|
NO-One is obliged to do this its just a request but i'd really like to see the numbers
Ok i'm going to keep this Blog short but i wanted to know if anyone has time to make a compilation of how many times and how often Foreigner Pros who play Protoss (Naniwa,Huk,Grubby,Sase) Etc. How many times do these guys beat High-Level Korean Pros compared to the best Foreigner Zergs and Terrans and no i don't mean Stephano because he is kind-of an Outliar (since he is so strong and uncontested best Foreign Zerg)
Anyways to keep it short i'm not sure if this permitted even if its a blog. But i've had this suspicion for a long time that the Protoss race is easier to take games off Koreans if a Mediocre Foreigner player is playing compared to A Foreigner playing Zerg,Terran. I first started to notice this trend at IEM Newyork when TT1, and Gatored took a bunch of games off High level Code S Code A or just really good Koreans.
In no way am i trying to take away from their wins; but its been happening quite alot in foreign tournaments and seems to be more prevalent with Mediocre/semi-pro Protoss's are taking Bo3's of High Level Koreans. I've noticed the trend and it seems to be alot more common that Mediocre Terran and Zergs taking BO3's off of High Level Koreans. These are just my suspicions because i have been examining many tournament results and have come to these suspicions.
If anyone could compile some kind of list for me it would help a ton for basically all or alot of the foreign tourneys that happened in the past 6-8 months.
NO-One is obliged to do this its just a request but i'd really like to see the numbers. You can call me crazy but something tells me its easier for Protoss race at that level to take games off Koreans who are way better than them. I finally came to my conclusions after this last MLG with Grubbys performance. (Not to take away from his achievement) But this has been happening way too much for me to dismiss it.
Sorry if i've upset anyone but i really have an inkling something is wrong because Protoss seemed so weak way back then and then all of a sudden it seems like Mediocre Foreign Protoss have the best chance at taking games/bo3's off of Korean Pros.
I might end up doing the research myself in the end but i don't have the time ATM
Finit
Sorry if this blog upsets anyone
Also not just Naniwa,Huk,Sase,Grubby I also mean like any other Mediocre or not so high level Foreigner Protoss who has taken Bo3's off of Koreans or what not.
Also i realise that Naniwa ,Huk are kind-of Outliars since they have been training/owning it up in Korean. But there seems to be a bunch of Foreign Protoss who never trained in Korean who have been raising my suspicions when they take Bo3's off the High Level Koreans and what not.
I don't care if replies to the blog are intended on helping or not with the compilation; any points we can argue about would be great.
 
|
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
|
On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
I didn't say it was so easy i said it happens more often that Foreigner Zergs or Terrans beating Pro Koreans from what i've seen. Stephano an Outliar though so don't count him.
I need to first have a compilation of numbers and how many times the Mediocre Protoss Foreigners take games/Bo3's of Koreans i haven't finished research yet so i just started this blog to get peoples ideas/arguments.
Its not fault logic considering i haven't compiled the statistics yet.
BUT i've noticed a pattern and this pattern cannot be denied.
|
How are you going to rate mediocre/a class foreigners? <--- Thats totaly subjective and probably why you have come to this retarded conclusion
|
On March 01 2012 15:01 XRaDiiX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
I didn't say it was so easy i said it happens more often that Foreigner Zergs or Terrans beating Pro Koreans from what i've seen. Stephano an Outliar though so don't count him. I need to first have a compilation of numbers and how many times the Mediocre Protoss Foreigners take games/Bo3's of Koreans i haven't finished research yet so i just started this blog to get peoples ideas/arguments. Its not fault logic considering i haven't compiled the statistics yet. BUT i've noticed a pattern and this pattern cannot be denied.
It can be denied, because you don't actually have any evidence of a pattern. All you have is a "feeling" likely founded entirely on your own biases.
|
Why would bad foreigner protosses outperform the apparently superior korean protosses?
|
On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
|
On March 01 2012 15:15 Rotcod wrote:
How are you going to rate mediocre/a class foreigners? <--- Thats totaly subjective and probably why you have come to this retarded conclusion
Its still an idea and i have noticed the trend if i'm able to compile the information it will be much clearer.
|
On March 01 2012 15:30 TylerThaCreator wrote:
Why would bad foreigner protosses outperform the apparently superior korean protosses?
They wouldn't if you read what i said i said they take games off them more often than Zerg/Terran mediocre foreigners not that they are doing better than Korean Protosses.
|
On March 01 2012 15:16 Jumbled wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 15:01 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
I didn't say it was so easy i said it happens more often that Foreigner Zergs or Terrans beating Pro Koreans from what i've seen. Stephano an Outliar though so don't count him. I need to first have a compilation of numbers and how many times the Mediocre Protoss Foreigners take games/Bo3's of Koreans i haven't finished research yet so i just started this blog to get peoples ideas/arguments. Its not fault logic considering i haven't compiled the statistics yet. BUT i've noticed a pattern and this pattern cannot be denied. It can be denied, because you don't actually have any evidence of a pattern. All you have is a "feeling" likely founded entirely on your own biases.
