Every GSL event has had Ro32 terran plurality

On December 02 2012 07:13 Qikz wrote:
People expect Blizzard to do any major balance changes right now, but I'm pretty sure nothing will happen until HoTS.

Hopefully the beta will get better soon and tournaments will start switching to mix things up a bit.

On December 02 2012 07:12 peia wrote:
this is because earlier, terran WAS the strongest race, ´but until mid 2012 terran has got the weakest (imao)
and because earlier there were so many terrans because it was the strongest race, there still is this big MASS of korean terrans, who are still pretty good at the game, they belong into code S, and if you look at EU ladder 10 % terran, 30 % toss 60 % zerg, and also at IPL the race distribution is a big big joke

On December 02 2012 07:15 EU.Pink wrote:


nice facts about EU ladder bro, can i see source?

On December 02 2012 07:12 peia wrote:
this is because earlier, terran WAS the strongest race, ´but until mid 2012 terran has got the weakest (imao)
and because earlier there were so many terrans because it was the strongest race, there still is this big MASS of korean terrans, who are still pretty good at the game, they belong into code S, and if you look at EU ladder 10 % terran, 30 % toss 60 % zerg, and also at IPL the race distribution is a big big joke

On December 02 2012 07:19 ChillPhiju wrote:
It sounds alot like: "Terrans had success and were stronger than other races so now another race is allowed to be imbalanced if so be"
And assuming you wanted to say this please don't argue like that.
Or would you like to be enslaved because we enslaved black people just because as a "revenge" they are allowed to. (I am sorry for making such a drastic comparison, but I hope everyone gets it for once and for all)

And on the other hand if Terrans were able to sustain such a amount of them in the GSL till now you shouldn't say they change the Meta because this indicates the complete opposite: They have been changing the Meta etc and it is not working anymore (Which means a buff is needed)

All in all I don't want to say any of this is true(Just wanted to point out some flaws in your argumentation which you got IMO) but Blizzard should let the possibility of buffing open.

On December 02 2012 07:18 xPabt wrote:
And yet only Mvp has been able to make it to the finals.

On December 02 2012 07:26 QuanticState wrote:


http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV_Global_StarCraft_II_League

you're horribly, horribly wrong

On December 02 2012 07:28 xPabt wrote:

This year I meant.

On December 02 2012 07:28 xPabt wrote:

This year I meant.

On December 02 2012 07:12 peia wrote:
if you look at EU ladder 10 % terran, 30 % toss 60 % zerg, and also at IPL the race distribution is a big big joke

On December 02 2012 07:33 Martyrc wrote:


Then say so, you idiot.... I'm a Terran myself, and imbeciles like you make me ashamed of being one.

On December 02 2012 07:15 EU.Pink wrote:


nice facts about EU ladder bro, can i see source?

On December 02 2012 07:18 xPabt wrote:
And yet only Mvp has been able to make it to the finals in 2012.

On December 02 2012 07:36 hootsushi wrote:



Dude, why so rude? He didn't offend anyone. I read his reply and already assumed he meant this year.

On December 02 2012 07:12 peia wrote:
this is because earlier, terran WAS the strongest race, ´but until mid 2012 terran has got the weakest (imao)
and because earlier there were so many terrans because it was the strongest race, there still is this big MASS of korean terrans, who are still pretty good at the game, they belong into code S, and if you look at EU ladder 10 % terran, 30 % toss 60 % zerg, and also at IPL the race distribution is a big big joke

On December 02 2012 07:40 FeyverN wrote:

10% Terran?

I've never heard about this. From what I've seen on the EU ladder (1000 point masters), there is a pretty even distribution of the races.
http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all
As you can see, it seems pretty even overall. There is a slight bias towards Zerg in Grandmasters, but who's to say thats due to imbalance?
As someone who played on NA and now plays on EU regularly, I can say that the NA ladder is really Zerg biased, but the EU ladder is surprisingly balanced in terms of race distribution. Maybe you have bad luck, I don't know.

On December 02 2012 07:45 chaokel wrote:


Much more likely he just made up the figures, or heard it at one point from some guy who was trying to backup his balance complaints with false facts.

On December 02 2012 07:15 blade55555 wrote:


Tournaments won't switch until release I am pretty sure. I do wish at least some tournaments would happen for hots as it might encourage more pros to play hots at least online cups anyway would be nice >>.

On December 02 2012 07:37 neptunusfisk wrote:



Actually EU grandmaster has a staggering 20% terran - 54 players! - while zerg only has 101 players.

