| Welcome to Fusion. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you are registering with a Yahoo e-mail address, or if you are having trouble receiving your validation e-mail, please refer to this topic for assistance. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Super Street Fighter IV; Thus begins the next generation of "rebalances" | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 6 2010, 09:42 PM (2,622 Views) | |
| Inui | Mar 7 2010, 11:14 PM Post #31 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
Sentenal, what you are not understanding is that one game's 60/40 could be another game's 80/20 based on what the games are. In something like Starcraft, a 60/40 advantage is very meaningful. In a fighting game, it's not. There are plenty of ways to work around a disadvantage like that, and tons and tons and tons of tournament instances exist to prove it. 60/40 means if two players of equalish skill level and knowledge fight each other, one wins 60% of the time and the other 40% of the time. How can you say that's horrible? Starcraft is using the wrong numbers then. Edited by Inui, Mar 7 2010, 11:15 PM.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| sephiroth667 | Mar 7 2010, 11:27 PM Post #32 |
![]()
Nostalgia
![]()
|
I must disagree with that Lucas. 6-4 does not imply that a person will win 60% of the time and the other will win 40%. It implies that the person at the disadvantage will have to work about 10% harder to make the match even. Also, Sent how can you even compare statistics in Starcraft to those in fighting games? I have zero clue about what goes on in Starcraft, but the mechanics are obviously so blatantly different you cannot compare it to balance in a fighting game. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Admin | Mar 7 2010, 11:27 PM Post #33 |
|
There is a light that never goes out...
![]()
|
60-40 with a low number of games played doesn't mean much. When you have a large sample area, imbalances will obviously show up in the data. Unfortunately its early this Iccup season, so I can't give you stats of games in the thousands yet, but I can give you stats in the hundreds. Terran vs Protoss on Destination this season is 197 - 274 (42 %) on Iccup. At low numbers, this could be anything as insignficant as Protoss winning 6 games, to Terran winning 4. But with this sample size, that comes to Protoss winning 77 more games is a pretty big number. When Destination gets to be Map of the Week, and people all over Iccup mass-game that map, 60-40 could easily be something like Protoss having hundreds of wins on top of Terran. And you don't think that is significant? @PD: The mechanics of Starcraft being different from fighting games doesn't much, if anything, to do with its balance. Edited by Admin, Mar 7 2010, 11:28 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| sephiroth667 | Mar 7 2010, 11:33 PM Post #34 |
![]()
Nostalgia
![]()
|
It has a difference to do with what balance IS, though. In fighting games, anything can happen. Let's say in Melee a Ganon rapes a Fox. That matchup is in Fox's favor, but what did Ganon do? He got in past the bullshit, techchased and combo'd the Fox, and overall outplayed him. I don't know if that's how it WORKS in Starcraft =/ You know, maybe it would be better if you explained the concept of SC to me cause when I watch it I have NO clue what is going on lol |
| |
![]() |
|
| Admin | Mar 7 2010, 11:47 PM Post #35 |
|
There is a light that never goes out...