No not on biases but what i have noticed when watching several tournaments in the past 6-8 months. I told you i do not have the information and statistics compiled yet. Until then you can say its not true but i need to gather the appropriate data.
|
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there
|
I don't know if this is relevant, but I always feel protoss tends to loose and win on really small margins early to mid game. In that sense, they get behind or get out of control a lot faster than the other races.
Also, I tend to feel that protoss focuses a lot on somewhat different skill sets, since the above feels true for me. Winning the small battles matters sooo much and as a result, a lot of players who are good at this seem to do well (probably why all of our best foreign protoss are wc3 vets and not ex bw stars)
But, this is just my non-factual based gut feeling or opinion, so take it as such,
|
Just throwing it out there, Gatored has sick PvT, Mana has probably the best and most consistent PvT in the whole non-Korea especially in tournaments, and the Korean toss have only recently developed PvT that was not "oh... you did a stim timing, guess i die now before i get that deathball up..." MC was the exception in that he went 2 base timings a lot, and Inca as well, coz he made DT's work.
|
On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there
No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this.
|
On March 01 2012 16:43 Vansetsu wrote:
I don't know if this is relevant, but I always feel protoss tends to loose and win on really small margins early to mid game. In that sense, they get behind or get out of control a lot faster than the other races.
Also, I tend to feel that protoss focuses a lot on somewhat different skill sets, since the above feels true for me. Winning the small battles matters sooo much and as a result, a lot of players who are good at this seem to do well (probably why all of our best foreign protoss are wc3 vets and not ex bw stars)
But, this is just my non-factual based gut feeling or opinion, so take it as such,
This is true most matches that Protoss is involved in is always a significant moment where you get ahead in army size or some battle and it becomes a snowball effect usually.
|
On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
in the same way that zerg never used infestors, cried about protoss deathball, then found infestors and got infestors nerfed, was back to being the underdog, then found mass muta and phoenix got buffed.
meanwhile, protoss always went 1 base. protoss has recently figured out they can macro just as well as zerg and terran. Remember that zerg was "the macro race" because it naturally progressed to that stage. Season 1 and 2 games from PROS tended to be 2 base 30 minute affairs. Now its 5 or 6 base 20 minute affairs. terran and protoss whined about zerg being able to be ahead on economy (which they HAVE TO BE BY GAME DESIGN), until T and P started actually macroing on their own and learning how to maximize their macro abiltiies. mass FFE games later, P is back on par with zerg and rolling with the deathballs again.
Protoss has been stated as "the underdog" all this time.
protoss has always had the highest representation in GM.
protoss was always getting torn up in tournmanets.
protoss is now smashing everyone, even the terrans are crying protoss op, wehre before it was zerg saying it and noone listened because it was zerg being bad and biased.
how do you explain this inconsistency?
Protoss -> most GMs -> zerg cries op and noone cares -> always beaten in tournaments -> learn how to macro -> beating everyone in tournaments and now terran cries op and noone cares (issue is the same for T as for Z, the colossus, HERP!) -> protoss on top now that they learned to macro.
how is it that protoss is so good its owning Terrans at Terrancraft, when protoss is UP by so many years of tournament data, while being most represented in GM by sc2ranks data?
So many inconsistencies!
And here is my explanation of what we're seeing. There's a thing called a skill ceiling. You never go above the skill ceiling, because if you need X skill and Y skill, Z skill to have is useless until your opponent gets X skill and Y skill too. protoss wasn't macroing like they are now because it wasn't necessary to beat Z or T reliably. they stuck with the whole 14 mineral probes 2 base deathball because it worked vs Z mostly, and since Z represents a majority of players, they just accepted the T losses. when Z started cranking up their macro (raising the skill ceiling), protoss had to reach up again for more skills (getting their own macro), and then it settle again with P being favored early, mid, and early-late game while Z has its T3 deathball eventually.
an analogy could simplifiy the idea behind skill ceiling progression.
Take the burrow banes. burrow banes would never exist if terran didn't spam marines. It wouldnt even have been created because there's no need for it, and because of no need, noone uses it. someone might think of it, but it proves impractical and useless as long as terran isnt using marines. so its a skill that noone will reach for because it doesn't take this to beat terran, it takes X. tio get to the skill level of X+BB, means that terran ups their own skill.
So in a way a lot of people saying "let the game settle before balance changes" were right to a degree. However we can still see that roach was overpwoered as 1 supply 2 armor, but now zerg is underpowered on ground vs coloss, and that's just as evident, and I think people have chosen to ignore that. seems like zerg gets a nerf when a unit appears overpowered, while colossus has never been touched.
maybe now that protoss are getting into the high end macro skill ceiling vs T and Z, and showing how much coloss really is bad, it'll get the nerf it's needed.
