|
On April 17 2021 23:50 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2021 21:56 Jealous wrote:On April 17 2021 19:53 TMNT wrote:On April 17 2021 12:42 fgt4w wrote:On April 17 2021 11:21 TMNT wrote:On April 17 2021 09:12 Jealous wrote:On April 17 2021 07:30 TMNT wrote:On April 17 2021 04:27 onlystar wrote:On April 17 2021 04:25 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:On April 17 2021 03:56 onlystar wrote:
[quote]
keep in mind we are speaking about the top 1% here so just having a bigger player base of protoss users doesnt make a big factor here its remarkable that of those 1% there is an abundance of protoss players
What does this even mean If half the population plays a race and we assume perfect balance across all races, then we would expect half the population will be that race at the top level. okay except no game is perfectly balanced Yep and that's why there's 43% Protoss players overall but only 41% Protoss in S rank. If it were perfect you'd see exactly 43% Protoss in S rank. Protoss has ~10% more players than the other races in S because overall they have ~10% more players than the other races, not because of maps or whatever. It's like there are 1 billion Chinese men compared to 150 million US men. It's because the Chinese population is freaking 2 billions, not because Chinese parents favor boys over girls more than US parents. What's hard to understand? One of the worst possible analogies because Chinese parents DO favor boys over girls LOL, is this a Chinese shill account?? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_women_of_China Read my sentence again and find in which part I say they do not, alright Mr Big Brain? He's right. Reread your own post lol. If I say "I play BSL because I like BW, not because the top prize is 2000$", does that mean the prize is not 2000$? Can't believe I'm having this conversation. Hope this is just a language misunderstanding. Yet another horrible analogy because the $2000 is not tied into you liking BW whatsoever, whereas the reason why there are so many men in China IS to some extent due to the preference of male babies over female ones. So, while the logic structure you are referring to is correct, it's also false in the first case - which makes the analogy horrible on its own - and reeks of revisionism because the implication is that the number of men is not in any way associated with the well-known phenomena of male preference. Just a total train wreck. Stick to writing your words plainly, you can't handle much else. Wtf are you on about? The analogy was never about why there are more men than women in China, it's about there are 1 billion Chinese men compared to 150 mil US men because their population is much higher (and that's just some arbitrary numbers for example, pls dont interpret it as facts). The male preference - which I never denied - has an influence on China demographic itself, but it has nothing to do with Chinese having 850 mil more men than the US. Any implications are inside your convoluted mind. Even the part where you initially disagree with, is because you can't read a sentence properly. This board is full of sensitive people isn't it. First the topic about USSR (which I can partly understand), and now this shit. Just an arbitrary example and there are people jumping on you calling this is a shill account (what does that even mean anyway?) Anyway I'm in no way interested in this conversation anymore so let's call it a day here and get back to the main topic.
If parents in China are aborting female fetuses in favor of keeping male fetuses on the next pregnancy, that contributes to there being more men in China, and thus more men than there are in America. Saying it's because of X and NOT Y is implying that Y DOESN'T contribute, which is FALSE and moronic to boot. Is the size of the population a bigger factor? Yes. Is it the only factor? No. Is it disingenuous to imply that the problematic factor isn't a factor at all? Yes.
Do you need more help?
|
On April 17 2021 07:30 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2021 04:27 onlystar wrote:On April 17 2021 04:25 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:On April 17 2021 03:56 onlystar wrote:On April 17 2021 03:55 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:On April 17 2021 03:34 onlystar wrote:
and besides you can judge the S rank statistics by itself dont need to include the rest of the ladder perse
it gives you what it is S rank race distribution in S. Well if 42-43% of the whole ladder is playing P then P is actually underrepresented at the top rank. 2% doesn't seem that significant of an amount in any case so the results are in line with what you would expect. keep in mind we are speaking about the top 1% here so just having a bigger player base of protoss users doesnt make a big factor here its remarkable that of those 1% there is an abundance of protoss players What does this even mean If half the population plays a race and we assume perfect balance across all races, then we would expect half the population will be that race at the top level. okay except no game is perfectly balanced Yep and that's why there's 43% Protoss players overall but only 41% Protoss in S rank. If it were perfect you'd see exactly 43% Protoss in S rank. Protoss has ~10% more players than the other races in S because overall they have ~10% more players than the other races, not because of maps or whatever. It's like there are 1 billion Chinese men compared to 150 million US men. It's because the Chinese population is freaking 2 billions, not because Chinese parents favor boys over girls more than US parents. What's hard to understand?
