Starcraft, played at a high level, on a balanced map

[Dormir Con Las Arañas]

is the most balanced RTS, and possibly the most balanced game, of all time.

http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/korean/m ... ing_Spirit

Look at that, about 250 games in each matchup, and the "better" race wins about 51-53% of the time.

 

[Zed]

Yes and?

 

[MetalCraze]

Stop spamming Stragegy Gaming with shit plz

 

[Ulminati]

Why the butthurt? He's talking about Brood War.

I mean, it's fairly banal, and he doesn't really make any interesting points. But it's a different game than the SC2 that lured you into its black van with promises of candy.

 

[Destroid]

Doesn't SC2 have a similar bias to this? I recall reading it was in the low 50%s.

 

[attackfighter]

No these are SC2's win ratios:
43% Protoss
52% Zerg
60% Terran

 

[Elzair]

I bet Blizzard will improve this in the next expansion.

 

[Mhain]

No these are SC2's win ratios:
43% Protoss
52% Zerg
60% Terran

Nope. For the top players, the statistics are at about 55%.
http://sc2ranks.com/stats/all/1/all

I am sure that the current win ratios should be Terran>Protoss>Zerg. Terran is, because of the campaign, the most represented, and of course, the Zerg is the least represented. Zerg is the weakest race of the three right now, but Zerg vs Protoss matchup is quite balanced. The problems of zerg include: Trick based gameplay, not many viable options, too reactionary to be flawless with, no campaign. Terran needs, according to most top players and many others, a small nerf (like the elimination of marauder stim, or addition of time delay to siege tank rounds) limiting Terran's options to be a balanced race.

 

[Malakal]

I believe its because Protoss lack good ranged units. In SC1 multiplayer with them was all about dragoons but now they are gone and instead we have those blinking fucks which are not exactly as competent. On the contrary Terran gameplay remains unchanged and players were able to easily adapt. Zergs are in the middle with new good units and old still being there. Pros of course dont care as they are masters of the new game too.

 

[Ulminati]

On the topic of balance, people tend to forget the reason SC1 got so popular was because blizzard kept releasing balance patches until it was just right. SC2 has just been released. Give it 5-6 patches and things will likely improve.

 

[Mhain]

I believe its because Protoss lack good ranged units. In SC1 multiplayer with them was all about dragoons but now they are gone and instead we have those blinking fucks which are not exactly as competent. On the contrary Terran gameplay remains unchanged and players were able to easily adapt. Zergs are in the middle with new good units and old still being there. Pros of course dont care as they are masters of the new game too.

Nope, Protoss are actually quite balanced right now. Sentries are great against air for example, but you don't know that until you try it. Stalkers are fun too - They have the best voices, are good overall and blink, when used professionally (I mean, I haven't seen many people do) allows great mobility, as well as a great survival technique (for example, you have 8 stalkers in a row; when they get damaged, blink only them to the back of the army, they will regenerate shields and the opponent won't be able to kill them). They also don't have the strange dragoon movement ai. They are cost inefficient at low numbers though.

The problem people have with Zerg is the early game and the late game. Zerg cannot harrass properly without sacrificing the game, and terran hellions&reapers are deadly. Sure, you can micro your units, but you lose your concentration. In late game, Terran siege tanks are so powerful that a 100 food terran army can defeat a supply capped Zerg at times. This leaves Zerg only limited opportunities against Terran.

 

[attackfighter]

Nope. For the top players, the statistics are at about 55%.
http://sc2ranks.com/stats/all/1/all

I am sure that the current win ratios should be Terran>Protoss>Zerg. Terran is, because of the campaign, the most represented, and of course, the Zerg is the least represented. Zerg is the weakest race of the three right now, but Zerg vs Protoss matchup is quite balanced. The problems of zerg include: Trick based gameplay, not many viable options, too reactionary to be flawless with, no campaign. Terran needs, according to most top players and many others, a small nerf (like the elimination of marauder stim, or addition of time delay to siege tank rounds) limiting Terran's options to be a balanced race.

Those are statistics for Blizzards crappy league. Blizzards crappy league trys to set you up so you have a ~50% chance of winning, no surpise that it's succeeded in doing that. Look at the "pro" scene, you'll see a different story.

I believe its because Protoss lack good ranged units. In SC1 multiplayer with them was all about dragoons but now they are gone and instead we have those blinking fucks which are not exactly as competent. On the contrary Terran gameplay remains unchanged and players were able to easily adapt. Zergs are in the middle with new good units and old still being there. Pros of course dont care as they are masters of the new game too.

Actually I think Protoss' core gameplay has remained the least changed from SC1. They've always been about getting a solid ball of units and then A moving around with occasional spells thrown in. Zerg and Terran otth had very unique ways of playing in SC1, but in SC2 they've turned into Protoss clones, just getting units, A moving, etc..