User was warned for this post
|
On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this.
that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist
|
On March 01 2012 17:06 Spieltor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
in the same way that zerg never used infestors, cried about protoss deathball, then found infestors and got infestors nerfed, was back to being the underdog, then found mass muta and phoenix got buffed. meanwhile, protoss always went 1 base. protoss has recently figured out they can macro just as well as zerg and terran. Remember that zerg was "the macro race" because it naturally progressed to that stage. Season 1 and 2 games from PROS tended to be 2 base 30 minute affairs. Now its 5 or 6 base 20 minute affairs. terran and protoss whined about zerg being able to be ahead on economy (which they HAVE TO BE BY GAME DESIGN), until T and P started actually macroing on their own and learning how to maximize their macro abiltiies. mass FFE games later, P is back on par with zerg and rolling with the deathballs again. Protoss has been stated as "the underdog" all this time. protoss has always had the highest representation in GM. protoss was always getting torn up in tournmanets. protoss is now smashing everyone, even the terrans are crying protoss op, wehre before it was zerg saying it and noone listened because it was zerg being bad and biased. how do you explain this inconsistency? Protoss -> most GMs -> zerg cries op and noone cares -> always beaten in tournaments -> learn how to macro -> beating everyone in tournaments and now terran cries op and noone cares (issue is the same for T as for Z, the colossus, HERP!) -> protoss on top now that they learned to macro. how is it that protoss is so good its owning Terrans at Terrancraft, when protoss is UP by so many years of tournament data, while being most represented in GM by sc2ranks data? So many inconsistencies!
out of idle curiosity, what exactly was the last high level tournament that a protoss won?
|
On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist
read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro.
given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss.
no race in brood war had T3 splash.
T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason.
|
On March 01 2012 17:15 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:06 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
in the same way that zerg never used infestors, cried about protoss deathball, then found infestors and got infestors nerfed, was back to being the underdog, then found mass muta and phoenix got buffed. meanwhile, protoss always went 1 base. protoss has recently figured out they can macro just as well as zerg and terran. Remember that zerg was "the macro race" because it naturally progressed to that stage. Season 1 and 2 games from PROS tended to be 2 base 30 minute affairs. Now its 5 or 6 base 20 minute affairs. terran and protoss whined about zerg being able to be ahead on economy (which they HAVE TO BE BY GAME DESIGN), until T and P started actually macroing on their own and learning how to maximize their macro abiltiies. mass FFE games later, P is back on par with zerg and rolling with the deathballs again. Protoss has been stated as "the underdog" all this time. protoss has always had the highest representation in GM. protoss was always getting torn up in tournmanets. protoss is now smashing everyone, even the terrans are crying protoss op, wehre before it was zerg saying it and noone listened because it was zerg being bad and biased. how do you explain this inconsistency? Protoss -> most GMs -> zerg cries op and noone cares -> always beaten in tournaments -> learn how to macro -> beating everyone in tournaments and now terran cries op and noone cares (issue is the same for T as for Z, the colossus, HERP!) -> protoss on top now that they learned to macro. how is it that protoss is so good its owning Terrans at Terrancraft, when protoss is UP by so many years of tournament data, while being most represented in GM by sc2ranks data? So many inconsistencies! out of idle curiosity, what exactly was the last high level tournament that a protoss won?
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
User was warned for this post
|
On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro. given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss. no race in brood war had T3 splash. T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason.
high templar was t3 in broodwar, so that doesn't make sense(science vessel could also count technically), and unless you're trying to claim that every single protoss player has hit their respective cap but the zerg and terran players haven't that makes absolutely no sense. Also the colossus isn't the "problem" in tvp
On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:
Show nested quote +
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
As to you quoting this, 4 protoss in the top 8 is suddenly super op? what...
|
On March 01 2012 17:38 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro. given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss. no race in brood war had T3 splash. T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason. high templar was t3 in broodwar, so that doesn't make sense(science vessel could also count technically), and unless you're trying to claim that every single protoss player has hit their respective cap but the zerg and terran players haven't that makes absolutely no sense. Also the colossus isn't the "problem" in tvp Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:
Show nested quote +
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
As to you quoting this, 4 protoss in the top 8 is suddenly super op? what...
you're looking at stats instead of how it happens. typical.
|
On March 01 2012 17:41 Spieltor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:38 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro. given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss. no race in brood war had T3 splash. T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason. high templar was t3 in broodwar, so that doesn't make sense(science vessel could also count technically), and unless you're trying to claim that every single protoss player has hit their respective cap but the zerg and terran players haven't that makes absolutely no sense. Also the colossus isn't the "problem" in tvp On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:
Show nested quote +
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
As to you quoting this, 4 protoss in the top 8 is suddenly super op? what... you're looking at stats instead of how it happens. typical.
that's completely nonsensical, you make an incorrect argument about the problem in tvp, talk about how pvz has always been imba and every time it's not, it gets nerfed, and then tell me, well the stats aren't the problem, it's that all protoss players suck and if i watched every game i'd know that, so what has so magically been demonstrated in these games that shows how incredibly overpowered protoss is
|
On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist
Your completely missing the point i'm talking about the skill level of Protoss at the Foreigner level per se from Gatored to Sase TT1 Grubby Level being able to smash Koreans in BO3's.
I'm not speaking about the Likes of MC or the strongest Protosses im talking about at that lower skill level the Protoss race has an edge compared to Terran and Zergs at that same level in the foreign SCENE.
