Patchzergs, Real or Imagniary? - Page 9

On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote:
"Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.

On August 20 2012 09:18 nkr wrote:
- What is a so called "patchzerg" ?

A zerg who only started making a splash in the scene after patch 1.4.3 balance changes (patch notes), released the tenth of may 2012, implying that this zerg only is where he is at due to the patch, and the supposed zerg imbalance that comes with it.

- Are patchzergs real, or are they just a figment of our imagination?

Axiom: If the last balance update in truth is the reason these zergs made it to the top, one would assume high winrates in especially TvZ and possibly PvZ (some would argue that the overlord change made it easier for zerg to be greedy in this matchup as well) while their ZvZ winrates dropped off.

Why? Well we can safely assume that the balance in ZvZ was not affected by this or any previous patch, and while getting further in tournaments, they will now face the better pre-patch zergs. If these zergs in truth got to where they are because of the patch, they should lose more of these matches.
---snip---

On August 20 2012 13:22 Piledriver wrote:



I think there is a very big fallacy in the original post, one that I'm afraid cannot be so easily overcome unless we come up with some way to quantify and factor in player skill.

The way to see if a player is a so called "patch-zerg", is to not just collect raw win-percentage data like you did, but also to record the change in win percentage while keeping the relative skill level of the opponents as a constant. For example a 50% win-rate vs Euro GM terrans in Playhems and MLG qualifiers, cannot be directly compared to a 65% win rate vs a collection of pro players that includes absolutely top class Terrans and Protoss including Code S players in a big tournament like IEM.

So in essence I strongly feel that the latest patches (and metagame changes), have led to the surge of a lot of new zerg "talents", while there have been no new notable players from other races coming out of Europe recently.

On August 20 2012 13:12 vultdylan wrote:
sLivko is not at all a patch zerg, he has been a badass for a while.
and who cares, anyways. they adapted to a change in the game and they went with it as an advantage, it just shows that those who have been good for a while and are struggling haven't fully adapted to said changes.
but sLivko needs to be off this list. thanks.

On August 20 2012 13:22 pOnarreT wrote:



Actually, if this thread wasn't created, a lot wouldn't even know what "patchzergs" are. I question the real motives of the OP.

On August 20 2012 13:19 IPA wrote:
"Patchzerg" is frankly insulting to a lot of players who have been working incredibly hard to improve. They don't deserve it and I wish the community was above this kind of bs. But it's not.