|
On October 11 2023 18:11 angry_maia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2023 16:41 Dante08 wrote:
Thanks this is amazing!
This sort of solidifies the fact TvP is the hardest matchup. There are so many ways Terran can die to Protoss in the early-mid game but not the other way around. Once the game goes past 20 mins it gets favoured for Protoss again due to the number of bases Protoss has and the option to switch to carriers.
If you run it at the top level I would think the early-mid game win rates for Protoss lowers abit but overall it wouldn’t change too much. i dont disagree that TvP is the hardest, but this data doesn't really prove that. All of your arguments equally apply to PvZ (easy to die early, and then zerg pulls ahead again in the late game).
not equally. the winrate bump in the 10-20th ish min for protoss in PvZ is clearly way more pronounced than the terran one in PvT. terran's "compensation" through their 2/3 base timing push in TvP is seemingly not as effective as protoss's 2 base pushes in PvZ.
its actually surprising to me how for all the crying about hydra busts protoss have their own hydra bust esque win spike in the early stage of PvT. even with toss early game shenanigans i never thought it would be just as bad
|
On October 11 2023 19:14 RJBTV wrote:
I've noticed post 40 PvZ protoss becomes extremely resource efficient compared to zerg as the map mines out and toss gets a chance to use reavers, archons, and high templars to defend their last couple bases at a very very low cost. The zerg on the other hand has to spam large volumes of units trying to break into a fortified position with units that die in the blink of an eye.
yeah ultra lategame PvZ is known to be heavily toss favoured for the general reasons u mention but i guess theres not enough sample size
|
On October 11 2023 16:41 Dante08 wrote:
This sort of solidifies the fact TvP is the hardest matchup..
It does nothing of the sort, lol
|
You guys have to reserve all the balance discussion or which matchup is harderst sort of things until the analysis with regard to player skill comes out.
For example, even without this data we already know Protoss dominates at almost every level until S rank. Even BSL is dominated by Protoss.
its actually surprising to me how for all the crying about hydra busts protoss have their own hydra bust esque win spike in the early stage of PvT. even with toss early game shenanigans i never thought it would be just as bad
Another example, the near 70% win rate around 3-4 minutes in PvT could very well be about Terran noobs not being able to handle the first Zealots lol. I don't think there are a lot of pro games where the games end that soon.
|
Also another thing to consider: I don't think the data from repmastered.app contains much of the progamers/Korean portion. The spon games between progamers are custom games which are held between themselves that even cwal.gg can't have access. Only recently do we have access to progamers' replays when they clash with each other on the ladder.
|
On October 11 2023 20:14 TMNT wrote:
Another example, the near 70% win rate around 3-4 minutes in PvT could very well be about Terran noobs not being able to handle the first Zealots lol. I don't think there are a lot of pro games where the games end that soon.
yes i know i mean thats the point, if u are talking about ANY game balance u have to care about the lower levels not just pro levels. how to get people to buy your games or have a community if u don't care that the effort reward ratio is disproportionately skewed in early game TvP just like in ZvP? or i guess thats a moot point for old dead BW? if u lot are just boomers not wanting to make concessions then fine done.
|
On October 11 2023 20:24 ggsimida wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2023 20:14 TMNT wrote:
Another example, the near 70% win rate around 3-4 minutes in PvT could very well be about Terran noobs not being able to handle the first Zealots lol. I don't think there are a lot of pro games where the games end that soon. yes i know i mean thats the point, if u are talking about ANY game balance u have to care about the lower levels not just pro levels. how to get people to buy your games or have a community if u don't care that the effort reward ratio is disproportionately skewed in early game TvP just like in ZvP? or i guess thats a moot point for old dead BW? if u lot are just boomers not wanting to make concessions then fine done.
I mean, you're kind of confusing between points here.
If you want to care about lower levels and how to get people to buy the game, then you're talking about DESIGNING the game. It was already done 25 years ago and through several patches later. It can't be changed. It is what it is now.
Then if we are TALKING about balance alone, as in we're just discussing the game, you can either talk about it as a whole or talk about it at a specific level. And most of the times we're implicitly talking about it at high levels (like when we're discussing ASL or something).
Then the point you made about hydra bust in PvZ being comparable to the P win spike in early game PvT, well it's not comparable at all, since the former exists at high levels (maybe even at all levels?) but the latter only exists at noob levels - and it's not where the discussions are at all.
|
On October 11 2023 09:37 Monochromatic wrote:
[...]
I would love to see a ZvZ plot about game length and frequency. What are the odds of lategame ZvZ? It might be interesting to see for other mirrors as well.
Great idea, I'll add those later.
On October 11 2023 18:15 Dakota_Fanning wrote:
Amazing job! Nice stats!
Don't throw away your tools you generated the stats with, as we might repeat this with a bigger dataset, which might also include matchmaking stats I'm gathering recently (e.g. MMR).
No worries! I was hoping for you to say something like this, so in the future we maybe could re-run the replay parser to get more information from the replays and also include MMR ratings.
@ggsimida and TMNT: please wait for the upcoming data which will examine the behaviour in higher-level and lower-level games, it is going to be rather enlightening.