The Naniwa,Huk They are Outliars so we can keep them out of the discussion because i pointed out they were training in Korea for a long time so now we can consider them Korean Level because they have proven they can compete with them consistently and get GM in Korea etc...
Example we rarely EVER see Terrans or Zergs Foreigners that are Mediocre take games off Koreans in International Tournaments. (except a la Stephano he is an outliar).
But we SEE tons of Protoss at this level taking out Koreans. I can name a few off the top of my head for now i will corroborate with further data and compiled lists and evidence later.
Grubby 2-0 Losira
Gatored 2-0'd some Korean Terran
Gatored almost beat DRG as well at IEM NY i think.
Feast taking games of MMA almost beating him at IEM Sao Paulo.
And a bunch more times this has happened with Mid-tier Protoss beating or almost beating the best Koreans in the world.
I will make a list later.. when i can find help and time.
|
On March 01 2012 17:06 Spieltor wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
On March 01 2012 17:06 Spieltor wrote:in the same way that zerg never used infestors, cried about protoss deathball, then found infestors and got infestors nerfed, was back to being the underdog, then found mass muta and phoenix got buffed. meanwhile, protoss always went 1 base. protoss has recently figured out they can macro just as well as zerg and terran. Remember that zerg was "the macro race" because it naturally progressed to that stage. Season 1 and 2 games from PROS tended to be 2 base 30 minute affairs. Now its 5 or 6 base 20 minute affairs. terran and protoss whined about zerg being able to be ahead on economy (which they HAVE TO BE BY GAME DESIGN), until T and P started actually macroing on their own and learning how to maximize their macro abiltiies. mass FFE games later, P is back on par with zerg and rolling with the deathballs again. Protoss has been stated as "the underdog" all this time. protoss has always had the highest representation in GM. protoss was always getting torn up in tournmanets. protoss is now smashing everyone, even the terrans are crying protoss op, wehre before it was zerg saying it and noone listened because it was zerg being bad and biased. how do you explain this inconsistency? Protoss -> most GMs -> zerg cries op and noone cares -> always beaten in tournaments -> learn how to macro -> beating everyone in tournaments and now terran cries op and noone cares (issue is the same for T as for Z, the colossus, HERP!) -> protoss on top now that they learned to macro. how is it that protoss is so good its owning Terrans at Terrancraft, when protoss is UP by so many years of tournament data, while being most represented in GM by sc2ranks data? So many inconsistencies! And here is my explanation of what we're seeing. There's a thing called a skill ceiling. You never go above the skill ceiling, because if you need X skill and Y skill, Z skill to have is useless until your opponent gets X skill and Y skill too. protoss wasn't macroing like they are now because it wasn't necessary to beat Z or T reliably. they stuck with the whole 14 mineral probes 2 base deathball because it worked vs Z mostly, and since Z represents a majority of players, they just accepted the T losses. when Z started cranking up their macro (raising the skill ceiling), protoss had to reach up again for more skills (getting their own macro), and then it settle again with P being favored early, mid, and early-late game while Z has its T3 deathball eventually. an analogy could simplifiy the idea behind skill ceiling progression. Take the burrow banes. burrow banes would never exist if terran didn't spam marines. It wouldnt even have been created because there's no need for it, and because of no need, noone uses it. someone might think of it, but it proves impractical and useless as long as terran isnt using marines. so its a skill that noone will reach for because it doesn't take this to beat terran, it takes X. tio get to the skill level of X+BB, means that terran ups their own skill. So in a way a lot of people saying "let the game settle before balance changes" were right to a degree. However we can still see that roach was overpwoered as 1 supply 2 armor, but now zerg is underpowered on ground vs coloss, and that's just as evident, and I think people have chosen to ignore that. seems like zerg gets a nerf when a unit appears overpowered, while colossus has never been touched. maybe now that protoss are getting into the high end macro skill ceiling vs T and Z, and showing how much coloss really is bad, it'll get the nerf it's needed.
Thank you i will touch up on your points after the Code A GSL matches.
|
Just did the data for this year's big competitions (IEM Kiev, IEM San Paulo, Homestory IV, MLG Arena) and it's actually reasonably close:
26 wins for Terrans against Koreans
30 wins for Protoss against Koreans
29 wins for Zergs agasint Koreans
If we discard Stephano, Huk and Naniwa.... (which seems completely arbitrary but that's apparently what you want) it is:
26 wins for Terrans against Koreans
24 wins for Protoss against Koreans
25 wins for Zergs against Koreans
That's in terms of games not best of 3's, you can check the data over here:
Google Docs Spreadsheet
For the sake of this seleCt is considered a foreigner, but didn't win against any koreans. ReaL, Pheonix and viOLet on the other hand were considered koreans despite living outside of korea. What a crazy life we lead...