Great analogy. While it's true that chinese parents favour boys over girls, this have a minimal impact in why there are so more chinese men than american men.
Edit: of course Jealous is right, but TMNT's point is still valid in my view.
|
Maybe beginners tend to play toss, thus the race contains more low-skilled players and therefore is expected to be underrepresented in S rank 🔥
|
On April 18 2021 02:50 plast1c wrote:
Maybe beginners tend to play toss, thus the race contains more low-skilled players and therefore is expected to be underrepresented in S rank 🔥
Maybe most beginners play terran and since we know that beginners need somebody to blame, it became popular to blame toss 🔥🔥
|
On April 18 2021 06:18 Cele wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2021 02:50 plast1c wrote:
Maybe beginners tend to play toss, thus the race contains more low-skilled players and therefore is expected to be underrepresented in S rank 🔥 Maybe most beginners play terran and since we know that beginners need somebody to blame, it became popular to blame toss 🔥🔥
I mean toss is just objectively easier to play at lower levels. All the mechanical constraints of BW, like limited unit selection, and how easy it is to macro out of gates, building every building off of one probe, canons etc. Nothing imbalanced, yet for newcomers those things make protoss really friendly to play.
|
PvZ is super easy. PvP is easy. PvT hardest matchup from whole game.
|
Imagine this was written instead
It's like there are 40.62% Protoss winrate compared to 30.46% Terran in S rank. It's because the Protoss population is freaking 42.57%, not because Siege Tanks have a high range. What's hard to understand?
Anybody would come to the conclusion that the intention would be to try to persuade people that Siege tanks do not have a high range.
|
On April 18 2021 01:17 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2021 01:13 kaspa84 wrote:On April 17 2021 04:36 TT1 wrote:
balance is only relevant at the highest level because they're the ones who actually play the game properly, everyone else is just looking to blame something other than themselves
you'd feel better about yourself if you played a moba ^^ While I never used the balance issues to excuse for my failure in being a decent player (best rank D+ on iccup) I still felt the balance was tilted. Back then I had 50% in PvT and about 10% win rate in PvZ while studying and practicing PvZ a lot more than PvT. And the overall level of Ts and Z's I encountered was about the same. PvZ is just harder at all levels I would guess. Interesting. zvp is the matchup I studied the most. Practised the most. I even stoped at some point playing vs other races. my zvp is still trash.
Interesting indeed. If you meant that my personal experience is not any proof of the imbalances in the game I agree 100%. We need much more evidence than that to prove something. However on your liquipedia profile it says you have an career 68% win rate in ZvP, 64% in ZvZ and 61% in ZvT. That's hardly comparable to my 40% spread between my 50% PvT and 10% PvZ.
But my main point anyways is that differences between races does affect the chances in any matchups, at any levels.
|
How can this even be measured?...Most people tend to play every race at least once on one account ... Than most ladder people tend to play with different ids depending on practise, strategy,race... Than there is mmr inflation depending on time, when you play, aswell as which gateway you play in combination with vPn, luck and connection problems ...
Skill wise even latencyT laggs matters,specially in connection with leavers that dont want to play with certain lagg or certain matchups... And than there are hackers who also influence the whole matter ...