As already mentioned in the thread, currently no MMR information is available, thus we can't just get stats for S-rank. However, I think that the effective APM is sufficiently correlated with skill and rank, so we can use it as a proxy to create a sample of high-level and low-level games.
See here for normalized distributions of effective APM, really beautiful gaussian.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 11 2023 21:30 Kraekkling wrote:
As already mentioned in the thread, currently no MMR information is available, thus we can't just get stats for S-rank. However, I think that the effective APM is sufficiently correlated with skill and rank, so we can use it as a proxy to create a sample of high-level and low-level games.
I am a bit skeptical about that. If you go through cwal.gg you'll probably see B C ranks players having the apm of progamers.
But the guy who runs cwal.gg does have stats for each specific mmr range, it was posted on reddit a while ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/broodwar/comments/15nvvrk/matchups_by_winrate_including_2300_s_rank/
I suppose maybe you can grab the data for S rank only and extract the win rate vs time from it? Obviously need to contact him to ask for those data though.
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2369 Posts
On October 11 2023 21:45 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2023 21:30 Kraekkling wrote:
As already mentioned in the thread, currently no MMR information is available, thus we can't just get stats for S-rank. However, I think that the effective APM is sufficiently correlated with skill and rank, so we can use it as a proxy to create a sample of high-level and low-level games. I am a bit skeptical about that. If you go through cwal.gg you'll probably see B C ranks players having the apm of progamers. But the guy who runs cwal.gg does have stats for each specific mmr range, it was posted on reddit a while ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/broodwar/comments/15nvvrk/matchups_by_winrate_including_2300_s_rank/I suppose maybe you can grab the data for S rank only and extract the win rate vs time from it? Obviously need to contact him to ask for those data though.
I'm also skeptical about the rank-skill correlation. I see many S rank players that have a series of games where opponent leaves early (to artificially push the player up), and I also see many top players leave so they get to low ranks to stomp unskilled players.
While rank (MMR) should be (and probably is) a better indication of skill than APM, it often isn't.
|
Great work. I'd love to see the same data with only S rank and above filtered.
|
On October 11 2023 21:45 TMNT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2023 21:30 Kraekkling wrote:
As already mentioned in the thread, currently no MMR information is available, thus we can't just get stats for S-rank. However, I think that the effective APM is sufficiently correlated with skill and rank, so we can use it as a proxy to create a sample of high-level and low-level games. I am a bit skeptical about that. If you go through cwal.gg you'll probably see B C ranks players having the apm of progamers. But the guy who runs cwal.gg does have stats for each specific mmr range, it was posted on reddit a while ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/broodwar/comments/15nvvrk/matchups_by_winrate_including_2300_s_rank/I suppose maybe you can grab the data for S rank only and extract the win rate vs time from it? Obviously need to contact him to ask for those data though.
You're right that there are players and games at B and C rank with the apm of programers.
I also looked at the apm distributions - those had a much more prominent tail at the high end of the distribution with entries at the 500-600 apm range, which is obviously due to spam. I don't have the plot at hand right now but I might post it later. In short: it didn't look pretty and you could see that there is a lot of spam going on. The effective apm distributions are much cleaner though, as can be seen in the post above.
I don't think this is the perfect way to do it - but it seems reasonable enough to try and see what comes out. It's also probably the best that can be done with the data at hand.
I'd also suggest you might take a look at the games on repmastered.app . I was mostly eyeballing the stats, but to me it seemed reasonable to assume that if we require something like
- both player have an effective apm above 180
we end up with almost exclusively A/S-rank games. Please feel free to suggest any improvements in this regard.
Regarding data from cwal.gg: we might get MMR data added to the current data anyway, once it's there it would be used.
|
On October 11 2023 20:14 TMNT wrote:You guys have to reserve all the balance discussion or which matchup is harderst sort of things until the analysis with regard to player skill comes out. For example, even without this data we already know Protoss dominates at almost every level until S rank. Even BSL is dominated by Protoss. Show nested quote +its actually surprising to me how for all the crying about hydra busts protoss have their own hydra bust esque win spike in the early stage of PvT. even with toss early game shenanigans i never thought it would be just as bad Another example, the near 70% win rate around 3-4 minutes in PvT could very well be about Terran noobs not being able to handle the first Zealots lol. I don't think there are a lot of pro games where the games end that soon.
Yes once you get to the pro level Terrans don’t die as easily but it still happens, I’ve seen it happen in ASL, ultimate battle and various other Korean pro games. Also when you flip it the other way around it’s true at pro level Terran almost never beats Protoss early game.
