at least you have now made it clear that you are a main T with your statements.
it tastes like mmmine Terran player.
btw…
ghost are still being built en masse.
wm, targeting did not become any clearer.
my teacher would now say that the topic of the essay was missed.
Part of the reason why MMMG is difficult is that Bio needs its own click-intensive micro alongside the Ghost. The player needs to be skilled enough to do both.
The other important factor here is that EMP is front-loaded. You really have to hit EMP at the start of the fight for it to have a decent effect. Sitting in the Medivac until it is “safe” for the Ghosts to drop usually means the EMP does less.
In contrast, Storm can be dropped at any time (within reason) without significantly changing the damage that it deals. The point of the Warp Prism is to prevent High Templar from getting disabled before the fight starts, which is admittedly less of a threat to Ghosts.
I would disagree with that. A radius of 1.5 is fairly normal for AOE damage spells–They are rarely smaller unless they include hard-cc or insta-kill most units.
I’m not denying they need help; I frankly believe they do, but I also don’t think that their problems are just limited to balance.
I’m not overhyping him when I say that in my opinion he is the best Protoss player currently, with Classic and HerO vying for 2nd place. He’s one of the only protoss players who can consistently beat Clem and Reynor, and is consistently capable of beating Serral, or at least taking games off him in matches, not to mention Dark.
Yep, it’s pretty appalling. I do have my own thoughts on that as well, but again, it comes down to issues that aren’t just balance related.
Protoss as a whole is designed… poorly. There’s so many things for protoss that are a balance nightmare that I could go on for a while. Between that, players being away for military, and the issues with balance and their flimsiness in the early-game in general, Protoss is definitely in a rough state.
At a pro level, that extra 20-30 seconds is an entire warp-in round. Pushes are literally made and broken in less time than that. 2/1/1 was a great example; something that was designed to hit at 5:00 exactly at pro level. If it hit even 10 seconds later, then it would do absolutely nothing. It ultimately ended up relegated to creep-clearing, before falling out of meta entirely.
Again, I’ve made my opinion on cyclones quite known at this point. They’re stupid in their current design and frankly speaking I wish they’d go back. They’re a nightmare for all matchups - TvZ and TvP make the early game super volatile with them, while TvT you either open with reaper cyclone and do great damage, or you struggle to hold an expansion early. But god forbid they go BCs since Cyclones were the counter to early BCs but aren’t any longer.
I never said that it was, don’t go putting words into my mouth. We’re having a discussion, nothing more. No need to get hostile with me.
Eh, they partially did this by increasing the size of certain units on the minimap (medivacs, dropperlords), so half a point there. But again, I get your point.
Having fungal straight off the bat is a pretty decent buff, especially since it’s got a pretty sizable AOE radius and greatly inhibits counter-micro.
What’s the difference between the talking points and that of Zerg’s back in 2017?
The scenario you laid out is, by its own definition, uneven.
If player skills are equally distributed, race selection has no effect on rank, and despite this a race has nonstandard MMR,
Then things aren’t even.
My personal favourite example of this will always remain the Disruptor itself. Unlike every other remotely similar button, Purification Nova instantly kills multiple things from full health in an area. The only response is to split the units out flawlessly or to snipe down the Disruptor.
The former still usually results in unit loss, the latter is a gamble because if it fails you lose huge value and the thing you’ve ‘gained’ - a dead disruptor - is one that already did its full damage.
Like, c’mon -
Banelings are squishy and have to risk themselves to do damage, Corrosive Bile only does 60 damage and its target spot is fixed, Fungal deals a miserable 25 damage now, Lurkers have a pretty narrow AoE and just got nerfed, Parasitic Bomb can be split away from and fliers aren’t super squishy,
Widow Mines only deal huge damage to one target so they’re fairly focused on being worker killers, Hellions are kind of bad and Hellbats aren’t much better, EMP might travel super fast but it only damages shields, Steady Targeting only hits one target and is sometimes trivial to interrupt, Tanks take forever to siege and deal decaying splash, Thors and Liberators’ splash are a bit niche
Storm is a reducible DPS effect, Archons have 3 range and their splash decays, Colossi are weak to air and Armored units?
So, then Terran player would have to be uneven in that they aren’t as good of players on average OR The races themselves have to be uneven.
These are the only two feasible explanations.
You’re ignoring the fact that in that example you and Eliwan are talking about, all things have to be even. That means number of players. That means game length played. That means number of games played. rank distribution etc.
But that’s not the case in the real world, thus the conclusion to the narrative you’re pushing towards is itself inherently false, because it’s based off a false narrative.
Why would the number of players and game length played need to be even in order for win rates to be 50%?
Because this isn’t about being 50%, this is about why there are more low-league terrans compared to their counter-parts of other races.
Game-length might not necessarily matter, but for the sake of the example, we’re saying all things are even. That includes time played, that includes skill level, that includes the number of players etc.
But this isn’t what actually occurs in real life. In real life, there is a larger number of terran players overall compared to the other two races. In real life, we only have MMR to be able to tell skill, which is imperfect at best since there’s so many different skills that go into sc2, and each race is unique and different compared to its counterparts, making truely balanced representation not really feasible anyway. In real life, there are other factors outside the game that contribute to a person’s MMR in general too - play time, what people find fun, learning ability, etc, none of these things are mutually exclusive, and all of them likely in some way contribute to a person’s overall skill with one or all races.