If we remove the ambiguous koreans though (violet, Real and Pheonix) but also don't conisder them foreigners for some reason... then it changes to
22 wins for Terrans
26 for Protoss
22 for Zergs
Then removing the "outliers" (Huk, Stephano, Naniwa)
You're left with
22 for Terrans
19 for Protoss
18 for Zergs
Basically what I'm saying is you can stretch this data, all kinds of ways, ultimately it's actually pretty close, doubly so when you consider how many of the protosses are players who train 100% of their time in korea. I didn't remove Sase, but he only adds 2 points for protoss.
|
"mediocre"
Who is a non-Korean mediocre P, Z, T?
You name Grubby as a mediocre Protoss.
Z - Ret? Sheth? Darkforce?
T - Demuslim? dde? illusion?
P - Elfi? White Ra?
|
On March 01 2012 18:31 Dingobloo wrote:Just did the data for this year's big competitions (IEM Kiev, IEM San Paulo, Homestory IV, MLG Arena) and it's actually reasonably close: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 30 wins for Protoss against Koreans 29 wins for Zergs agasint Koreans If we discard Stephano, Huk and Naniwa.... (which seems completely arbitrary but that's apparently what you want) it is: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 24 wins for Protoss against Koreans 25 wins for Zergs against Koreans That's in terms of games not best of 3's, you can check the data over here: Google Docs SpreadsheetFor the sake of this seleCt is considered a foreigner, but didn't win against any koreans. ReaL, Pheonix and viOLet on the other hand were considered koreans despite living outside of korea. What a crazy life we lead... If we remove the ambiguous koreans though (violet, Real and Pheonix) but also don't conisder them foreigners for some reason... then it changes to 22 wins for Terrans 26 for Protoss 22 for Zergs Then removing the "outliers" (Huk, Stephano, Naniwa) You're left with 22 for Terrans 19 for Protoss 18 for Zergs Basically what I'm saying is you can stretch this data, all kinds of ways, ultimately it's actually pretty close, doubly so when you consider how many of the protosses are players who train 100% of their time in korea. I didn't remove Sase, but he only adds 2 points for protoss.
Thank you  Imagine that... it isn't actually completely favoring any one race.
|
On March 01 2012 17:38 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro. given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss. no race in brood war had T3 splash. T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason. high templar was t3 in broodwar, so that doesn't make sense(science vessel could also count technically), and unless you're trying to claim that every single protoss player has hit their respective cap but the zerg and terran players haven't that makes absolutely no sense. Also the colossus isn't the "problem" in tvp Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:
Show nested quote +
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
As to you quoting this, 4 protoss in the top 8 is suddenly super op? what...
you're really comparing an energy dependent, low hp, slow unit that requires positioning to a fast unit that ignores positioning requirements by walking over any units? Lurker, tank, reaver. T2. templar, defiler, science vessel. T3.
sc2. Tank, infestor, T2. colossus, HT T3.
not rocket science.
|
On March 02 2012 04:24 Spieltor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:38 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro. given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss. no race in brood war had T3 splash. T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason. high templar was t3 in broodwar, so that doesn't make sense(science vessel could also count technically), and unless you're trying to claim that every single protoss player has hit their respective cap but the zerg and terran players haven't that makes absolutely no sense. Also the colossus isn't the "problem" in tvp On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:
Show nested quote +
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
As to you quoting this, 4 protoss in the top 8 is suddenly super op? what... you're really comparing an energy dependent, low hp, slow unit that requires positioning to a fast unit that ignores positioning requirements by walking over any units? Lurker, tank, reaver. T2. templar, defiler, science vessel. T3. sc2. Tank, infestor, T2. colossus, HT T3. not rocket science.
ghost is also a splash damage unit against protoss and the colossus really isn't that fast, it can't run away from any unit in the game successfully except thors and hydras. also banelings are 1.5 tier splash damage, I'm sorry but your claims are rather baseless
so
T1.5 baneling T2 infestor ghost tank T3 Colossus HT
So yea if you let protoss get up a deathball you're going to lose, This has been long established, although broodlord infestor is pretty good at shattering a deathball
|
On March 02 2012 06:20 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 04:24 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:38 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:08 Coramoor wrote:On March 01 2012 17:05 XRaDiiX wrote:On March 01 2012 16:41 Coramoor wrote:
so Gatored, who's strongest matchup was pvz was destroying the likes of DRG and now you think protoss is the op race, wonderful theory you have there No what i mean is at that level of play Protoss is a strong race considering how many players of this calibre have taken out Korean pros on several occasions and this is extremely rare for Zerg/Terrans of that Calibre to do this. that doesn't make any sense, your argument is that protoss is a strong race because underrated, imo, foreign pros beat Korean pros in tournament while very few zerg and terran mediocre pros do so. If your logic held, then MC, Inca, Genius, Huk, et al would be demolishing the competition non stop, you're trying to find basis for opness in a place where it logically can't exist read above. a race could be overpowered, but its OPness can be hidden by the fact that the players have hit their personal skill ceilings with the race because they are achieving results they think are good enough. when Z or T finds some other little advantage, it'll force P to grow some more. We're finally getting to a stage where macro is completely maxed out in skill terms, so now we get to see what people do with that macro. given the huge ass raping terrans getting from coloss, I think we're seeing a future where protoss proves once and for all they have too good of a unit in the T3 coloss. no race in brood war had T3 splash. T and Z dont have T3 splash, unless you count HSM which is like spammable nukes for some reason. high templar was t3 in broodwar, so that doesn't make sense(science vessel could also count technically), and unless you're trying to claim that every single protoss player has hit their respective cap but the zerg and terran players haven't that makes absolutely no sense. Also the colossus isn't the "problem" in tvp On March 01 2012 17:19 Spieltor wrote:
On March 01 2012 15:42 red4ce wrote:
Show nested quote +
Have you, per chance, watched any GSL this season at all?
