|
On May 19 2012 00:16 hitthat wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2012 00:11 storkfan wrote:On May 18 2012 23:58 lorkac wrote:
I'd be more interested in a statistical analysis of the first 1-2 rounds of each individual league.
Once you get past the first few rounds the winners of the early rounds start counting for double or triple the value of those who lost in the early round meaning a player like Flash would give +5-6 data points to terran but some guy who lost in the first round would only give one data point. exactly. and this is why regular format proleague is the best metric of overall balance situation. And it tends to confirm - terran has had the upper hand over zerg consistently for the past 8+ years But this also inclueds loses/wins in matches of horrible/mediocre players, what single handly crashes the statistics. And in my opinion it was 2010 that draw the line. 2009 was incredible for Zerg players. And also Terran always had 1 major advantage over Zerg- he had much bigger variety of strats.
why is it bad to have lower tier players in the statistics? In fact its good! You want the player frequency over skill, map etc range to be uniform in order to get an unbiased sample set. Proleague is pretty good at offering this. Starleagues are terrible.
2009 wasnt incredible for zerg, look at proleague stats for the year, TvZ was terran favoured like every year.
|
On May 18 2012 23:56 hitthat wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2012 23:50 storkfan wrote:
EVERY proleague since 2005 has had T advantage in TVZ.hardly a new thing. and i dont count older ones because of small sample size making it dubious to judge by, but probably was true then too. So many Zerg golds in 2007-2010 are hard to explain other way that this matchup was quite balanced OR the maps were horrible for terrans. In 2009 we had a freaking marathon of ZvZ semis.
starleagues are a small and very biased sample set, it can have lots of different reasons why, and cannot be justified for overall balance arguments
|
On May 19 2012 05:12 storkfan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2012 23:56 hitthat wrote:On May 18 2012 23:50 storkfan wrote:
EVERY proleague since 2005 has had T advantage in TVZ.hardly a new thing. and i dont count older ones because of small sample size making it dubious to judge by, but probably was true then too. So many Zerg golds in 2007-2010 are hard to explain other way that this matchup was quite balanced OR the maps were horrible for terrans. In 2009 we had a freaking marathon of ZvZ semis. starleagues are a small and very biased sample set, it can have lots of different reasons why, and cannot be justified for overall balance arguments
Why? It counts as well as loses of players poor in specific matchups. IMO true ballance is showed, when the very best players play, cuz they know how to use at last 90% of true potencial of their perspective race.
Off course you can argue that Fantasy, who have relatively weaker TvZ, have nice record also in this MU (even compared to some ZvT players considered good, like Zero). But also he started to win like crazy against Zerg in mid 2010, when I said was a "breaking" date. Before that, he was quite succesfull, but not consistent.
|
On May 19 2012 05:11 storkfan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2012 00:16 hitthat wrote:On May 19 2012 00:11 storkfan wrote:On May 18 2012 23:58 lorkac wrote:
I'd be more interested in a statistical analysis of the first 1-2 rounds of each individual league.
Once you get past the first few rounds the winners of the early rounds start counting for double or triple the value of those who lost in the early round meaning a player like Flash would give +5-6 data points to terran but some guy who lost in the first round would only give one data point. exactly. and this is why regular format proleague is the best metric of overall balance situation. And it tends to confirm - terran has had the upper hand over zerg consistently for the past 8+ years But this also inclueds loses/wins in matches of horrible/mediocre players, what single handly crashes the statistics. And in my opinion it was 2010 that draw the line. 2009 was incredible for Zerg players. And also Terran always had 1 major advantage over Zerg- he had much bigger variety of strats. why is it bad to have lower tier players in the statistics? In fact its good! You want the player frequency over skill, map etc range to be uniform in order to get an unbiased sample set. Proleague is pretty good at offering this. Starleagues are terrible. 2009 wasnt incredible for zerg, look at proleague stats for the year, TvZ was terran favoured like every year.
Hey, why don't we include ICCUP C+ and up statistics to the pro data we have collected. That will be even more data and give us more statistical power!
Only in the individual leagues do good players have to play on maps that disfavor them as well as those that favor them.
|
Honestly if you dont see that terran is too strong and protoss is too weak i really think you got a problem and this thing is not going to encourage more people to play and watch the game if only one race can be big champion.This game is asymetricly unblanced believe or not..
|
Lol? This game was far from balanced.
how about emp that takes away all shields in a far radius.
how about siege tanks vs toss? Toss cant do much vs them.
plague? yeah ok.
Oh and SC2 continues the races being completely different from each other. Roach, Maurader, Stalker is just one great example. They are way different from each other.
|
serenity in chaos, balance in imbalance.
sweet sweet BW.
|
Terrans just too good, end of story. Seige Tanks all the way
|
On May 18 2012 23:56 hitthat wrote:
So many Zerg golds in 2007-2010 are hard to explain other way that this matchup was quite balanced OR the maps were horrible for terrans. In 2009 we had a freaking marathon of ZvZ semis.
I think Zergs overall started to reach a level of mechanics that made them much more effective, players started to make far better use of defilers, faster multitasking that could deal with game-ending situations like drops better, strategies like 2hatch muta being perfected etc. While obviously Terran's improved too, i think Zergs gained a better advantage from the skill jump, in the short term at least. Then all the crazy amount of mech variations started once the maps were right (fuck polaris rhapsody) and the Terran's got accustomed to dealing with the muta's and developed ways to abuse the modern Zerg. It takes a while for Terran to have to work out things like 'at time A you can surivive with as little as B'. That's why when new maps come out that look good for mech they don't actually use it right away for example, like on Electric Circuit. So gradually they started taking back the initiative and taking back control of the game flow away from Zerg, which led to the current situation.
And while you'd hope it went back the other way Zerg really doesn't have the same extent of options available, so we only got gimmick strats like queen&broodlings as development, and not a noticeable big jump in ZvT skill, if anything it sort of dropped. I think YarnC and Kwanro not being involved anymore was quite a loss, 2 of the best aggressive ZvTers. If there's more management style Zergs at the very top tier i think things start to shift in that direction as people obviously try to use what the successful players are doing. But prehaps T defensively is capable of handling any of that kind of style at this point.
|
On May 20 2012 01:20 PurePwnageofTerran wrote:
Terrans just too good, end of story. Seige Tanks all the way
did you srsly make an account just to rage at terrans?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
