a few of the casters / personalities talk about the widow mine change as bizarre / unnecessary etc. as a balance change, they don't seems to realize that is a change target to change the state of game rather than balance. If you put the state of game (entertainment value) into a balance discussion (achieving 50% win rate), it will get an already complicated discussion even more complicated. Of course that does not mean state of game, or future state of game should not be discussed. I certainly do not have any right or authority to stop you from putting state of game into balance discussion, nor my opinion is going to be "more correct / valid" than yours, so feel free to ignore my point. Well, if the community have no consensus to what is imbalance or how to measure imbalance, how do we have constructive discussion about that? Just like this post, the OP want to prove there is no balance problem at the top, but how many other poster agree with his method, or interpretation of the data? I get your point and mostly I agree in most of you argue but there is one big difference in how we view balance. You seem to define balance as actual winrate right now while I am talking about the games overall winrate withstanding time. Meaning I don't care if the winrates are even now, it is very possible that as the game gets figured out and players get better at different things and meta evolve winrates change. If the winrate is tournaments and ladder is exactly 50/50 right now, in three months time one matchup is extremely skewed 60/40 across the board and there has been no change to the game no update. Is the game balanced right now? Obviously not right, since as the game gets figured out we learn that the game has been badly balanced even the time when the winrates were even. That is why we disagree, I simply look at the big picture while you only look at only the data we have now. This is I think discussing how games play out matters because that says more about game balance because in my opinion game balance is the actual balance of the game long term. Your way of looking at it would mean that broodwar has been badly balanced in different ways in different periods without the game ever changing or updating. Broodwar has been balanced the same for ages even if the winrates change over time. | ||
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On September 23 2020 17:50 dbRic1203 wrote: I like how a thread about how the top of Korea has a beatifull, perfectly balanced Alligulac distribution got absoluty derailed into another balance whine thread. This was about the topic, that RIGHT NOW, LOOKING AT ALL TOURNAMENTS, balance seems to be in a rather good state. It s obviously not perfect, but I belive it s actually pretty decent right now. if you notice many acutally are not saying balance is broken, but the VICTOR balance is broken. but hey, let's make a shortcut and call it balance whine, it's easier, right? | ||
Harris1st
Germany6140 Posts
That said, I'm very happy with balance right now since ma bois Serral and Reynor keep destroying people | ||
| ||