Now when you sample the absolute top level Terrans like Light Rush etc then things become different but we are not just looking at the absolute top level.
|
On October 11 2023 19:54 vOdToasT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2023 16:41 Dante08 wrote:
This sort of solidifies the fact TvP is the hardest matchup.. It does nothing of the sort, lol
Care to explain, the TvP win area is by far the smallest in all matchups
Edit for typo
|
On October 11 2023 22:09 Dakota_Fanning wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2023 21:45 TMNT wrote:On October 11 2023 21:30 Kraekkling wrote:
As already mentioned in the thread, currently no MMR information is available, thus we can't just get stats for S-rank. However, I think that the effective APM is sufficiently correlated with skill and rank, so we can use it as a proxy to create a sample of high-level and low-level games. I am a bit skeptical about that. If you go through cwal.gg you'll probably see B C ranks players having the apm of progamers. But the guy who runs cwal.gg does have stats for each specific mmr range, it was posted on reddit a while ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/broodwar/comments/15nvvrk/matchups_by_winrate_including_2300_s_rank/I suppose maybe you can grab the data for S rank only and extract the win rate vs time from it? Obviously need to contact him to ask for those data though. I'm also skeptical about the rank-skill correlation. I see many S rank players that have a series of games where opponent leaves early (to artificially push the player up), and I also see many top players leave so they get to low ranks to stomp unskilled players. While rank (MMR) should be (and probably is) a better indication of skill than APM, it often isn't.
It doesn't matter for S rank and above though. S rank players may tank their mmr to stomp noobs, but the accounts in S rank still belong to legitimate S rank players.
A rank players who get accidentally bumped to S by leavers should not be too many. And even if there are a lot of them (I don't think there are though), it's A being mixed up with S which is still fine as far as "high skill" goes (think Artosis hitting 2400 a while ago). But more importantly, it occurs for all 3 races so it auto evens out.
You can't say the same for eapm. It's very normal for C and B ranks players (even D) to have ~ 200 eapm. So using eapm you get B and C mixed up with S.
|
It's very normal for C and B ranks players (even D) to have ~ 200 eapm.
This is not true. Can you in any way show this claim to be true or quantify what you mean by "very normal"?
|
On October 11 2023 22:44 Kraekkling wrote: This is not true. Can you in any way show this claim to be true or quantify what you mean by "very normal"?
Okay maybe "normal" is not the right word (as in most of them have 200 eapm) but what I mean is the proportion of lower rank players with high eapm is still large enough to affect the results. Of course I can't verify it with stats but if you just randomly browse the B-C rank sections in cwal you'll see a lot of (Korean) players around 180-200 eapm.
On the opposite side, you may have S rank players with less than 200 eapm too. For example just look at Stork and Soulkey here:
https://cwal.gg/players/gateway/30/player/Stork
https://cwal.gg/players/gateway/30/player/LC_needmoney
these dudes have sub 200 eapm all the time, some games even 160-170 eapm lol.
I'm quite sure that if filtered by eapm, you will leave the Storks and the Soulkeys out of the equation while adding in some random B rank players. At what proportion I dont know but what I'm saying is the data filtered by eapm is not as "clean" as you think.
|
I'm quite sure that if filtered by eapm, you will leave the Storks and the Soulkeys out of the equation while adding in some random B rank players.
This is obviously true and I can't think of any way to fix this without using MMR data.
Actually, we introduce another bias by applying a requirement on eapm. Since the distributions have different mean values but we impose the same selection for both races (e.g. above 180 eapm), we bias our selection samples for the races.
That is, if the mean is 160eapm for Terran but 150eapm for Zerg, you could say that we impose a higher requirement on the Zerg players and therefore bias our sample towards better Zerg players, compared to the Terran players sample.
There are even more problems to this, depending on how rigorous you'd like to be, but let's ignore that for now.
At what proportion I dont know but what I'm saying is the data filtered by eapm is not as "clean" as you think.
I will refrain from further replying to your posts until I posted the rest of the data, but as I previously mentioned, it is clear that this is not the best way to do it. But it's probably the best way to do it with the available data.
|
On October 11 2023 23:42 Kraekkling wrote:
I will refrain from further replying to your posts until I posted the rest of the data, but as I previously mentioned, it is clear that this is not the best way to do it. But it's probably the best way to do it with the available data.
Yes of course. If you can't have mmr data this is obviously the best way, if not the only way, to filter player skill. It would also be interesting if, once you can get access to the mmr data, to redo it for mmr and compare both sets of results.
And may also be interesting to do a mmr vs eapm comparison as well, although it should be more or less a positve correlation anyway, except from A/S rank it would probably flatten out.
|
yes well the problem is eAPM is also a flawed measure in BW which can easily be spammed, it has to do with unit movement/attack commands (protoss has less of this so their eAPM is usually less than t/z), so a zerg player will normally have more eAPM just because they're constantly microing mutas etc., basically the more time you spend on your units the higher your eAPM will be, at high lvls thats fine because progamers will also macro but at lower lvls that data is flawed because many players will sacrifice their macro for that... but i guess it's better than nothing
to me a sample size of like ~1k hand picked games of high lvl players is worth way more than that type of data
the thing about BW is you can't really unlock the "true form" of the game until you hit a certain lvl of execution, any data before that is pretty meaningless (that said it's still interesting to see the trends among all skill lvls) because it snowballs into the later stages of the game from a flawed state
to put it in perspective, imo even 2500 KR ladder players are playing a different game than the progamers are, 2500 (this number changes depending on the ladder season, in general it's around this range tho) is sort of the starting point of competitive BW play
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.ibb.co/4p1MNH4/effapm-allraces.png)