Also I think the Stalker has the same range as the Dragoon, it's just that Terran has a unit with a similar range (marauder) and Zerg units have better AI and thus are less susceptable to the move ---> hold position micro that goons used to do (now they have to do their gay blink).

 

[Destroid]

It's really annoying that zerg have additional macro overheads (keeping your queens making larva, wtf isn't this smart cast) and growing creep, protoss have warp gates which allows you to be really quite lazy with your macro and remain competitive.

I tell you what though, it's a truly beautiful sight the first time you see just how badly Ultralisks smash Stalker/Colossus combo, which is pretty popular (and generally effective).

 

[attackfighter]

106 wins: Terran 82.81%
11 wins: Toss 8.59%
11 wins: Zerg 8.59%

Here's the results from a Korean SC2 tournament, man I can't believe they call this shit 'competitive' LOL

 

[Destroid]

Useless information without knowing the player distribution.

 

[ScottishMartialArts]

106 wins: Terran 82.81%
11 wins: Toss 8.59%
11 wins: Zerg 8.59%

Here's the results from a Korean SC2 tournament, man I can't believe they call this shit 'competitive' LOL

Jeez, that's bad.

On the other hand, SC1 didn't become the uber-competitive, perfectly balanced e-sport it is now until about a year after BW was released. Still, I expected better for SC2.

Speaking of SC1, I found out the other day that the two Enslavers campaigns are canonical, so I'm giving them a shot. HOLY SHIT, are they ever hard! Waves of Tarrasques (hero ultralisks) are bad, very, very bad.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

The problem people have with Zerg is the early game and the late game. Zerg cannot harrass properly without sacrificing the game, and terran hellions&reapers are deadly. Sure, you can micro your units, but you lose your concentration. In late game, Terran siege tanks are so powerful that a 100 food terran army can defeat a supply capped Zerg at times. This leaves Zerg only limited opportunities against Terran.

Are you even playing Zerg? Their problems are almost all mid game. Hydra melt to everything and are so slow as shit off creep they might as well be static defenses. Muta melt to Thor/Turrets, Infestors alone can't win the battle, and only truly counter bio balls with fungal growth. Playing Zerg is about fighting to stay in the game till you get Broodlords and Ultralisks.

Also, map imbalance. Maps like Lost Temple aren't played in competitive SC1 for a REASON. That reason is you can siege a player's mineral line from ridiculous places that are very hard to counter. 1/4th of the maps might as well be auto-win once terran puts siege tanks in a certain section of the map. Other maps such as Desert Oasis, Incineration Zone, Steppes of War, Kulas Ravine all have places where Terrans can siege your natural (or, god forbid, your main) mineral line and you have to walk half way across the map to reach them.

SC1 was hardly balanced by Blizzard, it was balanced by map makers who have to stick to a very certain set of characteristics to ensure races are at least fairly even. Go put good players on the original SC1 maps, the balance would be horrible. Blizzard has done this slightly better in SC2 (mirrored maps, all bases have chokes, same expansion mineral placement, etc), but its not nearly perfect.

106 wins: Terran 82.81%
11 wins: Toss 8.59%
11 wins: Zerg 8.59%

Here's the results from a Korean SC2 tournament, man I can't believe they call this shit 'competitive' LOL

I'll have to hear a lot more about this tournament, since from what I've heard its Zerg that is popular over there. Or at least, that was true for the Beta. Races aren't nearly THAT imbalanced, so even if this info is legit its undoubtable that this is partially due to the fact that noone wants to try playing the races that are considered 'weak'.

 

[Antihero]

It's not like my opinion on balance is worth a damn, but it seems like Terran definitely has more cheap strategies in SC2 right now, at least against Zerg I feel. Mass MMM? Maybe you get them with fungal growth and fast banelings, but that's a huge waste of gas if you want to keep that up, even if you burrow them and hope for the best. Multiple FGs one after another is enough, but infestors need backup or you'll lose a huge investment in the blink of an eye (and infested terrans usually take too long to hatch to work as decoys). I guess there are Hydralisks or overlord drops if your oponent is blind, but it's not really a fair trade either. Not sure how mass mutalisks would fare, but it seems expensive and dicey to counter mainly minerals spent by the Terran who could probably throw in a few Thors. Zerglings would melt before they reach the bioball, so there you have to hope they don't have detection or know how to scan (would call that a death wish).

Terran mass mech against Zerg? Common Terran winning strategy = Attack move. Yeah, get them while they're moving you say, or don't let them mass up... Neural Parasite got reduced to lasting 12 seconds I think and you'd need a lot of infestors to NP their Thors and you probably still want the glands upgrade and maybe even the burrow upgrade, which makes them take a while to be effective - all on the good chance they'll get blown away almost instantly if you make one mistake.

It just still feels like Zerg is too reactive at times instead of being able to give terran any early pressure (besides all-in "baneling busts" or whatever other weak pressure you can apply). Plus, I'm still not really sure how useful the Ultralisk really is - seems suicidal to rely on it unless you're already controlling the map, and Broodlords take a long while to get and support. Supposedly you just expand if you think you can hold or want to risk it, but that's still just scouting and waiting for their attack then.

