EPTIMBALANCED! - Introduction - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
If you have criticism, you need to address the content, not the hosts. Idra and Artosis are 2 (1.5) Zerg players, but you can't point that out and then blanket them as biased. Respond to the content. You can't tell them to "get 2 Terran and Protoss players". That's fucking obtuse advice. "Yo just get 4 more high level players to record with you." Yes, I think everyone sees the value in getting it, but it's not practical. Respond to the content and use evidence / logic to back up your claims. | ||
|
sjschmidt93
United States2518 Posts
| ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On February 03 2011 10:36 avilo wrote: Pretty legit point, I think every Terran was thinking it lol. I pretty suprised they are even using this format, discussing one unit. Its pretty easy to look at just one unit and say oh look its OP or its useless or whatever. We should know this from BW though, just look at the defiler from BW. On the surface it should be incredibly OP, but in the context of the match up as a whole it isn't. | ||
|
Seraphic
United States3849 Posts
 ). Protoss has none, Bisu came very close but never got there, or stayed there long enough.Blizzard HAS to find a way to give Protoss more diversity in there unit compositions. Having a race just around the Colossus is ridiculous. | ||
yamato77
11589 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:20 StarcraftMan wrote: Winner of GSL Season 1 = Zerg Winner of GSL Season 2 = Zerg Winner of GOM All Star Invitational = Zerg Winner of GSL Season 3 = Protoss Winner of GSL Season 4 = Terran Zerg has won 3/5 of the most prestigious GOM tournaments with the best players in the world. And no, I won't count IEM or MLG because those tournaments are 1 class below GOM tournaments. Not only is this is really horrid argument overall, but saying MLG, IEM, or even Dreamhack isn't as competitive as GSL is just flat out biased. The Koreans are not by default better than foreigners, and the GSL has had its share of really, really bad players. | ||
|
Seraphic
United States3849 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:28 Tachion wrote: Storm is still very powerful in lategame PvT. It was at the point not too long ago that Blizz talked about nerfing storm so that T didn't get dominated by P so badly as the game continues on longer and longer. If you buff storm for PvZ, it'd break PvT even more. I'm really not sure where the buff should come from to be honest. Maybe if they made templar tech faster/more accessible we'd see more of it. The reason most all P's go colossus first and then transition into HT(at least for PvT) is because it's faster and safer than going straight from gateway units to HT. I'm not really sure why P's don't use HT in PvZ. I haven't seen those in a ladder games in, literally, 2+ months :O I don't even remember why P's don't use them anymore. What is it about PvT that makes HT more powerful than colossus in the lategame, but not PvZ? feedback on medivacs? A way to avoid the vikings? Energy is probably my best guess. You can only do it as often as the energy gives you the ability to do so. Without Energy, HT is useless, and sits there. Terran has EMP, which serves more then it's purpose to ground an entire Protoss army to dust. Zerg, I think don't think have a lot to deal with it but Micro. With the Colossus, you get rid of all of that, it's safer, no energy, and basically the same effect without the worry of having it back fire on you if your enemy EMPs you. | ||
|
StarcraftMan
Canada507 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:32 yamato77 wrote: Not only is this is really horrid argument overall, but saying MLG, IEM, or even Dreamhack isn't as competitive as GSL is just flat out biased. The Koreans are not by default better than foreigners, and the GSL has had its share of really, really bad players. Arguably, the best Zerg in the world is Nestea Arguably, the best Terran in the world is MVP Arguably, the best Protoss in the world is MC | ||
|
Smigi
United States328 Posts
You guys need to chill out, its not like their going "EL OH EL ZERG FREEKING SUCKZ MAN, PROTOSS AND TERRAN ARE BROK3N!" They are going about this in a very analytical and mature way, there is no raging and/or rants. nice stuff artosis. | ||
|
JoeSchmoe