On December 02 2012 07:52 Siphyo wrote:
My graph from liquipedia to support the OPs statement:



Personally, I don't think any balance-related conclusions should be drawn from this.

On December 02 2012 07:52 Siphyo wrote:
My graph from liquipedia to support the OPs statement:



Personally, I don't think any balance-related conclusions should be drawn from this.

On December 02 2012 09:33 Inquisitor1323 wrote:
wow cool story bro. Guess what, a lot of Koreans play terran. If a lot more people play one race than the other races, they are going to have more representation in the ro32. Why don't you stop presenting bullshit irrelevant counter points for an argument you know is true.

On December 02 2012 09:25 Krychek wrote:
I want to point a basic flaw about the op.

The fact that T was for long time unbalanced, or their partial dominance months/years ago, has nothing to do with race/unit imbalance right now.

If a race or unit was op or up in the past, have nothing to do with the patch going right now.

And for the record, in the T dominance, watching foreigner T's beating korean non-Ts was NOT common.

Now watching foreigners Zs winning vs top non-z koreans it is indeed very common.

On December 02 2012 09:33 Inquisitor1323 wrote:
wow cool story bro. Guess what, a lot of Koreans play terran. If a lot more people play one race than the other races, they are going to have more representation in the ro32. Why don't you stop presenting bullshit irrelevant counter points for an argument you know is true.

On December 02 2012 09:40 Lunares wrote:


The point is that regardless of "balance changes", the terran representation (and zerg and protoss) pretty much hasn't changed. If there really had been such a massive balance change so that zerg op was true (as people are crying so hard about right now) then we would expect the zerg representation in the Ro32 to go up. And it hasn't. It just goes to show how balanced the game really is and that we shouldn't be crying imba imba just because of a ZvZ finals.



Unless more koreans started playing terran in the last 5 months than at the start of the game, why would their representation stay the same if it really was "zerg op"? My point is that the game is mostly balanced. Any shifts are extremely minor and people need to stop whining about them.

On December 02 2012 09:53 Inquisitor1323 wrote:

Where have you been for the last 8 months? Look at the most recent IPL statistics, zerg winrate in ZvT was around 70%. Go watch some late-game TvZ or PvZ and then tell us about how the game is "mostly balanced."

On December 02 2012 10:12 Lunares wrote:


You are confirming my point. People are looking at single tournaments, or a single player on a hotstreak. One player tearing through a tournament can singlehandedly raise their races winrate for that tourny by quite a bit. I see players on both races winning in both late game TvZ and PvZ when I look objectively. Most people just focus on the games where their races lose. Talking about the WAY they lose is very different from being balanced, e.g. Z wins really easily late game when they get there with no pressure, whereas all the T/P wins are hard fought after keeping Z economy down. Even if that happens at 50/50 (e.g. balanced) it LOOKS unbalanced.

When you look at the only consistent, continual tournament the race distribution hasn't changed. The tournament with the best of the best playing each other all the time. This despite all sorts of things, such as map pool changes, kespa players, patches, etc. It just goes to show how balanced the game is and how resilient balance is to being changed. Blizzard does need to alter the game to shake things up and make sure the metagame doesn't become stale/boring. But in terms of actual balance? It's fine. The fact that more terrans haven't dropped out of code S after 2 years of Code S shows that.

On December 02 2012 07:35 arcane1129 wrote:


EU ladder: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/eu/1/all

KR: (zerg is lowest % in gm and masters actually) http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/fea/1/all

Global: http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all

Who are you trying to fool?

On December 02 2012 09:25 Krychek wrote:
I want to point a basic flaw about the op.

The fact that T was for long time unbalanced, or their partial dominance months/years ago, has nothing to do with race/unit imbalance right now.

If a race or unit was op or up in the past, have nothing to do with the patch going right now.

And for the record, in the T dominance, watching foreigner T's beating korean non-Ts was NOT common.

Now watching foreigners Zs winning vs top non-z koreans it is indeed very common.

On December 02 2012 11:36 Fuzer wrote:

¨
what the heck are you talking about?
http://starcraft2.fi/suomiladder_gm.php
theres % of every ladder in world.

On December 02 2012 11:58 arcane1129 wrote:


Did you just try to say that the links I posted to sc2ranks are wrong by linking to an obscure site that contains the same stats, only with less overall information (and not in English)?

