HotS Progame Mapstats

On February 24 2013 23:42 Kevoras wrote:
I do think Protoss got the short stick in terms of designs, but Zerg draw the short one on strength.

I was looking forward to seeing the Ultra even better. but their upgrade was removed.

On February 24 2013 23:57 JOJOsc2news wrote:
This data is not very useful. The sample size was already mentioned.
Also, just remember some of the MLG showdowns. Some of them were terrible in the way, that one player had played quite a bit of HotS before while the other seemed to have not played any games in HotS at all yet (because they were busy with ongoing WoL tournaments).

I am also not sure why the data is called "mapstats." In the presentation of the data, you chose to completely disregard maps.

On February 24 2013 23:57 JOJOsc2news wrote:
This data is not very useful. The sample size was already mentioned.
Also, just remember some of the MLG showdowns. Some of them were terrible in the way that one player had played quite a bit of HotS before while the other seemed to have not played any games in HotS at all yet (because they were busy with ongoing WoL tournaments).

I am also not sure why the data is called "mapstats." In the presentation of the data, you chose to completely disregard maps.

What is it you would like to discuss about the data you present?!

On February 24 2013 23:59 Grapefruit wrote:


I called it mapstats because it's the winrate per maps played.

On February 25 2013 00:00 Tppz! wrote:


thanks for repeating my post.

@grapefruit:
but thats not the normal "mapstats".
its winrate.

mapstats is about the stats of maps. thats why it is called mapstats

On February 24 2013 23:48 bananafone wrote:
hardly relevant considering the small samplesize. when you get 1000 games you can start talking about tendencies. 150 games however is nothing.

On February 25 2013 00:20 FeyFey wrote:
Was expecting map stats and not tournament winrates. Not that one or the other is saying alot. There are still alot of punching bags in the tournament, that don't have enough HotS experience and especially Zergies as they often went the farthest in WoL tournaments. They hand out alot of free wins. Terrans and Toss can easily learn a do or die strat and get some wins even if they have no idea about HotS. But Zerg needs to learn how to stop all of them. They should be less hesitant to do their own ones, since they are really powerful against the new Terran standard openers.

Apart from that Zergs with HotS experience are collecting a ton of free wins from Terrans and don't seem to have alot of problems against experienced Terrans. Though Terrans usually don't go for the do or die strategies that people deem almost unstoppable.

Guess in 2 month data from tournaments will start to show more, right now its just "jep this race has the hardest time to adapt".

On February 25 2013 00:45 wammyz wrote:

This is the most in-cohesive post I have ever read. I don't understand what you are trying to say.

On February 25 2013 00:53 Tppz! wrote:


Well I understand everything easily (even at the first read). What exactly is your problem?

On February 25 2013 01:06 Loxley wrote:
This topic has done nothing than discuss the topic itself instead of the content.

On February 25 2013 00:19 Gimpb wrote:


The sample size isn't so small that it can be discounted. It's borderline significant based on standard statistical methods. For example, let's say you wanted to know the chance that the true TvZ win probability is >60%.
pi = .6
standard error = .0722
Z-obs = 1.329
prob value = 90.8%

Read: There is a 90.8% chance that the true TvZ win percentage is greater than 60%

Personally, I see the rapid development of strategies as a much bigger detractor than the sample size.

This topic has discussed how its content is flawed therefore not worth taking seriously. It begins with the fact that the author himself didn't even understand the difference between winrates and maprates, after that you see that the sample size is way to small and to top it off, these games where played on old patches and with strategy's that are no longer viable.

What is it that you want to discuss again?

On February 25 2013 01:50 Supah wrote:
The old 1 Rax doesn't work anymore, but for the most part, standard Toss translates OK and now the Terran needs to worry about varied all ins, while they themselves don't have anything very new to pressure the Toss early game.

On February 25 2013 01:49 BronzeKnee wrote:


Exactly, people see "small" sample sizes and assume they are flawed, but unless your sample size is just a few games, statistics can be very revealing, as anyone who has studied statistics will know. 150 games is more than enough.

But as you said the rapid development of strategies combined with balance changes by Blizzard and the time (or lack thereof) that each player has spent with HOTS is likely what is causing the statistics to be unstable.

With time, we'll see what happens, but after looking at the buffs and nerfs each race received, I would be shocked if Zerg wasn't the weakest after some time, assuming Blizzard makes no balance changes. While many of their units received buffs, the Infestor carried Zerg and I don't think these buffs make up for the nerf that the Infestor received.

I am also struggling vs Terran as a Protoss, I am apparently missing something...

On February 25 2013 01:57 JDub wrote:

Actually, anyone who has studied statistics would know that the individual samples would need to be completely randomly selected to draw conclusions based upon them. Unfortunately, that is not the case here.

On February 25 2013 02:02 BronzeKnee wrote:


That was certainly not my experience when I did psychological testing in college, you have to control variables to make a good assessment, and thus it can't be completely random. Maybe if you are testing water in a river or something sure, you'd want random samples... but in this case you can only use what you have.

In other words, if you wanted to find out whether college aged males had better reflexes than high school aged males, you control the variables of age and sex. There would be be no point to testing females, or post college or pre-high school males. The same can be said here, we are controlling for high level play by looking at tournaments.

Making assessments from completely random HOTS games is terrible idea if that is what you are suggesting. The winrates in the lower leagues probably look a lot different, but as players get better and learn new skills, they get into the higher leagues and begin to experience issues that higher level players have. Also, higher level players have solved many of the issues that player experience in lower leagues.

Thus we should control the variable of skill as much as possible, by only looking at tournaments and high level play.

Certainly, if there were more tournaments out there they should be included, but this is fine for what it is.

On February 25 2013 01:57 MilesTeg wrote:
The stats aren't perfect obviously, but since they confirm what I suspected (ZvP isn't as bad as people say, ZvT is much more problematic) I'll just assume they are :p

On February 25 2013 02:02 BronzeKnee wrote:


That was certainly not my experience when I did psychological testing in college, you have to control variables to make a good assessment, and thus it can't be completely random. Maybe if you are testing water in a river or something sure, you'd want random samples... but in this case you can only use what you have.

In other words, if you wanted to find out whether college aged males had better reflexes than high school aged males, you control the variables of age and sex. There would be be no point to testing females, or post college or pre-high school males. The same can be said here, we are controlling for high level play by looking at tournaments.

Making assessments from completely random HOTS games is terrible idea if that is what you are suggesting. The winrates in the lower leagues probably look a lot different, but as players get better and learn new skills, they get into the higher leagues and begin to experience issues that higher level players have. Also, higher level players have solved many of the issues that player experience in lower leagues.

Thus we should control the variable of skill as much as possible, by only looking at tournaments and high level play.

Certainly, if there were more tournaments out there they should be included, but this is fine for what it is.