| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Soft_General_5023
110 Posts
On November 23 2025 09:47 tankgirl wrote: just give scv 40 hp already how many more decades we gotta keep doing this? that would be funny, snow would win pvt even before reavers | ||
|
Soft_General_5023
110 Posts
| ||
|
doktordingerdonger
17 Posts
You think zerg likes to go third base and then defend with mutas and then go lurkers, with every little fuckup being GG? This being said, Tesagi across the board. | ||
|
Kraekkling
583 Posts
This being said, Tesagi across the board I mean that's not a wrong conclusion, but I think it shouldn't be the last one to draw from all of this. Something I repeatedly think about is how the in-game timer was the most influential change which BW:Remastered gave to the game. It was not the HD graphics, neither the ladder system, even though both were great additions! The in-game timer seems like such a tiny and trivial addition, but it gave us a most important tool: measurability. Suddenly, everyone was able to consistently measure and track their progress. Benchmarks for builds were developed. "With this build, you need to hit X supply at Y minutes." It became much more obvious that specific spawns allowed to hit certain timings, while others didn't, which made us update the left-side mineral lines. Because build benchmarks became targets, optimizations everywhere increased. I think it's hard to overstate how much the general skill level improved because these things became easily quantifiable. Some optimizations even led to completely new developments in the meta game in some matchups. Coming back to Tesagi, balance and maps: there's a lot of variance all around, both for maps but also for specific spawns. Tiny changes can adjust or flip the balance. If we can reliably measure and understand such effects, we will also be able control them. | ||
|
Jealous
10257 Posts
| ||
|
Kraekkling
583 Posts
But it should be already sufficient to consider the fact that it took us a stupidly long time to notice and act on mining differences between left- and right-side spawns. Still, this is kinda beneath my main point, which is that it's useful to be able to measure and quantify things that are relevant for balance. | ||
|
Jealous
10257 Posts
On November 24 2025 12:55 Kraekkling wrote: A specific example would be the evolution of many builds for Zerg, which were previously deemed suboptimal due to lost larva. Which overall was downstream of mining optimizations. There's a nice thread by iopq on this. Since the availability of such builds shifted, Terrans had to adjust how often they 8-raxed. I'm sure there are other examples. But it should be already sufficient to consider the fact that it took us a stupidly long time to notice and act on mining differences between left- and right-side spawns. Still, this is kinda beneath my main point, which is that it's useful to be able to measure and quantify things that are relevant for balance. I've seen the iopq thread so I know what you're talking about. And true, mineral boosting and L v R became better understood after RM. Thanks for elaborating! | ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands1070 Posts
| ||
|
FinalGame
Canada14 Posts
The in-game timer seems like such a tiny and trivial addition, but it gave us a most important tool: measurability. Suddenly, everyone was able to consistently measure and track their progress. Benchmarks for builds were developed. "With this build, you need to hit X supply at Y minutes." It became much more obvious that specific spawns allowed to hit certain timings, while others didn't, which made us update the left-side mineral lines. Hopefully I snipped correctly, if not my bad. Man back when I used to play pre-timer I had gotten so accustomed to playing so often my track of measurement for builds back then (at least very early game) was how far along the music was while in-game vs my opponent, lol. | ||
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2359 Posts
For example 투혼 1.4 1v1 locations: 1 v 4, 880k games, 52% win ratio 1 v 8, 879k games, 52% win ratio 4 v 11, 879k games, 50% win ratio 1 v 11, 877k games, 52% win ratio 4 v 8, 877k games, 49% win ratio 8 v 11, 872k games, 50% win ratio Based on this data, top right location (1) is the favored, and bottom right (4) is the most unfavored location. Polypoid 1.75 as an another example seems more balanced regarding starting locations. And Eclipse 1.2 also seems almost perfectly balanced in this regard. | ||
|
Kraekkling
583 Posts