On December 02 2012 12:01 Fuzer wrote:


No, I posted a link which has top 100 top 50, which is not same as GM. Its not hard to get to GM but its hard to stay on top, and zerg dominance in the TOP is huge.

On December 02 2012 12:05 arcane1129 wrote:


If you want to use a smaller sample size to represent only the very top players, why don't we just use code S?

On December 02 2012 12:06 Shiori wrote:

8 of 9 Zergs advanced from the first round. Your move.

On December 02 2012 07:44 Lunares wrote:
I feel like people are missing the point. The point is that throughout all the balance changes, metagame shifts, map changes, player changes, etc Terran has maintained it's status as the most players in the highest competitive league.

As people have stated this is most likely due to more terran players. And that's my point. The game is NOT imbalanced. All the shifts have served to change the way the game is played. But it's not like all of a sudden the game is crazy imbalanced towards zerg. Even with the patch the overall race representation hasn't changed that much. Players adapt. This is just a reminder of how slowly player representation changes, even when massive changes (e.g. patch 1.4.3) occur. Just give the game time, enjoy what you watch, and wait for HotS if you are unhappy since there just isn't enough time to change the game by then (unless you just want to imbalance it completely, that's easy).

On December 02 2012 08:05 Denzil wrote:


So because they can't get to a final for once their race is awfully underpowered?

On December 02 2012 07:40 FeyverN wrote:

10% Terran?

I've never heard about this. From what I've seen on the EU ladder (1000 point masters), there is a pretty even distribution of the races.
http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all
As you can see, it seems pretty even overall. There is a slight bias towards Zerg in Grandmasters, but who's to say thats due to imbalance?
As someone who played on NA and now plays on EU regularly, I can say that the NA ladder is really Zerg biased, but the EU ladder is surprisingly balanced in terms of race distribution. Maybe you have bad luck, I don't know.

On December 02 2012 12:34 Pimpmuckl wrote:
I sometimes wonder if by now all balance whine bullshit should get an own subforum. Seriously guys, the game might not be 100% perfect but this amount of crying is absolutely too much.

Now to stay on topic: Doesn't surprise me at all about the distribution if you look who actually plays Code S. Most of the Terrans are around since quite some time and absolute high caliber players.

On December 02 2012 07:14 PixelNite wrote:
Terran is probably the most represented race among the pros in Korea, and also a lot of those terrans are just top players. Not sure if this is relevant.

On December 02 2012 12:24 HeeroFX wrote:



All of these do show evidence that zergs are winning a lot of big tournaments and stuff.

On December 02 2012 13:12 uNhoLeee wrote:
all you have to do is watch a game and see how many expansions are lost / denied, workers killed, structures destroyed - and to see one particular race still win the game without any huge mistakes given by the opponent.

(also the fact that mvp hasn't won every game is proof that the game is imbalanced)

win rates and stats don't signify much.you can draw a limited conclusion from it. but if a player whom is 70% better, has only a win rate of 50%. That's fair, because the win-rates are even?......lol

On December 02 2012 13:12 uNhoLeee wrote:
all you have to do is watch a game and see how many expansions are lost / denied, workers killed, structures destroyed - and to see one particular race still win the game without any huge mistakes given by the opponent.

(also the fact that mvp hasn't won every game is proof that the game is imbalanced)

win rates and stats don't signify much.you can draw a limited conclusion from it. but if a player whom is 70% better, has only a win rate of 50%. That's fair, because the win-rates are even?......lol

On December 02 2012 13:25 doffe wrote:
I think we should focus less on who is winning were and what race is winning more and on why it is happening. I think everyone, including myself feel that the infestor needs some work. Imbalance or not its a bad unit.. or rather fungal is a bad ability. It requires some skill to use but its way to unforgiving to get caught in.

I cant for my life understand why blizzard doesnt just try a small change here and there. I dont think they should do anything drastic in WoL.. save that for HoTS BUT tweak the numbers a bit here and there. say fungals does 10-20% less damage. Say it stuns for 3s instead of 4, say it costs 100energy. Its pretty obvious its a bit to good as of now so why not just try and nerf it a bit.

Then to clarify, if one unit is a bit to good doesnt make an entire race OP. The game is alot more complex then this. But now Z winratios has been pretty damn high for a long time in the lategame so I really feel they should atleast try something.

But, there is nothing worse then unconstructive balance whine likek "zerg OP!!" etc. It helps nothing and only makes people less keen to post seriously on these forums. In all honesty, we had 2 terrans in the semis in GSL S5 so its not THAT critical even if I do think there is some unbalance.. note THINK, its not an exact science so dont act like you know shit you dont.

