What are you talking about? When I said I was disappointed that the charge nerf didnt go through? Well guess what it is now, which is why I haven’t been talking about it. I’ve also mentioned the nydus before as needing a nerf but never made threads on it because there were already like a dozen threads up. And then a nerf was announced so why would I make threads about nydus? You’re not making any sense.
Trying to get tactical jump removed so the battlecruiser can be balanced as a lategame unit is trying to destroy starcraft? Melodramatic much?
I mean really, I thought you like managed property for a living or something. Why is this upsetting you so much.
And it wasn’t an issue because the battlecruiser was worthless. This isn’t a difficult concept to understand. Perhaps an analogy would help. Imagine a unit that has 30 range but does 1 damage and has a fire rate of once a minute and costs 1 supply. It would be a waste of supply to build them. Then that unit gets a buff to damage and fire rate, and now it does 100 damage every second. Suddenly the massive range of that unit is an issue. gasp its like magic! Or… common sense…
I like how you continue to make this argument over and over because that’s your strategy, and I get to keep dismissing it over and over because I adopted your strategy.
I agree with most of this. Casters in general are too strong for sure, the infestor in particular. But I also think the nydus unload speed is silly right now and I like the idea of gating it behind an upgrade. And I’d disagree a little that zerg has the best two casters just because I think the high templar is insanely good but honestly it’d be hard to rank a top 3 of viper infestor and templar.
Yeah I disagree with that, I think tactical jump needs addressing regardless. But the BC might need a buff to compensate after if we stop seeing them for a couple months. And I do mean a couple months, not blizzards typical 1-2 year turnaround time.
On a related note, the proposed viking hp buff is one of the few changes in the patch that I don’t like because I’d rather they nerf casters in general.
Honestly I don’t understand why you hate me so much lol whenever I get you to actually talk about your opinions on balance they’re not that far off from my own, I feel like you just don’t trust my motives or have some vendetta against zergs or something.
Mostly because you react so hysterically when I suggest that Zerg doesn’t deserve to win 50%+ of tournaments and that the pronounced lack of Terran players outside of Korea is due to the inherent difficulty of the race.
It’s been this way whenever I present any fact that contradicts your preconceptions, like when I submitted this gem (SC2 Forums) you jumped on the bandwagon to call me a “whiner,” etc… Because that was the way you felt about the match up.
If you want to move past that, I’m all for it, but you can’t keep banging the drum that Zerg hasn’t won a GSL, that’s long since past and any top Zerg should win any top tournament.
I’m just gonna jump straight to this part first because it feels like its possible we could actually come to a resolution here haha.
I haven’t been bringing GSL tournament wins up lately for exactly that reason, it isn’t relevant anymore. But I only brought it up in the first place as a counter to the ‘zergs always win wcs’ arguments because terran had a 6 GSL win streak at one point which was just ridiculous, and that’s when you posted that thread.
The stat that I actually care about is Code S winrates, not including qualifiers. And those have been very balanced for the last couple seasons, aside from this most recent season that Rogue won which showed pvz being really zerg favored and tvp being really protoss favored. If you wanna make a thread on that, I’m there, because that’s a metric for measuring balance that I consider valid.
And to be honest I might have to start looking at blizzcon stats too because of how far the korean scene has fallen and the foreign scene has risen in recent years, but it’s hard to consider those valid stats when theres qualifiers set up to include players that wouldnt normally make it in a true ‘best of the best in the world’ tournament.
See now you’re deliberately misrepresenting what I’m saying. Why would you ever think that I want zergs to win 50% of tournaments? I just don’t agree with you that terran is harder or zerg is easier. Otherwise we wouldn’t see such a marked improvement in Special’s play, for example, when he started living and practicing in korea.
And as much as you want to deny it, the biggest names in the foreign terran scene (uthermal and heromarine) have HUGE attitude problems that affect the way they approach games. And please don’t think I’m just talking smack here, I’ll freely admit that my favorite player Dark has that same exact problem in spades and it holds him back a lot.