Canada2058 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:07 emythrel wrote: if you actually listened to what they said.... idra said he "thinks" its OP, but there might be a way to counter it with the right unit comp Artosis said, having played both sides, he was unsure whether or not it was too powerful. Both agreed that time will tell. They also said collosus was atm too powerful in PvP. The main crux of their arguments for both ZvP and PvP was that the collosus was too important, that the entire match-up is based around it, and thats bad.... which it is. If virtually every PvP and ZvP ends up with collosus as the most important unit, then something is wrong.... because the same can't be said of TvP where there are multiple routes both races can take to deal with whatever the other player is doing. In TvP I play as many games where there is only ever 1-2 collosus in the entire game as when there are alot of immortals or HT's or air units instead. I can't say the same about PvZ or PvP. I really wish people would listen to what they actually said instead of selective deafness where you don't hear "think its OP" and instead just hear "its OP" obviously everything is opinionated. they don't need to prefix every comment with "i think", we know it is subjective because they're the ones saying it. this is not a thesis paper with references and proven facts. the point is their arguments lack perspective. idra spent the entire time presenting scenarios of how colossus rolls all zerg unit compositions. There is basically no protoss perspective about the matchup which is what I would've liked to see. How can you have an adequate discussion about imbalance when it's really just one side making conjectures about the state of their race? They entirely dismissed colossus discussion in TvP with idra saying vikings are better than corrupters, etc. Consider this. Would it make sense for idra to claim that a terran unit is underpowered in say a TvP matchup? Would you be convinced? He doesn't play protoss, or that matchup even. The only support he'll have for his argument comes from the opinions of other players and replays. In which case wouldn't it make much more sense to have a pro terran player with actual experiences to comment about the balance in this case? | ||
|
Sadist
United States7072 Posts
Also both ground armies do die when you engage. Ive been going mech and avoiding dealing with the whole colossus/templar deathball ;d That being said......I think SC2 needs some sort of units where skill level really gets more out of them. I know from playing BW that you could immediately tell the caliber of player you were going against in the first few minutes of the game simply by their reaction time an unit control. Theres absolutely nothing that separates the control of a Colossus between MC and a Bronze player. | ||
|
hifriend
China7935 Posts
due to warpgates, gateway units must be relatively bad to compensate for this, protoss tech is strong and a necessity for early mid game And therefore, it isn't really possible to nerf colossi or buff gateway units. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:32 yamato77 wrote: Not only is this is really horrid argument overall, but saying MLG, IEM, or even Dreamhack isn't as competitive as GSL is just flat out biased. The Koreans are not by default better than foreigners, and the GSL has had its share of really, really bad players. All of the players who played in MLG and IEM failed to go as far in the GSL. Coincidence? | ||
|
Deleted User 135096
3624 Posts
 | ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
I love their definition :DD | ||
|
confusedcrib
United States1307 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:31 Seraphic wrote: I would love to not feel inclined to get Colossus in SC2. I want that feeling removed honestly. But Protoss in SC1 was already "under" achieving compared to Terran and Zerg. All bonjwas in SC1 are Terran, 1 Zerg (Savior but I don't know if people still call him that now. The Fallen? ). Protoss has none, Bisu came very close but never got there, or stayed there long enough.Blizzard HAS to find a way to give Protoss more diversity in there unit compositions. Having a race just around the Colossus is ridiculous. I feel as though this post is exactly all that they were saying. Not that collussus is imbalanced, just that all protoss unit compositions shouldn't clutch on it. | ||
|
Rodregeus
Australia126 Posts