And yes, im a zerg.

Also, the skill level of the top players are so close that even 1 unit being OP can make a huge difference. Thors, ghosts, BF hellions were all nerfed very quickly once they were shown to be OP.

On December 02 2012 07:26 QuanticState wrote:


http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV_Global_StarCraft_II_League

you're horribly, horribly wrong

On December 02 2012 13:45 vthree wrote:


Problem is many constructive posts and threads have been made. But it seems Blizzard's response is "At the highest level, everything is balanced" and "We will look at infestors by changing the HP of infestor eggs and test this on Antiga without force cross spawns and gold mineral patches". If they are going to balance for the top level players, why aren't they using maps being played at the top level?



The unconstructive whines are basically just frustration at the situation.

Also, the skill level of the top players are so close that even 1 unit being OP can make a huge difference. Thors, ghosts, BF hellions were all nerfed very quickly once they were shown to be OP.

On December 02 2012 14:45 Aterons_toss wrote:
Facts against terran QQ-ing, i'm all up for it:

That is Code S since the beginning of the world til now.

Other interesting facts:
7 out of 17 GSL winners are terrans
22 out of 34 finalist are terrans
5 out of top 10 players as earning are terrans
The majority of major tournaments ( DH, MLG, IPL, GSL, ESL, NASL, WCS, WCG final ) have been won by terrans.

Terran has always dominated, especially in Korea and to some extent they still do but now it seems that the zergs have a fighting chance against them, as for foreign zergs... better for them.

On December 02 2012 07:26 QuanticState wrote:


http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV_Global_StarCraft_II_League

you're horribly, horribly wrong

On December 02 2012 14:45 Aterons_toss wrote:
Facts against terran QQ-ing, i'm all up for it:

That is Code S since the beginning of the world til now.

Other interesting facts:
7 out of 17 GSL winners are terrans
22 out of 34 finalist are terrans
5 out of top 10 players as earning are terrans
The majority of major tournaments ( DH, MLG, IPL, GSL, ESL, NASL, WCS, WCG final ) have been won by terrans.

Terran has always dominated, especially in Korea and to some extent they still do but now it seems that the zergs have a fighting chance against them, as for foreign zergs... better for them.

On December 02 2012 14:45 Aterons_toss wrote:
Facts against terran QQ-ing, i'm all up for it:

That is Code S since the beginning of the world til now.

Other interesting facts:
7 out of 17 GSL winners are terrans
22 out of 34 finalist are terrans
5 out of top 10 players as earning are terrans
The majority of major tournaments ( DH, MLG, IPL, GSL, ESL, NASL, WCS, WCG final ) have been won by terrans.

Terran has always dominated, especially in Korea and to some extent they still do but now it seems that the zergs have a fighting chance against them, as for foreign zergs... better for them.

On December 02 2012 16:18 blacknwhite wrote:
Don't you think that Terran is just playing incorrectly?
I mean look at Gumiho vs. Life in first game of GSTL, it really looked like that the amount of multi-tasking is needed to beat a top level Zerg.

He went marine maurauder medivacs, skipping tanks and then gradually mixing in ghosts; it looked like it caught life quite off guard especially with the amount of drops and harassment that Gumiho was able to achieve.

It feels like Terran just hasn't adapted, I'll just continue doing hellion reactor expands, although 4/6 queens clearly deflect this build; but I'll continue building hellions and waste 2-3 minutes of in-game time to build 12 hellions to be killed by queens, then complain that I can't get a third.

It feels like that ATM, just because reactor hellion expand was largely successful as an opener in 2011, doesn't mean it is now... It used to act as a contain, but can't anymore
Terrans just need to change up their opener to deal with the greedy 4-6 queens that Zerg has been doing..

On December 02 2012 15:31 ParamouR wrote:
Zerg sympathizers (players, for the most part), always point at the GSL as the evidence that the game is balanced because it has more Terran participants then Zerg. But look at the Round of 16: 8 Zerg 6 Terran 2 Protoss. Now the Ro16 at IPL 5: 10 Zerg, 3 Protoss, 3 Terran.

On December 02 2012 11:50 m0ck wrote:

When is the last time that foreign terrans had as good results against korean terrans as foreign zergs had against korean zergs this weekend?