As to you quoting this, 4 protoss in the top 8 is suddenly super op? what... you're really comparing an energy dependent, low hp, slow unit that requires positioning to a fast unit that ignores positioning requirements by walking over any units? Lurker, tank, reaver. T2. templar, defiler, science vessel. T3. sc2. Tank, infestor, T2. colossus, HT T3. not rocket science. ghost is also a splash damage unit against protoss and the colossus really isn't that fast, it can't run away from any unit in the game successfully except thors and hydras. also banelings are 1.5 tier splash damage, I'm sorry but your claims are rather baseless so T1.5 baneling T2 infestor ghost tank T3 Colossus HT So yea if you let protoss get up a deathball you're going to lose, This has been long established, although broodlord infestor is pretty good at shattering a deathball
we could see this argum,ent in chess. if one side moves 4 pawns and gets 4 queens on the board, uits auto win.
However to do that, they must move past the other player, meaning a good player can stop it. Or both players can turtle.
in sc2, if zerg and protoss turtle, zerg cant harass protoss really well except for muta, and even thats going out of style quick as protoss learn to deal with it. If protoss and zerg successfully turtle, protoss has its deathball. zerg does not because protoss can get its deathball 5-10 minutes sooner and then break a zerg turtle.
THat means that to beat the clock, zerg has to be aggressive and deny that third base, or auto lose to a passive expanding deathball toss. in true competitive games, this does not happen. thats why I cited the chess analogy.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
If you want you can turn protoss into a pretty hilariously luckbased race, yes (especially if your opponent doesnt know thats what you want to do).
But it is also not like that is a great way to ensure consistency vs someone you think you are better than.
Probably easiest for Protoss to take a game vs better players vs Terran, easiest for Terran to take games vs better players off Zerg, and for zerg Im not sure which is easier.
EDIT: Actually you know what, you can turn everything pretty luckbased -.just depends on whether your opponent knows you are going to try to do that or not, and in which direction you are gambling.
|
|
|
It seems to me protoss just has the most viable and strongest all ins so it's easier for them to take games off of stronger opponents.
|
You are confusing correlation and causation. There may in fact be a correlation between foreigner protoss beating Koreans that is higher then the other races, however that is not the causation that you can logically prove.
|
On March 01 2012 18:31 Dingobloo wrote:Just did the data for this year's big competitions (IEM Kiev, IEM San Paulo, Homestory IV, MLG Arena) and it's actually reasonably close: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 30 wins for Protoss against Koreans 29 wins for Zergs agasint Koreans If we discard Stephano, Huk and Naniwa.... (which seems completely arbitrary but that's apparently what you want) it is: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 24 wins for Protoss against Koreans 25 wins for Zergs against Koreans That's in terms of games not best of 3's, you can check the data over here: Google Docs SpreadsheetFor the sake of this seleCt is considered a foreigner, but didn't win against any koreans. ReaL, Pheonix and viOLet on the other hand were considered koreans despite living outside of korea. What a crazy life we lead... If we remove the ambiguous koreans though (violet, Real and Pheonix) but also don't conisder them foreigners for some reason... then it changes to 22 wins for Terrans 26 for Protoss 22 for Zergs Then removing the "outliers" (Huk, Stephano, Naniwa) You're left with 22 for Terrans 19 for Protoss 18 for Zergs Basically what I'm saying is you can stretch this data, all kinds of ways, ultimately it's actually pretty close, doubly so when you consider how many of the protosses are players who train 100% of their time in korea. I didn't remove Sase, but he only adds 2 points for protoss.
This guy did the work that the op should have done. Very well done and I think that it speaks for itself when saying that its very balanced even with the "outliers". I don't see the justification for the thread past some werid anti protoss bias.
|
OP is gonna hate it when he has to do his own data collection. My biggest problem with this thread is that everyone is run ing around stating their anecdotal opinions as fact without any kind of data. Go get the data, come back, and make the thread worth everyone's time, not a debate that does nothing to help us understand your question any better.
|
lol protoss op i bet the bad protoss statistically win more against koreans
*looks at stats*
oh lol the stats are misleading protoss is still easy and whichever race i play is so much harder
|
On March 01 2012 17:15 Coramoor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 17:06 Spieltor wrote:On March 01 2012 14:56 HardlyNever wrote:
So you have an idea.. based on no numbers and faulty logic.
If it were so "easy" for "mediocre" protoss foreigners to take games off of high level koreans, why wouldn't high level korean protoss players be doing it more often? How would you explain that inconsistency?
