Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Forgot your password?
|
Members
Total Members: 3393
Latest: Kevlar New This Month: 0 New This Week: 0 New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 26301
Total Topics: 2410
Most Online Today: 1072
Most Online Ever: 3142
(January 23, 2020, 05:58:40 am)
Users Online Members: 11 Guests: 894 Total: 905
|
|
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Swagnificent
16
« on: June 17, 2018, 08:51:10 pm »
What if we excluded all 1000 pt 0-0 recs from the standings? Or if we want them there to show how many potential participants there are, maybe we start them with 0 pts, but after they play their first game we calculate the points off of a 1000 pt default.
It just looks weird to see a bunch of people in the top 50 who aren't even playing. Or later in the season, it's more like 2nd and 3rd page out of 4 are 0-0.
17
« on: June 17, 2018, 06:22:45 pm »
Yes, thats what i meant. You are entiled to ur own opinion, no1 has the right to shut you down.
People have the right to ridicule the opinion just as much as he has the right to express it.
Freedom of expression is not exempt from consequence.
they look stupid ridiculing a legit and popular argument.
We look stupid? If my eyes rolled any harder I'd be looking at my brain. No pun intended.
18
« on: June 16, 2018, 07:30:03 pm »
..wat?
Now he's 6-0. When will the madness end?
19
« on: June 16, 2018, 07:15:29 pm »
I mean, look at him. He's 5-0 and has that mentality. Na fam. Not fair to the rest of us.
20
« on: June 16, 2018, 11:40:30 am »
im a full time ebay powerseller, got a job at a sign manufacturing plant. and Im taking sign language interperetation. Fuck off.
Learning sign language because your poorly constructed arguments are falling on deaf ears? 
21
« on: June 16, 2018, 02:05:32 am »
What kinda stuff you got going on Scope? Anything exciting?
22
« on: June 16, 2018, 12:44:51 am »
Great dialogue. Race stats from last season:
PvZ:
65.188% vs 34.811%
PvT:
66.987% vs 33.012%
Protoss is clearly advantaged no matter how we might try to spin it. That doesn't mean that anyone's protoss is unbeatable by a better player, but when you get protoss, you start with a lead that the other player will need to play extra hard in order to make up for. Allowing mind control will only perpetuate this advantage.
I'm not sure this is sufficient evidence. For instance, in the old pro scene, terran had a statistical disadvantage such as you pointed out. But Flash and others innovated the various matchups to the point where now it's statistically advantageous to play as terran if you use those strategies. I think it's entirely plausible and likely that such strategies will be found for z and t that give them statistically significant gains in the future. I think our community is small enough that homogenous gameplay from users can contribute to a lot of that. I think this is a vanity metric, in that it lacks substance to really get anything useful out of. It'd be really interesting if we got more granular with our analytics. I bet that is the key to z and t overcoming this deficit. The difference with this strategy is that you only need to succeed once, and this binary outcome is what causes the imbalance. The thing that makes the game great is that every action has a benefit and a cost, and you need to weigh your options accordingly based on quality and quantity. For example, if I attempt 10 templar drops but my opponent puts effort into stopping them such that only 1 or 2 succeed, they paid an investment in drop defense but prevented damage to their economy due to the fact that most of the drops failed. In contrast, in order to get 400 psi, I only need to succeed once. If I really insist on taking an SCV, unless my opponent doesn't build outside of their base at all, as long as the game lasts long enough, and I try enough times, I will get one. Your suggestion of putting defense around the SCVs may appear to work in theory, but the fact is that the logistics of the situation favor the SCV thief, and not you. Its simply not practical. They can fail 99 out of 100 times to take an SCV, succeed once, and reap the same benefits as though you didn't put in any defense at all. And regardless of what it cost, it doesn't matter, they will still get the extra 200 psi. This not only encourages really long games and turtling, but it disrupts the cost/benefit balance of relevant strategies.