On December 02 2012 12:29 Moka wrote:
What's the point of this thread? Saying that because Terran have been the most represented in Ro32 in GSL, all Infestor-BroodLord-Queen synergy death ball problem in the late game in PvZ and TvZ becomes irrelevant? All this intense discussion for nothing?

On December 02 2012 15:31 ParamouR wrote:


This is a really stupid analysis because it includes a period of terran dominance, after which they were nerfed heavily. To get a better view you need to look at stats since the last patch. even just stats for 2012 are a lot more acceptable.

My concern is that every major tournament outside of the GSL has been Zerg dominated in terms of participants:

IEM: 12 Zerg 9 Protoss 3 Terran.
WCS: 15 Zerg 13 Protoss 4 Terran.
IPL: 27 Zerg 21 Terran 17 Protoss

When you have this constant racial imbalance, AND zergs are having crazy high win rates (at IPL ~60%+) I think there is cause for concern.

Zerg sympathizers (players, for the most part), always point at the GSL as the evidence that the game is balanced because it has more Terran participants then Zerg. But look at the Round of 16: 8 Zerg 6 Terran 2 Protoss. Now the Ro16 at IPL 5: 10 Zerg, 3 Protoss, 3 Terran.

Zerg are currently dominant in almost every major tournament, and the only one in which they do not have the most participants is GSL. I feel that this is cause enough to question the racial balance of SC2 at the moment.

On December 02 2012 14:45 Aterons_toss wrote:
Facts against terran QQ-ing, i'm all up for it:

That is Code S since the beginning of the world til now.

Other interesting facts:
7 out of 17 GSL winners are terrans
22 out of 34 finalist are terrans
5 out of top 10 players as earning are terrans
The majority of major tournaments ( DH, MLG, IPL, GSL, ESL, NASL, WCS, WCG final ) have been won by terrans.

Terran has always dominated, especially in Korea and to some extent they still do but now it seems that the zergs have a fighting chance against them, as for foreign zergs... better for them.

On December 02 2012 20:22 GolemMadness wrote:


This fails to take into account the fact that old results don't mean so much since the game has developed a lot since then and there have been patches; nor does it include the race percentages in later rounds. The amount of terrans in the Ro32 doesn't mean so much if most of them are getting knocked out there.

On December 02 2012 20:34 Avi-Love wrote:
Honestly, and I'm sorry that this is a bit off topic, but I think that the root of almost all complaints and/or whining about racial imbalance since the release of sc1 has been people trying to find ways of justifying their losses in tournaments, on the ladder, and their own personal ranks; it applies to all races, and all matchup - at the end of the day, if two terran players make it to the top 4 of a GSL, there's no excuse for anyone to lose tvz on the ladder, even if it's "grandmaster" level - but unfortunately people have a very hard time accepting that fact, and they would rather spend their energy complaining, and creating a mental barrier for themselves getting into the awful mindset of "what's the point, I can't overcome this imbalance anyway!". It makes me feel rather morose.

On December 02 2012 20:29 Joedaddy wrote:
I always thought that the general consensus was Terran is fairly balanced at the highest level (aka: Terran is fine if you're a Code S korean). I admit I haven't been playing/following the scene as closely the last few months, but has this changed? I wonder, what the race representation looks like in other tournaments, leagues, and ladders?

On December 02 2012 20:42 vthree wrote:


This is BS. Competitive games should try to be balanced at ALL skill levels. Yes, in theory, this is not possible to achieve but it should always be the end goal. However, the priority should be at the highest levels.

Just because 2 terrans made top 4 in GSL doesn't make the game balance. If this was the case, then we need to revert back the Queen patch because DRG was still winning without it, right? I am sure all the zergs would be fine with that here.

On December 03 2012 01:07 bellsNkeys wrote:
The sample size of only Code S players or even all the top players in general is too small to determine balance off of. It's really not far fetched to say Terran isn't OP even if 20 of the 32 Code S players play T every season because 32 is a VERY small sample size and the format of the GSL makes it difficult for new players to get into. Over the course of all SC2 players, skill is pretty evenly distributed and balance changes should be made according to that theory.