Your entire "theory" doesn't even make logic sense, much less have any grounding in results (that apparently you want other people to find?)
in the same way that zerg never used infestors, cried about protoss deathball, then found infestors and got infestors nerfed, was back to being the underdog, then found mass muta and phoenix got buffed. meanwhile, protoss always went 1 base. protoss has recently figured out they can macro just as well as zerg and terran. Remember that zerg was "the macro race" because it naturally progressed to that stage. Season 1 and 2 games from PROS tended to be 2 base 30 minute affairs. Now its 5 or 6 base 20 minute affairs. terran and protoss whined about zerg being able to be ahead on economy (which they HAVE TO BE BY GAME DESIGN), until T and P started actually macroing on their own and learning how to maximize their macro abiltiies. mass FFE games later, P is back on par with zerg and rolling with the deathballs again. Protoss has been stated as "the underdog" all this time. protoss has always had the highest representation in GM. protoss was always getting torn up in tournmanets. protoss is now smashing everyone, even the terrans are crying protoss op, wehre before it was zerg saying it and noone listened because it was zerg being bad and biased. how do you explain this inconsistency? Protoss -> most GMs -> zerg cries op and noone cares -> always beaten in tournaments -> learn how to macro -> beating everyone in tournaments and now terran cries op and noone cares (issue is the same for T as for Z, the colossus, HERP!) -> protoss on top now that they learned to macro. how is it that protoss is so good its owning Terrans at Terrancraft, when protoss is UP by so many years of tournament data, while being most represented in GM by sc2ranks data? So many inconsistencies! out of idle curiosity, what exactly was the last high level tournament that a protoss won?
HerO won dreamhack
|
On March 01 2012 18:31 Dingobloo wrote:Just did the data for this year's big competitions (IEM Kiev, IEM San Paulo, Homestory IV, MLG Arena) and it's actually reasonably close: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 30 wins for Protoss against Koreans 29 wins for Zergs agasint Koreans If we discard Stephano, Huk and Naniwa.... (which seems completely arbitrary but that's apparently what you want) it is: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 24 wins for Protoss against Koreans 25 wins for Zergs against Koreans That's in terms of games not best of 3's, you can check the data over here: Google Docs SpreadsheetFor the sake of this seleCt is considered a foreigner, but didn't win against any koreans. ReaL, Pheonix and viOLet on the other hand were considered koreans despite living outside of korea. What a crazy life we lead... If we remove the ambiguous koreans though (violet, Real and Pheonix) but also don't conisder them foreigners for some reason... then it changes to 22 wins for Terrans 26 for Protoss 22 for Zergs Then removing the "outliers" (Huk, Stephano, Naniwa) You're left with 22 for Terrans 19 for Protoss 18 for Zergs Basically what I'm saying is you can stretch this data, all kinds of ways, ultimately it's actually pretty close, doubly so when you consider how many of the protosses are players who train 100% of their time in korea. I didn't remove Sase, but he only adds 2 points for protoss.
Thank you good sir, this should be added in the OP with this man's name.
Also it's incredible how close it is, i would have expected foreign terrans to be a bit lower, but it looks well balanced no matter how you stretch it, i'd go with the first one though.
|
As a note of reference, could it be that the Protoss players in EU could be used to more Korean style aggressive play because of their ladder and local tournament environments? Obviously Terrans and Zergs would also benefit, but both Z and T see the matchup akin to a ticking timebomb. Z can't let a protoss get to 3 base of gas or he gets too much gas, T can't let toss successfully fund both AoE tech paths. (bases be damned, no collo den and no templar archive? That's a dead toss @ 12 minutes). Therefore, Z and T work at forcing a Protoss to stall in economy via timings, harassment, and allin play.
In reverse, T and Z players in the EU servers are less aggressive on the average compared to Koreans who specifically add in harassment whenever they possibly can (trading as effectively as possible at different points in the game). Both T and Z simply want 3 bases and reach toward max with upgrades rolling fast. Obviously players want to deny their opponent's 3rd, but they'll put much less strain and effort on their opponent on average.
Thus when transitioning to Korea and korean opponents in international tournaments, Protoss is already fighting the "metagame" style of the other races that force a protoss to slow down. In comparison, a TvT MU between a korean and foreigner could be a strange reaper into mech opening for the korean with a hellion drop/runby behind reapers and the foreigner might just forgo extra defense and counter aggrssion to grab a greedier 3rd or tech up/upgrade faster. One mis-step by foreigner and he loses the game in some cases, other times one bad decision and his macro advantage is gone, etc...