![]()
|
Lets take Protoss vs Zerg, traditionally considered in Zerg's favor, even though if there is a favorite, its probably only by like 2% or something. Protoss normally opens with a fast expansion (to get more money fast). Zerg would normally either fast expand themself, but more often than not, they do an Overpool build, and get their combat units (zerglings) out for early map control, and possibly kill the Protoss if they were too greedy. The Protoss needs to scout, and see what the Zerg is doing, so he can respond appropriately. However, the Zerg has zerglings out, which are just as fast as Probes (what the protoss uses to scout), and you have 6 lings out. Normally, the lings will just chase the probe down and kill it, leaving Protoss in the dark. However, with jukes, and overall just micro managing the probe around the lings, you can get that probe into the enemy base, and see what they are doing. Being blind normally results in death, but information can either win or equalize battles. Or lets take another example, this time talking about the map. Lets say we are playing a map that has two entrances to your natural expansion location. This is bad for the Protoss, because it would allow the Zerg to attack from multiple locations, thus forcing the Protoss to have to spend more money on defenses (to guard both entrances), thus putting him 'behind' (money in defense is money that isn't in other stuff). However, there are still things the Protoss can do. One is, the Protoss can simply not fast expand, but rather get their own early attacking unit, the Zealot, which are alot stronger than the zergling, and try and put some early pressure on the Zerg. This may catch them off guard, and if the Protoss can kill a few drones (the Zerg worker unit), it can equalize the matchup. Doing this requires you to more or less induvisually controlling your units in battle, so they aren't getting surrounded/flanked, and at the same time keeping your home base running (requires lots of multitasking). Or, the Protoss might fast expand anyway. In this case, the Protoss player can try and keep an eye on the enemy's Zergling count, and when he moves in for the kill, the Protoss player pulls their mining units off of the mineral line, and blocks the Zerglings from attacking your defenses (doing so requires very fast reaction time, and micro). Those are examples, but does that give you a better idea of how the mechanics aren't that big of a difference, in terms of balance? Both Melee and StarCraft are mechanical games, and I honestly consider Starcraft to require more mechanics than Melee. Top players in Starcraft average at around 300 APM (actions per minute), which is insane if you watch any of them play. Edited by Admin, Mar 7 2010, 11:51 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Inui | Mar 7 2010, 11:49 PM Post #36 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
PD, both of us are right. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Kalamadorel | Mar 7 2010, 11:54 PM Post #37 |
![]()
Your friendly neighbourhood spiderman.
![]()
|
That's fucking crazy, I get like 200 as an absolute max when playing HoN or LoL. |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| sephiroth667 | Mar 8 2010, 01:50 AM Post #38 |
![]()
Nostalgia
![]()
|
I still don't see where you're going by comparing the two genres. The strategies are totally different to win in both games, as well as what you can do. The options are just so totally different, and in a game as complex as Starcraft I can see why minor advantages are more major. However, in a game with much fewer mechanics it doesn't pose as much of an advantage |
| |
![]() |
|
| Spartan-099 | Mar 8 2010, 06:25 PM Post #39 |
|
This Space intentionally left blank
![]()
|
Heh, buying said game, don't really care about the other stuff since I don't really do the tourney scene and most online Kens are n00bs |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| AdamNW | Mar 8 2010, 10:07 PM Post #40 |
|
Needs moar Sety
![]()
|
SF4 Matchups as of Feb 2010 BBCT Matchups as of Oct 2009 Total matchups for SF4: 240 Total matchups for BBCT: 110 (excluding mirrors, which are counted on the chart for no good reason) SF4 Top Character (Sagat) win/total: 148/240 = 56.45% BBCT Top character (Rachel): 64/110 = 58.18% SF4 Bottom Character (Dan): 93/240 = 38.75% BBCT Bottom Character (Tager): 40/110 = 36.36% Dan wins 42.5 less matches (~17%) than Sagat. Tager wins 24 less matches (~22%) than Rachel. The range between the top and bottom characters are actually worse in BBCT. So, how exactly is SF4 way more imbalanced than BBCT? |
![]() Formerly: Sety | |
![]() |
|
| Inui | Mar 8 2010, 11:07 PM Post #41 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
You can't only count the top and bottom. |
| |
![]() |
|
| AdamNW | Mar 8 2010, 11:10 PM Post #42 |
|
Needs moar Sety
![]()
|
Everything else is equal, it's just the higher and lower ends of the tiers. But considering SF4 has twice the characters, I consider that to be more balanced.
Edited by AdamNW, Mar 8 2010, 11:23 PM.
|
![]() Formerly: Sety | |
![]() |
|
| Inui | Mar 8 2010, 11:10 PM Post #43 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
If that's the first version of it, lol @ it. |
| |
![]() |
|
| AdamNW | Mar 8 2010, 11:15 PM Post #44 |
|
Needs moar Sety
![]()
|
Read edit. It's not the first version of either tier list. It's the most recent. Edited by AdamNW, Mar 8 2010, 11:16 PM.
|
![]() Formerly: Sety | |
![]() |
|
| Inui | Mar 8 2010, 11:35 PM Post #45 |
|
Power of Flower
![]()
|
First version of BB with the horribly overpowered top three and massively fucked Tager, I mean. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Console Gaming · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
9:09 AM Jul 11
|















9:09 AM Jul 11