On January 11 2013 20:52 IMPrime wrote:
terran allows for the most multitasking

the koreans are up to this multitasking, everyone else isn't.

thus terran in korea dominates, while it's too hard for anyone outside of korea

On December 02 2012 20:38 Joedaddy wrote:


I'm super sleepy, but I counted 47 Terrans in the top 217* on the EU ladder according to sc2ranks. ~21.6% T

On January 11 2013 21:02 Qwerty85 wrote:
1. terran is the most played race among top Koreans so terran was always most represented.
2. it is logical to assume that since every season had more terrans, terrans would win more gsl's
3. blizzard looks at numbers and sees too many terrans winning gsl championships so they nerf regularly
4. terran is still the most played race in gsl but has worst chances of winning a championship because blizzard balances around how many times did certain race win a championship but not around all races having equal chances to win

On January 11 2013 21:08 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:


you know this b/c you're privy to blizzards balance teams discussions right? don't talk like you know what blizzard is thinking, this sort of thing annoys me. Unless you're a part of the blizzard team (which you're not...and if you are why the hell would you post here about something like this?) you don't know.

Adjusted ratings: (...) Please note that the way we do this calculation factors out player skill.

That’s good for us because, while we like seeing very solid results at the pro level, we are also always working towards a balanced experience across all skill levels.

On January 11 2013 21:50 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:
I seem to remember dustin browder has stated in numerous interviews that they're trying to balance the game for all levels of play, taking in information (win percentages mainly) from all levels of play, and that it would be stupid and unfair to balance based on only the pro scene and their tournaments

David Kim has ALSO said this when he talked about balance in this post on battle.net's forums.

On January 11 2013 21:21 Qwerty85 wrote:
Even in a perfectly balanced game, if there is like 14 terrans in a tournament and 9 zergs in a tournament, statistically, terran as a race should have higher chances of winning 1st place.

Now we see exact opposite. Even though terrans are still most represented (they get eliminated in code S then get back through code A and Up&down), they have lowest chances of winning 1st place in gsl.

On January 11 2013 22:06 Hider wrote:
Well this is easily explained by the fact that terran is the most played race (in every single region). So rather one should ask why terran isn't overrepresented in Europe and North America as well.

On January 11 2013 22:02 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:


and yet, source
There have been 8 Terran first place, 8 Zerg first place, and 3 protoss first place

in 1st and 2nd places there've been 17 terrans, 13 zergs, and 8 protoss.

seems to me they had the highest chances of winning 1st place in GSL, since in the finals there's been 4 more terrans than zergs, and 9 more terrans than protoss

On January 11 2013 22:13 vthree wrote:


Remember that GSL seasons were shorter in 2011. So if Zerg dominated for 4 months in 2012, they would only have 2 GSLs while Terran dominating in 2011 would have 4.

On January 11 2013 22:02 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:


and yet, source
There have been 8 Terran first place, 8 Zerg first place, and 3 protoss first place

in 1st and 2nd places there've been 17 terrans, 13 zergs, and 8 protoss.

seems to me they had the highest chances of winning 1st place in GSL, since in the finals there's been 4 more terrans than zergs, and 9 more terrans than protoss

On December 02 2012 07:22 Lunares wrote:


Last patch was may 2012. That's only 7 months ago, the metagame has started to shift around but it still hasn't settled. Terran never used to have to really think about how to beat BL/Infestor since they would win so often without getting there. I'm just trying to point out how slow balance/metagame changes and that we really should not be crying Zerg OP or trying to do much before HotS. All the effort for balance (especially game changes to make the matchups less stale) should be focused there.

On January 11 2013 21:50 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:
I seem to remember dustin browder has stated in numerous interviews that they're trying to balance the game for all levels of play, taking in information (win percentages mainly) from all levels of play, and that it would be stupid and unfair to balance based on only the pro scene and their tournaments

David Kim has ALSO said this when he talked about balance in this post on battle.net's forums.

On January 11 2013 23:05 Elp wrote:

This post says it all. The top 32 race representation does not say anything about balance because it does not factor out player skill. Furthermore, even IF it says something about balance (it doesn't), it would only be relevant to highest level of play. So any conclusions that can be drawn from it mean absolutely nothing for the 99.999% of us who do not play at that level.

On January 11 2013 23:05 Elp wrote:

This post says it all. The top 32 race representation does not say anything about balance because it does not factor out player skill. Furthermore, even IF it says something about balance (it doesn't), it would only be relevant to highest level of play. So any conclusions that can be drawn from it mean absolutely nothing for the 99.999% of us who do not play at that level.

On December 02 2012 07:35 Talack wrote:
I love how people try to bring up 1-2 year old statistics in order to argue a point about a constantly evolving game.