Eliwan would be able to explain it better than I can however. His ability to explain things like this generally outstrips mine.
In the hypothetical world you propose, this still isn’t quite the case - To simplify the math I will use an absurd example: Suppose there are four times as many Terran players as their are Zerg and Protoss players.
In order for your win rate to stay 50% (ie: Your MMR is accurate), you could have a 75% win rate vs Terran, but a 0% win rate vs Protoss and Zerg.
Now, also note from this second level of hypothetical; if Terran average MMR lags, it could be because there’s more good players that chose to play Protoss or Zerg, or that there’s four times as many Bronze Terrans as there are Bronze Zerg and Protoss.
That note is also what we observe in reality. (If, of course, significantly less exaggerated.)
Because if Terrans play ~5 minute games, but Protoss vs Zerg is a ~20 minute game, then whenever a PvZ happens there’s an “increased” number of Terrans which can also contribute to the aforementioned “Your win rate in X match-up doesn’t have to be anywhere near 50% for your MMR to be accurate”.
The only way for them to be lower, on average, is to lose more than they win, on average.
To elaborate this point; in order for things to be actually all equal - and assuming Blizzard’s idealized rank splits because it’s just easier to think about and - since all things should be equal in this world - it won’t matter.
For every 1,000 Terrans, there must be 1,000 Zergs and 1,000 Protoss.
=> Otherwise, the skill level in each match up will almost definitionally represent an uneven amount of a given player’s MMR.
/—
All players have 50% overall win rates.
=> Otherwise, their MMR is inaccurate, and our assumptions will begin to fall apart.
/—
Players with, for example, a 90% win rate in one match up but a 10% win rate in another don’t exist.
=> While such a player does not imbalance the statistics and therefore should become noise as your data set acquires additional members, it demonstrates questionability of the environment’s intended well-leveled nature.
/—
All match ups should average to an equal amount of time spent.
=> If the average time of a TvZ is ten minutes, but the average time of a PvT is fourty minutes, then as PvT matches are started, the likelihood of ZvX increases, which brings us back to the “population is uneven”, just in a weird way.
/—
For every 40 Bronze Terrans, there are 230 Silver, Gold, Platinum, and Diamond Terrans, and 40 Master Terrans.
=> If that’s not the case, then unless every race matches whatever distribution Terran has, either the skill levels of players, the skill requirements of the races, the influence of skill on victory, etc; are not actually even.
=> Note that this right here is the reason your example in post 554 doesn’t work: In order for average Terran MMR is lower to be true, then either Terran requires more skill, has fewer skilled players, or has more bad players – each individually qualifies us out of the theoretical realm of “everything being even.”
/—
To a reasonable degree, for the amount of time that a given player has played, a player of each other race has played that long; or in other words, their sense of game knowledge should be equivalent.
=> This one is the least important, because skill level should abstract this away. However, from personal experience feeding people information while they’re mid-game, the amount of relevant random fun facts under your belt you have actually makes a difference in a lot of games; so I type it here.
This is the same thing as saying that Terran players are worse on average.
Incorrect.
That’s all there is. Those statements are only equivalent mathematically, and people do not view the world that way and do not evaluate things like magical girl deconstruction antagonists.
If you say “Terrans are worse on average”, people will not interpret this as a statement of the fact that The mean average MMR of Terran is less than that of Protoss and Zerg.
They will interpret it as you saying many other things, such as They're a bad player because they picked Terran, such as Terran is the weakest race, such as Terran is the hardest race to play, –
Because the word average does not carry only one meaning, and people do not tend to read things as though they are restatements of researched facts, but as whole judgments that come from a combination of factors.
Yeah but you dont get the extra 20-30 seconds. The 20-30 seconds are about the travel time of the army (raven) from your base where its built to the enemy. So the timing should hit about exactly the same timing. Meaning the upgrade actually didnt do anything in favor of protoss other than its a thing terrans could forget and an extra -50/50.
Im sorry that i was a bit mean but honestly saying things ín the slightest that this patch something actually good would be a stretch considering the amount of input and time the “balance council” got. Ofc i dont know how exactly it works (nobody does i guess) and obviously those guys are still only people, but still… I feel a bit like in 2019 where the official balance team buffed zerg through the roof and rather than acknowledging that they began to nerf other races 0o i mean you simply cant mess up this bad…yet here we are. only that now protoss just sucks and rather than doing something about it they are just heeey cyclone lets go. Instead of trying something experimental with protoss.
So, Terran players are not worse players on average, the game is precisely even at all skill levels, and Terran players have drastically lower MMR? That’s where we landed?
Remember when I said you were going to come up with nonsense?
This is that nonsense.
In the real world:
Terran players are not worse on average: ✓, of course not.
The game is precisely even at all skill levels: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, but I think so
Terran players have drastically lower MMR: ╳, except when viewed as the mean average without accounting for population disparity
In the hypothetical proposition:
Terran players are not worse on average: ✓
The game is precisely even at all skill levels: ✓
Terran players have drastically lower MMR: ╳, since then things aren’t even.
What does population disparity have to do with having lower average MMR?