How can you even decide which race they play? Specially when one selection isnt even displayed ... Random ... Even if this statistic displays the most played race of certain IDS, if the player is Random, it would be quite random.
|
I've been playing brood war for a few months now and it's actually absurd how unbalanced the game is. Like one race is explicitly easy to play. And people complain about balance in sc2 , shit isn't even comparable lol. Brood War needs a balance patch to thrive
User was warned for this post
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50350 Posts
On April 20 2021 13:04 TentativePanda wrote:
I've been playing brood war for a few months now and it's actually absurd how unbalanced the game is. Like one race is explicitly easy to play. And people complain about balance in sc2 , shit isn't even comparable lol. Brood War needs a balance patch to thrive
explain, chances are for every gameplay problem you present there are more than one solutions to them.
|
I've been coding in my spare time for the past few months and it's actually absurd how shitty Java is. Like the whole structure is just trash. And people complain about C++, shit isn't even comparable lol. I'm an expert now btw, and my name is TentativeDumbass.
|
On April 20 2021 13:04 TentativePanda wrote:
I've been playing brood war for a few months now and it's actually absurd how unbalanced the game is. Like one race is explicitly easy to play. And people complain about balance in sc2 , shit isn't even comparable lol. Brood War needs a balance patch to thrive
This is bullshit
|
On April 20 2021 13:04 TentativePanda wrote:
I've been playing brood war for a few months now and it's actually absurd how unbalanced the game is. Like one race is explicitly easy to play. And people complain about balance in sc2 , shit isn't even comparable lol. Brood War needs a balance patch to thrive
lol
|
On April 20 2021 13:04 TentativePanda wrote:
I've been playing brood war for a few months now and it's actually absurd how unbalanced the game is. Like one race is explicitly easy to play. And people complain about balance in sc2 , shit isn't even comparable lol. Brood War needs a balance patch to thrive
complete bollocks
|
I'm assuming we don't have the eqivalent of that for BW?
 Statistics/2020
Would be fun to see, since historically speaking ZvP was always the most 'imbalanced' mu by quite a margin (favouring Z), followed by PvT (favouring P) and TvZ (favouring T).
I wonder how that has changed (if at all) in the new/amateur era of BW.
|
On April 20 2021 20:42 True_Spike wrote:I'm assuming we don't have the eqivalent of that for BW? Statistics/2020Would be fun to see, since historically speaking ZvP was always the most 'imbalanced' mu by quite a margin (favouring Z), followed by PvT (favouring P) and TvZ (favouring T). I wonder how that has changed (if at all) in the new/amateur era of BW.
It was Z > P, T > Z, and P > T in that order.
|
We have something way better, it's called Sponbbang.
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/oghlty5.png)
|
On April 20 2021 21:43 Avi-Love wrote:We have something way better, it's called Sponbbang.
The slight problem with sponbbang games is that some match-ups are selected specifically because they want to see XvY specialist play a series - for example, setting up Bisu in PvZ against someone. They are also more top-heavy as a result, aren't they? So the data may be somewhat skewed, but it would be hard to tell by how much... I feel like SSL/KSL/ASL stats may be a better metric?
|
In my opinion, the sample size for ASL/KSL would be way too small to be statistically significant, they also rotate maps every season which doesn't help. Since people don't want to watch/play mirrors, I actually don't think it's that big of an issue -- sure Bisu probably plays more pvz than pvt, but it's not like his win rate against the best zergs in the world is good enough to skew the perceived balance of PvZ; especially seeing that people will also then be more likely to sponsor the best zvp players in the world to play the mu, presumably also meeting the same % of worse players that Bisu would in the first scenario, theoretically.
One issue I could see is that the number of spongames played by a given player is heavily influenced by their popularity, which is not always directly correlated to their skill. An example would be that LighT has played 652 spon games this year, while Larva has played 1172 and Rush has played 1234.
I do think that sponbbang is by far the best metric we have, since it's a large sample of the very top Koreans playing for prize money, even doing so in different formats; the proleague format is quite popular nowadays, which allows players to kill all and such. A year ago it was almost exclusively bo3/bo5 between two players, as far as I know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