And I just wanted to address this real quick: if that was my motivation for posting I would have been complaining about protoss FAR earlier than when the rest of the community started complaining and the stats and tournament results started reflecting that protoss was broken. For a LONG time I’ve struggled in ZvP and felt it was impossible and I’m still terrible at it. Seriously for like 2 years my ZvT and ZvZ were 55-60% and my ZvP was about 30%. I’m completely aware that this is in my head and its why I didn’t complain about protoss until the stats reflected what I felt.
Because the fact that Terran had a 6 win GSL streak was mostly irrelevant. During that time, stats were all over the place, mostly with Terran being at a huge disadvantage.
This is the crux of my argument against Batz and my argument against using solely GSL statistics to represent balance: Terran is slowed by getting to the GSL and Code S. Once at GSL, the format greatly benefits Terran players as it takes more careful planning for your specific opponent than the other two races do.
Batz argument always was: Look at the number of pro players that play Zerg, they deserve to win like 8x more. In effect, looking only at GSL win rates is the same thing, it’s punishing players for playing a slightly harder race, slight differences that end up having big results at at the margins.
I don’t know if you’re a fan of Jordan Peterson at all, but one of his philosophical refutations of the Gender pay gap and that women have so few people at the top (CEOs and world leaders, etc.) is that small differences have large consequences at the margins. His example: if you have 100 men and 100 women, the 100 most aggressive of those 200 is about 60 men and 40 women. If you have the 1 in 100 most aggressive person, 99% of them are men. Thus the male population of prisons is massively disproportionate. Same goes for CEOs in the other direction.
Applying this to Starcraft, if Terran is slightly harder (keep in mind, this is at the tournament level, where you know who you’re playing, on ladder you can play however since they have no idea who you are), you could quite easily see massive disproportion of players making it to low to mid pro level, since we are talking about the margins, not the majority of the player base.
Lastly, with regards to this thread, my problem with your take is as follows: The BC is your big enemy. When AAM was a huge problem in the game, Terran was still doing poorly, but I suggested we tackle that first, since it was so obviously broken. The Infestor is just as obviously broken and Zerg is not doing poorly, they are absolutely dominating. I have no problem with nerfing (or even removing) all sources of instant, risk free teleportation from the game (recall, Nydus, Tac jump), but you have the fix the obvious problems first, and that’s the infestor.
That’s only according to stats you use, which is really the main reason we disagree so much. All I’m saying is can we agree to disagree on this without being swear filter to each other? Because this just goes round in circles, like I can post links to the GSL stats for that period of 2.5 years where Terran dominated GSL and show you that in both PvT and TvZ, winrates were either balanced within 5% or terran favored, sometimes quite heavily (the highest it got was 73%). But of course you’ll link other stats and round we go.
Yeah I understand your argument trust me, it could even be true. There’s a lot of support for a couple different arguments that can explain the results we see. I just don’t think this explanation is the right one. It’s not a failure on your part to explain it properly or of me understanding it, I just don’t agree.
Got it, maybe I should update the OP and explain my stance better since people are probably assuming I’m just balance warring for mmr. Basically I agree that the infestor needs nerfing, and the changes proposed are absolutely ridiculous by the way like I couldn’t stop laughing when I read them. But at first I wasn’t convinced so I wasn’t really ready to hop on the nerf infestor bandwagon when it first rolled around. But I looked into it and now I agree. Only reason I haven’t really posted about it is because theres already so much whine about it I thought for sure blizzard would notice and I could just focus on the BC, which not as many people are talking about but is definitely also an issue. Nydus is a similar thing, except as soon as they buffed it I knew it was broken, no investigation needed xD. And I should mention I do remember you being reasonable about AAM and I appreciated that because I saw it in the same category I see tactical jump, recall before the nerf, and nydus: totally unacceptable design choices that create massive balance issues and cause upsets in tournaments.
We can have different opinions but we can’t have difference facts. There are premier, major and minor events; team events, monthly and weekly events. There are thousands of tournaments every year. When you average all of the major, premier and minor events, having removed serral you would get 28% for zerg. This is a fact and ignoring it is a disservice to your argument because ignorance is not an argument.