I'm pretty sure that terran MC units need terran food, like supply depots. Please correct me if I'm wrong. This alone is a huge obstacle for someone using this MC strategy to overcome, especially when your opponent isn't just sitting around. Not to mention if you create a focused attack on the location where the MC "infestation" has occurred, you can eliminate the threat. It's simply a tactic that manufactures a sense of urgency, just like a doom drop but over a longer scope of time. At that stage in the game, money is generally not an issue, its about the combination of 200 units that you choose to make and how you use them. Having the extra 200 revokes any chance the opponent has of competing. No game has ever lasted longer than 10-15 minutes after the opponent has built the new race
We can't really be making assumptions about which stage of the game it's happening. We see really effective DT rushes before 7 minutes. Money would be an issue here, not to mention you'd need to fill out the tech tree of a non-mirror race to be effective with them. Also this argument is based off the presumption that they automatically get an extra 200 food, and I don't believe that's the case. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they have to build out enough food in a non-mirror matchup to make use of it, and they can't do it with pylons.
23
« on: June 15, 2018, 09:15:38 pm »
I personally am not into having any rules on how players can play. I think all of this effort around 2.0 maps and trying to prove imbalances exist could have been put towards figuring out how to spot these strategies and prevent them ahead of time. It feels to me like players want to be able to play the same set of strategies over and over and never be in a situation where they are forced to react a certain way. It just doesn't seem logical to me.
I've been around for 20 years on here and know every one of the imbalance arguments. I'm not ignorant, I'm just biased towards individual liberty. I've seen players come out and go 70-5 in leagues vs pros playing only terran whenever it was "obvious" that protoss was OP. Think about how often zerg lost before dr.cheese. Think about how disadvantaged terran was until aifam.
Every strategy has a counter somewhere. Especially for how rarely the MC strategy occurs, I think we should incentivize innovating around it rather than regulating it out of existence.
99.999% of the time I would exactly agree with this. But I think this is an exception for several reasons:
1) the disadvantage created by this technique is exclusive to FMP only (to the extent that it is in FMP), so we should not assume it must somehow be balanced or that there must necessary be a strategy against it, especially given that it favors an already overpowered race
2) its a discrete action that you have to deliberately plan to do, and in some cases even build your gameplay around - for example, in contrast, banning lurker swarm wouldn't make sense because in some cases a player might accidentally or habitually burrow a set of units that happens to include a lurker under a swarm, etc..
3) it contradicts the very nature of StarCraft that creates a delicate balance of macro and micro. In general, no unit is so powerful that having 1 of it will change the outcome of a game. In contrast, having ONE extra unit (an SCV or a Drone) will generate 200 extra psi for your army (that does not need to be backed by workers, mind you - so it actually more than doubles your army size)
4) the possibility of mind control disrupts gameplay and strategy even when it is not used. for example, terrans can not build turrets around the map when fighting carriers; zergs cannot position hatches in the middle, due to the possibility of having the worker stolen. More generally, these races have to restrict where they can build in order to avoid having a worker stolen. So rather than promoting innovation and skill, it hampers it
1. I disagree that protoss is overpowered. I believe it to be the weakest of the 3 in late game when such a strategy is viable. The reason some people believe it to be weak and others believe it to be strong, in my humble opinion, is evidence that the power of the race is up to the individual. It definitely has an early game advantage vs a lot of the popular strategies, but there are decent hard and soft counters to these strategies that we have an archive of replays of pros executing at a high level. 2. Not sure what this one has to do with anything. Lurk swarm is more often than not (by far) a deliberate technique and is also a fine one imo, like every technique. 3. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it only doubles your PSI without any extra effort if you're the same race. Otherwise you gotta build t/z production buildings in order to take advantage of the gains. If you're trying to macro 400 psi of units, you'll need more resources, so it's not entirely true you won't have to back it up with extra workers or a base. In the case where it's PvP and it does double your army, killing the probe (correct me if I'm wrong) eliminates this. It makes sense to me that if you know such a play is possible, you shouldn't be lazy with leaving probes around to be picked up. An easy enough solution would be to keep them by cannons always like if they're outside your base so when they get MC they just die quickly. Not to mention in the mirror m/u, the same strategy is viable for both sides and you could stage a double recall to get you an enemy probe as well. 4. Always occupy expos with defensive structures or offensive unites (few rines/dras/lurks/mutas/gols) should do it, especially if you scout the possibility of an MC threat. I respectfully disagree that this constitutes hampering innovation. Massing turrets over the map isn't innovation. It's been around for a minute. Keeping a ghost near your scvs to lockdown a dark archon or one of your SCVs when it gets MCd is, in contrast, innovative in this context. It sounds like a lot of these use cases could be prevented by just keeping track of your army. IMO, the threat of MC only increases the importance that you know what your opponent is doing and that you have control/visibility of the map. These are things that are imperative to compete at a high level anyway.