|
On March 01 2012 18:31 Dingobloo wrote:Just did the data for this year's big competitions (IEM Kiev, IEM San Paulo, Homestory IV, MLG Arena) and it's actually reasonably close: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 30 wins for Protoss against Koreans 29 wins for Zergs agasint Koreans If we discard Stephano, Huk and Naniwa.... (which seems completely arbitrary but that's apparently what you want) it is: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 24 wins for Protoss against Koreans 25 wins for Zergs against Koreans That's in terms of games not best of 3's, you can check the data over here: Google Docs SpreadsheetFor the sake of this seleCt is considered a foreigner, but didn't win against any koreans. ReaL, Pheonix and viOLet on the other hand were considered koreans despite living outside of korea. What a crazy life we lead... If we remove the ambiguous koreans though (violet, Real and Pheonix) but also don't conisder them foreigners for some reason... then it changes to 22 wins for Terrans 26 for Protoss 22 for Zergs Then removing the "outliers" (Huk, Stephano, Naniwa) You're left with 22 for Terrans 19 for Protoss 18 for Zergs Basically what I'm saying is you can stretch this data, all kinds of ways, ultimately it's actually pretty close, doubly so when you consider how many of the protosses are players who train 100% of their time in korea. I didn't remove Sase, but he only adds 2 points for protoss.
Im talking about the Data from the past 6-8 months. Not the past 2-3 months or so.
Do you think you'd be able to find out further back say all the way back to MLG Anaheim?
|
On March 02 2012 08:08 Recognizable wrote:
It seems to me protoss just has the most viable and strongest all ins so it's easier for them to take games off of stronger opponents.
Good point i believe this as well and i think it means the skill ceiling may be alot lower for Protoss which enables weaker opponents to beat much stronger opponents ?. I'm not entirely sure but i'm still getting an inkling and Protoss seems to be on the upward win/rate as of recent most games i watch these days Terran seem afraid of Protoss as well as Zergs.
|
On March 02 2012 16:33 Lysanias wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 18:31 Dingobloo wrote:Just did the data for this year's big competitions (IEM Kiev, IEM San Paulo, Homestory IV, MLG Arena) and it's actually reasonably close: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 30 wins for Protoss against Koreans 29 wins for Zergs agasint Koreans If we discard Stephano, Huk and Naniwa.... (which seems completely arbitrary but that's apparently what you want) it is: 26 wins for Terrans against Koreans 24 wins for Protoss against Koreans 25 wins for Zergs against Koreans That's in terms of games not best of 3's, you can check the data over here: Google Docs SpreadsheetFor the sake of this seleCt is considered a foreigner, but didn't win against any koreans. ReaL, Pheonix and viOLet on the other hand were considered koreans despite living outside of korea. What a crazy life we lead... If we remove the ambiguous koreans though (violet, Real and Pheonix) but also don't conisder them foreigners for some reason... then it changes to 22 wins for Terrans 26 for Protoss 22 for Zergs Then removing the "outliers" (Huk, Stephano, Naniwa) You're left with 22 for Terrans 19 for Protoss 18 for Zergs Basically what I'm saying is you can stretch this data, all kinds of ways, ultimately it's actually pretty close, doubly so when you consider how many of the protosses are players who train 100% of their time in korea. I didn't remove Sase, but he only adds 2 points for protoss. Thank you good sir, this should be added in the OP with this man's name. Also it's incredible how close it is, i would have expected foreign terrans to be a bit lower, but it looks well balanced no matter how you stretch it, i'd go with the first one though.
I thank him for the data he fetched but i was looking more toward a Data set all the way back to MLG anaheim IEM Newyork.
Although the stats seem to be even maybe my original inkling is unfounded and has no statistical accuracy.
|
On March 02 2012 18:06 TG Manny wrote:
As a note of reference, could it be that the Protoss players in EU could be used to more Korean style aggressive play because of their ladder and local tournament environments? Obviously Terrans and Zergs would also benefit, but both Z and T see the matchup akin to a ticking timebomb. Z can't let a protoss get to 3 base of gas or he gets too much gas, T can't let toss successfully fund both AoE tech paths. (bases be damned, no collo den and no templar archive? That's a dead toss @ 12 minutes). Therefore, Z and T work at forcing a Protoss to stall in economy via timings, harassment, and allin play.
In reverse, T and Z players in the EU servers are less aggressive on the average compared to Koreans who specifically add in harassment whenever they possibly can (trading as effectively as possible at different points in the game). Both T and Z simply want 3 bases and reach toward max with upgrades rolling fast. Obviously players want to deny their opponent's 3rd, but they'll put much less strain and effort on their opponent on average.
Thus when transitioning to Korea and korean opponents in international tournaments, Protoss is already fighting the "metagame" style of the other races that force a protoss to slow down. In comparison, a TvT MU between a korean and foreigner could be a strange reaper into mech opening for the korean with a hellion drop/runby behind reapers and the foreigner might just forgo extra defense and counter aggrssion to grab a greedier 3rd or tech up/upgrade faster. One mis-step by foreigner and he loses the game in some cases, other times one bad decision and his macro advantage is gone, etc...
Interesting but i think it might be quite a lot more complicated than that so many different styles across so many different players. Although NA does seem to be more all-innish than EU from what i've heard generally speaking.
|
I will go to be now im tired and continue this later i'm going to ask that guy who posted the Data from earlier if he can guide me how to compile the data all the way back to IEM Newyork or MLG anaheim so i can get a better look at the amount of games foreigners of each race took off Koreans. Thanks for contributions to the Blog/Thread. Peace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