On February 03 2011 10:30 blade55555 wrote: I think you have something wrong "zergs dominate GSL" is completely wrong. Winning GSL and dominating are completely different. GSL1, Fruitdealer didnt' even "dominate" (almost lost vs TOP) every other zerg was out by ro16 I believe? GSL2 Nestea dominated through almost the entire GSL not zergs just nestea. GSL3 again zergs didn't dominate. As far as I know zergs have never "dominated" a GSL just a zerg has won it twice, winning a GSL and dominating are completely different ^^ I would just like to point out, That in a game with 3 races. Zerg has won exactly 50% of GSL finals. Along with the fact that zerg has been the least represented from the start, by about half that of Terran. Making their base chance at winning the GSL much slimmer than terrans. Even if the game was perfectly balanced, and GSL had 50% terrans, 25% Zerg and 25% protoss, Terran would still be more likely to win as a race because there are more there to begin with. Basically, less Zergs manage to beat out more terrans, for 50% of GSL wins in a game with 3 races. I hardly think that shows that zerg is UP at all. :/ It's all just carry over from beta, the game has changed since then. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:39 iEchoic wrote: All of the players who played in MLG and IEM failed to go as far in the GSL. Coincidence? Your telling me all the players who played in MLG and IEM played in the GSL? Wow I thought only a small portion of foreigners tried to qualify for the GSL each time. Hard to tell what would happen if every top foreigner tried to qualify for the GSL like every top korean does. | ||
|
MuTT
United States398 Posts
P.S. Yes pro players are biased but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't listen to them. Pro players are the most informed about the game and if they can prove their point with reasoning and evidence that cannot be refuted then we have to go on that because that is the best we got. | ||
|
oppS
Canada28 Posts
| ||
|
Saechiis
Netherlands4989 Posts
TeamLiquid is already overrun with hundreds of brainless bronze Zergs that cling to every word IdrA says and will go rampaging through the forums every time the magic word *imbalance* is proclaimed. For every person that can see through obvious bias, oversimplification and exaggeration there are at least two that don't or won't and it shows in the continuous degradation of TL's SC2 Strategy Forums. You explain how Starcraft 2 should be balanced around top level play since that's where the variable of "skill" relatively has the least influence. You fail to discuss though, the human factor, and what makes someone an objective judge of balance. Because let's face it, both you, IdrA and Artosis, are biased towards Zerg in the same way you were biased towards Terran when you played that race in BW. You're both easily the most vocal and quick in claiming imbalance in both versions of Starcraft and one can't help but notice that the arrow is always pointed at things that are disadvantageous to your race of play. Even though I can see that you've tried to at least make logical steps of reasoning, it's still so obvious that you're both not objective in your judgement. You talk a little bit about Colossi in TvP and how it's balanced there, but watching that as spectator you just feel your disinterest in the subject and how you seem to be getting that part out of the way to get to the point you "really" want to talk about. Which becomes pretty obvious when Artosis says "now let's talk about Colossi in ZvP" and you both can't help but get a huge grin on your face since you get to tell it's overpowered. You have both stated to not be familiar enough with other races than Zerg to play them at a competetive level. Doesn't that say enough about the validity of your judgement as two talented, but still biased Zerg players? You talk about the Colossus being a weapon of choice in all MU's and how it seriously obliterates ground. Concluding that it's too hard for Zerg to balance Corrupter count together with the economy required to churn them out. But that's obviously just 1 side of the story, you don't mention how Protoss gateway units all get totally raped by Roach/ Hydra, which is the reason why Toss needs ranged splash damage in the first place. The relative weakness of the core gateway units needs the additional DPS of Storm and Colossi for it to be cost-efficient. And since Storm is such an expensive and long tech path, Colossi are practically always the unit of choice to survive through midgame. Basically, I feel that the only ones that are benefited by such a show are yourselves; whilst SC communities like the ones on TL, SCReddit and even the Bnet forums are left to deal with even more irrational balance whines than there are now. | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
On February 03 2011 11:39 hifriend wrote: I think blizzard built an interesting dilemma into the game, because the design is as follows; due to warpgates, gateway units must be relatively bad to compensate for this, protoss tech is strong and a necessity for early mid game And therefore, it isn't really possible to nerf colossi or buff gateway units. Yep, hit the nail on the head right there. One thing they could do is have more upgrades for gateway units to make them more viable in late game. | ||
| ||