24
« on: June 15, 2018, 08:14:57 pm »
Might as well just get a better scoring algorithm that puts players like Buu and others who can't beat Brain consistently at the B level they are. If you folks want to then argue about whether or not #1 B Rank gets any money, do it.
What I'm hearing is "I've gotten most of the way there, so subsidize me getting the rest of the way there because I can't earn it on my own."
Not saying I can, I'm just reiterating a logically equivalent sentiment.
25
« on: June 15, 2018, 08:10:39 pm »
I spent about 30 minutes looking for information about hacks last night and found nothing conclusive. Maybe it's on some korean page that doesn't get indexed by Google. Until it's on Team Liquid, you're probably better off spending your time getting better at SC than worrying about if your opponent is hacking.
26
« on: June 15, 2018, 08:04:14 pm »
I'm sure sNipEr.ScopE is a fine person, but there is zero honor or integrity in weeding out superior competition with regulations. If you need $500 so bad, get a job. If you have one, then congrats, SC is a hobby and it won't matter when you don't win.
Sincerely to anyone who fits this condition, if you're playing only because there is a chance to win money, please do literally any other thing with your time. It'll be way more productive for you and your future self won't resent you so much for it.
27
« on: June 15, 2018, 07:57:36 pm »
I personally am not into having any rules on how players can play. I think all of this effort around 2.0 maps and trying to prove imbalances exist could have been put towards figuring out how to spot these strategies and prevent them ahead of time. It feels to me like players want to be able to play the same set of strategies over and over and never be in a situation where they are forced to react a certain way. It just doesn't seem logical to me.
I've been around for 20 years on here and know every one of the imbalance arguments. I'm not ignorant, I'm just biased towards individual liberty. I've seen players come out and go 70-5 in leagues vs pros playing only terran whenever it was "obvious" that protoss was OP. Think about how often zerg lost before dr.cheese. Think about how disadvantaged terran was until aifam.
Every strategy has a counter somewhere. Especially for how rarely the MC strategy occurs, I think we should incentivize innovating around it rather than regulating it out of existence.
28
« on: June 15, 2018, 10:11:00 am »
Why not just no Mind Control on workers?
29
« on: June 13, 2018, 10:02:48 pm »
I don't have any comment as to whether or not prizes are worth giving out to reward activity. I'm not even sure how I feel about any prizes being generated at all, but it's irrelevant.
What I do know is that Chick3n is an old school vet who plays for the love of the game. He didn't play this season for any other reason than because he likes StarCraft. Not sure why you've got to use him as an example to prove your point, which is largely baseless anyway. No disrespect, I know you're a good player, but put some respect on the man's name or just don't type it out to begin with. He's just another person trying to enjoy his free time by playing a childhood pastime.
A lot of you adults use adolescent or even childlike tactics to try to dismantle your opposition's arguments. I agree we need more players playing games and not less players playing more games, but literally none of the rest of your argument was cogent. Like seriously your argument had literally no evidence supporting it, yet you touted it like it was some supreme gospel. If you don't know what you're talking about – which you do not (an objective truth, not an insult) – then at least don't be so confident about it.
30
« on: June 13, 2018, 09:13:34 am »
I'm sure there's a web designer somewhere n the fastest community..
Perhaps it's the guy who just wrote a huge post about design.
|
SCW Season 45
Location: Op UGL@USWEST
Open: May 8 - Jun 22
1v1
2v2
LiveStreams
|
|
Show Posts