Although I'm not fully sure how to best interpret when it's averaged down to a single number. What I mean is that if split by matchup, there would be differences which we don't see otherwise. For example, on Eclipse 1.2 TvT: top better TvZ: about even TvP: top better ZvZ: bottom better ZvP: bottom better ZvT: about even PvP: even PvZ: bottom better PvT: top better but if average it all out, it's again "balanced" | ||
|
Jealous
10257 Posts
On November 25 2025 04:29 Dakota_Fanning wrote: Enthused by this nice analysis today I also added 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 location stats to all maps over RepMastered. These contain games of all races, and all games (not just Blizzard ladder games). For example 투혼 1.4 1v1 locations: 1 v 4, 880k games, 52% win ratio 1 v 8, 879k games, 52% win ratio 4 v 11, 879k games, 50% win ratio 1 v 11, 877k games, 52% win ratio 4 v 8, 877k games, 49% win ratio 8 v 11, 872k games, 50% win ratio Based on this data, top right location (1) is the favored, and bottom right (4) is the most unfavored location. Polypoid 1.75 as an another example seems more balanced regarding starting locations. And Eclipse 1.2 also seems almost perfectly balanced in this regard. Thanks for this, I had just asked for pairwise analysis of spawn locations in another thread, so either this is a fortuitous coincidence or I should be thanking you for looking into it after seeing it  | ||
|
XenOsky
Chile2303 Posts
... .. . . wait... | ||
|
Kraekkling
583 Posts
Unsurprised to see 1 v 4 be the most popular and 8 vs 11 the least given that one ladder bug we had! what was the ladder bug? | ||
|
doktordingerdonger
17 Posts
On November 25 2025 11:04 XenOsky wrote: protoss players are just bad and can't win asl based on their lack of skill and inteligence ... .. . . wait... Them not winning balances out protoss being easy. Math checks out | ||
|
XenOsky
Chile2303 Posts
On November 25 2025 12:09 doktordingerdonger wrote: Them not winning balances out protoss being easy. Math checks out says terran user | ||
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2359 Posts
On November 25 2025 07:08 Kraekkling wrote: Very nice, this is also interesting data I think. Although I'm not fully sure how to best interpret when it's averaged down to a single number. What I mean is that if split by matchup, there would be differences which we don't see otherwise. For example, on Eclipse 1.2 TvT: top better TvZ: about even TvP: top better ZvZ: bottom better ZvP: bottom better ZvT: about even PvP: even PvZ: bottom better PvT: top better but if average it all out, it's again "balanced" Of course these location stats are not to be taken for granted. Matchup plays a huge role when determining the actual win rate for a given location combination. But I think it's still interesting: a well balanced map should have a 50% win rate overall (overall meaning averaging games of all matchups) for all location combinations, or at least target to get close to it as much as possible, unless separate map versions are made for different matchups. Also this locations stats addition to RepMastered are not just for 1v1 games and are not just for ladder maps: they are for all maps and for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4. A lot of us play regularly or occasionally team games, often with and against random races, and this might give a clue what to expect on start. | ||
|
Cryoc
Germany912 Posts
For some time during remastered, the starting locations were no longer random after a Blizzard patch. But I am pretty sure, it was always 1 vs 11 on FS (location 1 vs location 2). | ||
|
iopq
United States1029 Posts
On November 24 2025 02:34 Soft_General_5023 wrote: that would be funny, snow would win pvt even before reavers What's wrong with that? Other races can't just repair one defensive building forever and hold a much larger army. You act like not losing for the first ~6 minutes should be a given if you play Terran | ||
|
Jealous
10257 Posts
On November 25 2025 16:48 Cryoc wrote: For some time during remastered, the starting locations were no longer random after a Blizzard patch. But I am pretty sure, it was always 1 vs 11 on FS (location 1 vs location 2). Correct, misspoke, my bad. It was indeed 1 vs. 11 on FS. | ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
Classic vs Krystianer
Solar vs TBD
ShoWTimE vs TBD
MaxPax vs TBD
MaNa vs MilkiCow
GgMaChine vs Mixu
SOOP
SHIN vs GuMiho
Cure vs Creator
The PondCast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
IPSL
DragOn vs Sziky
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
|
|
|
EPT