Still mostly fun though.

 

[Destroid]

Ultras are only good against protoss really. Mass thor would probably beat equal resources of Ultras. Never really tried them against MMM but their damage got nerfed against light so they need 3? swipes to kill a marine, which isn't exactly great.

Hydra/Roach I always found to be a pretty effective combination.

 

[Mhain]

106 wins: Terran 82.81%
11 wins: Toss 8.59%
11 wins: Zerg 8.59%

... in a tournament with 9 people, out of which 7 are Terrans. And one of the Terrans is oGstheSTC, one of the best players worldwide (about 50 of the Terran wins are his). Why the fuck do we have people like you? Everyone knows that Terran is overpowered, but not that much. It is however true that the number of Terrans in the tourney show something, but the win ratios are similar to what we would expect(77%/11%/11%). Don't hate the right problems for the wrong reasons.

@Overweighed Manatee: Just etymology. Replace "late game" with "mid game". I messed up the timings in my head.

 

[attackfighter]

106 wins: Terran 82.81%
11 wins: Toss 8.59%
11 wins: Zerg 8.59%

... in a tournament with 9 people, out of which 7 are Terrans. And one of the Terrans is oGstheSTC, one of the best players worldwide (about 50 of the Terran wins are his). Why the fuck do we have people like you? Everyone knows that Terran is overpowered, but not that much. It is however true that the number of Terrans in the tourney show something, but the win ratios are similar to what we would expect(77%/11%/11%). Don't hate the right problems for the wrong reasons.

@Overweighed Manatee: Just etymology. Replace "late game" with "mid game". I messed up the timings in my head.

9 people? Wtf are you talking about, all the races were fairly well represented it's just that the Terrans beat all the other races (one T player had a 50 game winning streak!)

 

[Grunker]

106 wins: Terran 82.81%
11 wins: Toss 8.59%
11 wins: Zerg 8.59%

... in a tournament with 9 people, out of which 7 are Terrans. And one of the Terrans is oGstheSTC, one of the best players worldwide (about 50 of the Terran wins are his). Why the fuck do we have people like you? Everyone knows that Terran is overpowered, but not that much. It is however true that the number of Terrans in the tourney show something, but the win ratios are similar to what we would expect(77%/11%/11%). Don't hate the right problems for the wrong reasons.

@Overweighed Manatee: Just etymology. Replace "late game" with "mid game". I messed up the timings in my head.

9 people? Wtf are you talking about, all the races were fairly well represented it's just that the Terrans beat all the other races (one T player had a 50 game winning streak!)

Link? I play random, and win approx half of my matches - equal spread on Terran and Protoss, but a bit less with Zerg (because I'm terrible at playing them).

 

[Mhain]

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmes ... _id=144731

9 people? Wtf are you talking about, all the races were fairly well represented it's just that the Terrans beat all the other races (one T player had a 50 game winning streak!)

Man, why are you repeating what I have already said? Do you have some kind of repetition syndrome or something?

And one of the Terrans is oGstheSTC, one of the best players worldwide (about 50 of the Terran wins are his).

The fact is that the program was some kind of Showmatch, and out of the 9 people who got +10 winstreaks, 7 were Terran, 1 was Protoss and 1 was Zerg. And 3 of those 7 were the same person, oGstheSTC. Since we don't know the number of participants, we cannot say much about anything. Even so, you see, the winstreak of STC should have eliminated many other skilled players, since he is so much better than the others. It is true that there seems to be a large amount of Terrans though. It is also true that since all diamond players can participate, there will be a large amount of trash among the players.

 

[attackfighter]

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=144731

9 people? Wtf are you talking about, all the races were fairly well represented it's just that the Terrans beat all the other races (one T player had a 50 game winning streak!)

Man, why are you repeating what I have already said? Do you have some kind of repetition syndrome or something?

And one of the Terrans is oGstheSTC, one of the best players worldwide (about 50 of the Terran wins are his).

The fact is that the program was some kind of Showmatch, and out of the 9 people who got +10 winstreaks, 7 were Terran, 1 was Protoss and 1 was Zerg. And 3 of those 7 were the same person, oGstheSTC. Since we don't know the number of participants, we cannot say much about anything. Even so, you see, the winstreak of STC should have eliminated many other skilled players, since he is so much better than the others. It is true that there seems to be a large amount of Terrans though. It is also true that since all diamond players can participate, there will be a large amount of trash among the players.

Add up all the wins, that's roughly how many people participated. And a good spread amongst the races too. Put 2 and 2 together and you have a 100+ person tournament with the top Terrans winning almost 10 times more than everyone else.

Sounds like you need to work on your reading comprehension

 

[Quilty]

I don't think I realized how gay the 'dex was until Starcraft 2 came out and all the twitchgaming homos left their closets.

STOP THIS MADNESS.