"Hey guys? Did you hear? The maps are too small, these statistics from GSL season 1 prove it"

On January 11 2013 22:02 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:


and yet, source
There have been 8 Terran first place, 8 Zerg first place, and 3 protoss first place

in 1st and 2nd places there've been 17 terrans, 13 zergs, and 8 protoss.

seems to me they had the highest chances of winning 1st place in GSL, since in the finals there's been 4 more terrans than zergs, and 9 more terrans than protoss

On December 02 2012 07:19 ChillPhiju wrote:
It sounds alot like: "Terrans had success and were stronger than other races so now another race is allowed to be imbalanced if so be"
And assuming you wanted to say this please don't argue like that.
Or would you like to be enslaved because we enslaved black people just because as a "revenge" they are allowed to. (I am sorry for making such a drastic comparison, but I hope everyone gets it for once and for all)

And on the other hand if Terrans were able to sustain such a amount of them in the GSL till now you shouldn't say they change the Meta because this indicates the complete opposite: They have been changing the Meta etc and it is not working anymore (Which means a buff is needed)

All in all I don't want to say any of this is true(Just wanted to point out some flaws in your argumentation which you got IMO) but Blizzard should let the possibility of buffing open.

On January 12 2013 00:09 AlexanderDebois wrote:
I like how this post ignores everything past the RO32. Simply because there are a vast number of top Terran's in Korea the race will always have strong representation at the start of tournaments, however, the RO16 onward results for Terran are appalling bad in many recent seasons.

On January 11 2013 23:09 exog wrote:
Haha so fun to se the terrans squirming trying to undermine the objective numbers to support their view... Cheers with your tears.

On December 02 2012 07:44 Lunares wrote:
Just give the game time, enjoy what you watch, and wait for HotS if you are unhappy since there just isn't enough time to change the game by then (unless you just want to imbalance it completely, that's easy).

On January 11 2013 22:35 bbm wrote:
If balance is 50/50/50 ie perfectly balanced, and players are evenly skilled, in that, every match is decided with a coin flip, the rest of the world is 33%33%33% races (in that when someone drops out of tourney their replacement is random race), and you start off with 80% terrans, regardless of how many seasons you simulate you'll end up with ~80% terrans left.


I thinjk.

if someone could correct me if i'm wrong i'd be happy to retract this but i'm pretty sure that's the case based on my simple head-maths.

On January 11 2013 22:02 Ryuhou)aS( wrote:


and yet, source
There have been 8 Terran first place, 8 Zerg first place, and 3 protoss first place

in 1st and 2nd places there've been 17 terrans, 13 zergs, and 8 protoss.

seems to me they had the highest chances of winning 1st place in GSL, since in the finals there's been 4 more terrans than zergs, and 9 more terrans than protoss

On January 12 2013 02:00 totauksz wrote:


it's quite obvious that you know nothing about statistics, i don't even know what you want to show with those numbers. you trying to imply that the % number of medals is in direct connection with racial balance? lol

a good statistical sample is huge, not 19 medals, and the individual samples have to represent the whole perfectly. in what fucking world does MVP- who by the way is nicknamed Game Genie Terran and is probably more skilled than the others, who has a significant % of the medals himself alone- represent the rest of the terrans? with this nonsense you're implying the fact that MVP won 5 medals means that terran is overpowered overall? lol

to enlighten you, if the distribution of z/p/t wins would be absolutely and totally random,(which it isn't even slightly, since it's directly connected to INDIVIUAL PLAYER SKILL, which makes any kind of statistics of sc2 borderline useless in a mathematical sense btw), even then the racial representation wouldn't ever be 33/33/33% with such a small number as the number of sc2 medals. you would need thousands and thousands of medals to make it start to be perfectly even.

in truth the overall winrates are calculated after analyzing thousands of game results, so they are somewhat correlated to racial balance. somewhat. the correlation can never be perfect with individual player skill in the equation. there are people who are better at mathematics than the rest, there are people who are better at learning piano than the rest, and there are players who are better than the rest even if the race they play is at a bad spot. to make the statistics mean even less, the metagame is constantly shifting and there are sometimes bugs/map flaws etc that can be abused that have nothing to do with racial balance. statistics like that can't be used with MVPs and MCs and Lifes who are obviously more skilled than the rest and grab much more championships even if their race is not in a good spot at the moment.

so please don't ever try to use numbers like that to prove anything because you're making educated people's brain hurt. thanks

On January 12 2013 02:26 Let it Raine wrote:
oh stats, how useless you are and have always been.

how long till people realize that there's no sense using stats in regards to balance, since it says NOTHING USEFUL.

The only meaningful balance talk is 100% strategy related and done by people who actually understand the game, not just watch or copy builds.

On January 12 2013 02:15 Markwerf wrote:


don't be such an ass though to someone when you are obviously not good in statistics either.
Low sample sizes have low power but that doesn't mean they can't be indicative.. It also depends on the deviation from the null hypothesis.. Besides individual player skill can be corrected for..

On January 12 2013 04:47 Jinsho wrote:
Yes, because more people play Terran.

CASE CLOSED

On January 11 2013 23:09 exog wrote:
Haha so fun to se the terrans squirming trying to undermine the objective numbers to support their view... Cheers with your tears.

On January 12 2013 04:47 Jinsho wrote:
Yes, because more people play Terran.

CASE CLOSED

On January 12 2013 05:10 Huragius wrote:
Yep. It prooves that terran is OP despite them winning nothing and zergs dominating the sc2 scene. Legit.

On January 12 2013 05:12 D_K_night wrote:
Specifically with regards to the statistics talk - there's a common thing we're seeing here. "the sample size is too small" - we've been seeing this statement made for the past few years now, whether it be true or false(in the context used).

If we really can't go by the stats presented here - there's no true authority to state where and when the sample size would be deemed "large enough" without accusations of cherry-picking the data to suit a dark agenda.

The data can be interpreted in just about any way possible. Let's look at this current GSL season, where T and Z both have healthy representation, with some new and old faces representing each sides. We have P with the lowest representation.

No matter what happens this season - people will come to conclusions which line up against what they already pre-condition themselves to believe, which leads to angry balance talk. If we end up with a PvP finals...what does that mean?

On January 12 2013 05:12 DiMano wrote:

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments_Medalists/Race
won 36 times
won 28 times
won 25 times
Stop crying and l2p.

On January 12 2013 05:36 mrRoflpwn wrote:


I would say Terran was the strongest race early on only because of the small maps...

On January 12 2013 05:36 mrRoflpwn wrote:


I would say Terran was the strongest race early on only because of the small maps...

On January 12 2013 05:25 Greenei wrote:


hahahahahahaa. are you seriously quoting 2 year old data right now? :D:D:D

On January 12 2013 05:45 Huragius wrote:


Well I think he is right. I guess I should just learn how to play, because Terrans were doing pretty good in WoL Beta. Thanks man.

On January 12 2013 05:46 DiMano wrote:

Watch Code A and Up and Down and l2p bro.

On January 12 2013 05:47 Huragius wrote:


Ok bro. You found one tournament (which is GSL) and you try to manipulate it's statistics as much as possible to prove your false statements.Yay. Bro.

On January 12 2013 05:49 DiMano wrote:

No man I watch every game of GSL and SPL and I see that terrans have good results.

On January 12 2013 05:56 Huragius wrote:


Cool. How about other tournaments ?

On January 12 2013 06:01 IshinShishi wrote:
gsl you say? refer to my signature.
International tournaments you say?Refer to tlpd .

GSL has had lots of terrans for various reasons, but not anything even slightly close to what the sneaky op is trying to imply.

On January 12 2013 06:29 MyNameIsAlex wrote:


Set win ratio for T in TvZ: 46.7%... Not bad at all.

On January 12 2013 06:30 zhurai wrote:

Yeah. it's near 50%!

if you round up a lot!

On January 12 2013 06:28 RaMBO2 wrote:
scarlett 3hatch before pool, ryung 11/11 rax... gets the floor wiped with himself when it mattered. my only question is... who was scarlett prior to the queen buff? who was ryung? one was code s level, the other...? not so much

On January 12 2013 05:59 -Archangel- wrote:

Other tournaments have weaker player competition and are worth less. If you were not trying to falsely prove your point you would remember that during the time Toss were doing "bad" they were only doing bad in GSL but were more then competitive in these other tournaments but that didn't prevent every toss out there from screaming murder.

And anyone claiming Terran are doing bad in GSL is crazy. Winning GSL does not determine balance, only determines which player plays best at that moment. Top 32 players on the other hand (ro32) does say well about racial balance (or top 64 or even top 100.

On January 12 2013 06:33 MyNameIsAlex wrote:


Up until +-5% is considered "balanced" since a metagame shift can push it both sides. Thing is Ts have not created a new strat except MVP who stopped playing due to his wrists.

TvP is 52%... Should P cry?