|
A thread was created with a list of all the known diamond league players. http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/index.php
I decided to go through each of the top 100 players and see what races they are. Here are my findings.
Protoss: 38
Terran: 36
Zerg: 22
Random: 4
Edit: I quickly went through the next 100. so here is a pool of the top 200 players.
Protoss: 75
Terran: 68
Zerg: 47
Random: 10
Went through the data real quick with excel, here's the numbers as of July 18th, 2010 1PM PDT
1120 Protoss
921 Terran
891 Zerg
440 Random
**Thanks to Primadog
http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/krranks.php
Thanks for the link, jokah, and thanks to martinni for updating the list.
Of the 3635 players in asia diamond division 1v1.
* 1244 are protoss
* 1187 are terran
* 750 are zerg
* 454 are random
So
* 34.22% are protoss
* 32.65% are terran
* 20.63% are zerg
* 12.49% are random
|
Someone should put up the EU top 100 too!
And Asia.
|
This proves that random is overpowered
|
I'm loving all the datamining going on.
I hope to see a lot more soon 
(Also, a nod to, and inb4, the low Zerg count! I would also love to see the stats for EU/Asia as well to see if the ratios are similar)
|
Thanks for this. Maybe the OP threads will simmer down now. Although yeah, Random is OP. Lol. :p
|
haha and terran is so overpowered!!! riiiiight lol :D
|
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss?
|
On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss?
Once you play a lot of games that stops happening.
|
On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss?
Uh what.
Maybe if you're in bronze. I'm getting about even.
|
On July 17 2010 09:25 3clipse wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss? Uh what. Maybe if you're in bronze. I'm getting about even.
what league? I'm getting +12 / -14..? is that just me lol? and I guess a +2 because of bonus pool
|
On July 17 2010 09:25 3clipse wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss? Uh what. Maybe if you're in bronze. I'm getting about even.
yea really. wtf is that guy talking about lol. maybe with a shitload of bonus pool.
Im nearing 600 rating and almost always losses take more than wins give . but thats how it should be, obviously.
|
Loss for me is -12 and a win is +10
|
i also thought that terran is imbalanced. but idk, maybe the 4 gate has to do with a lot of these.
|
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races
|
Protoss all-ins and early aggression account for a lot of the protoss success up to mid level diamond, really.
|
Lol oh yeah, rank 200 and I havent played a game since the third day of beta. Protoss is too easy, Most games come down (ZvP) either a all in 4gate, or a gateway forgebuild into a hard to stop 2base collosus. It's so easy to do either of these builds, and it's truly really hard for a zerg to come out ahead.. Dealing with collosus with roach hydra is hard, and if you make 5 too many drones, you lose to a good timing push. It's too demanding in comparison to the protoss strategy. Roaces need a buff against collossi. Hydras are completely useless by any sort of collosus micro.
|
16986 Posts
On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races
I'd actually argue that Terran is more straight-forward than Protoss is, especially in their macro mechanic.
|
On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races
Why is zerg going to " OP the crap out of all the other races"
I do not think Zerg is considered overpowered at all. Please explain what you mean
|
On July 17 2010 09:43 Empyrean wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I'd actually argue that Terran is more straight-forward than Protoss is, especially in their macro mechanic.
Terran is straight forward macro because they can build anything. so just do 1/1/1. Protoss has to commit to something
|
On July 17 2010 09:44 FatkiddsLag wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:43 Empyrean wrote:On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I'd actually argue that Terran is more straight-forward than Protoss is, especially in their macro mechanic. Terran is straight forward macro because they can build anything. so just do 1/1/1. Protoss has to commit to something
Protoss can chronoboost probes, put gates anywhere, not build units in battles, and then boom, 13 zealots warping in... I believe protoss is by far easier to macro than terran.
Also cannons, although not commonly used, easier to do than bunkers imo,
|
i agree with empyrean here
|
i don't think top 100 is as important as win %
i'd like to see how that plays out by top 100 for each race. i bet it would be a little closer.
|
On July 17 2010 09:47 superman. wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:44 FatkiddsLag wrote:On July 17 2010 09:43 Empyrean wrote:On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I'd actually argue that Terran is more straight-forward than Protoss is, especially in their macro mechanic. Terran is straight forward macro because they can build anything. so just do 1/1/1. Protoss has to commit to something Protoss can chronoboost probes, put gates anywhere, not build units in battles, and then boom, 13 zealots warping in... I believe protoss is by far easier to macro than terran. Also cannons, although not commonly used, easier to do than bunkers imo,
no way are cannons easier than bunkers. 100% return is insane. what happens when you place cannons and push out. you have 150 + 150 x cannon# sitting worthless in your base.
|
On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss?
yeah sure thats why you see guys with 100-100 stats with half the points of guys with 20 games
|
No win % isnt nearly as important, because everyone in diamond has around 60%, they constantly play gold level players, buffing the win rate. The race distribution in the highest level should be even, but it isnt, as it stands, its far too easy for a protoss to get into diamond and win against higher level zergs with 4gate, and it's far too easy for a terran to mnm stim push his way to diamond also.
|
|
|
Considering the fact that diamond level players learn the races the fastest, is it safe to say that there's a reason why zerg is underrepresented? Could it be that at diamond level zerg is considered to weak compared to terran/protoss?
|
On July 17 2010 09:44 TheKing. wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races Why is zerg going to " OP the crap out of all the other races" I do not think Zerg is considered overpowered at all. Please explain what you mean
I think he means something like this:
As P, your standard units are zealot/stalker/sentry + a few higher tier units
As T, its either marine/maurader/medivac + etc or hellion/tank/thor + etc
As Z, you don't have anything like that so zergs have to try out and experiment with different unit comps.
In other words, it's not as "straight-forward" as the other two races so it takes a while longer to figure things out.
|
On July 17 2010 09:53 ohN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:44 TheKing. wrote:On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races Why is zerg going to " OP the crap out of all the other races" I do not think Zerg is considered overpowered at all. Please explain what you mean I think he means something like this: As P, your standard units are zealot/stalker/sentry + a few higher tier units As T, its either marine/maurader/medivac + etc or hellion/tank/thor + etc As Z, you don't have anything like that so zergs have to try out and experiment with different unit comps. In other words, it's not as "straight-forward" as the other two races so it takes a while longer to figure things out.
Wow, sure is simplifying races here. Don't try to make it out as if making roach hydra or mutaling/bling requires some sort of strategic genius. I know zerg differs in alot of ways from the other two races, but zerg gets glorified way too much on TL.
|
On July 17 2010 09:53 Morphs wrote:
Considering the fact that diamond level players learn the races the fastest, is it safe to say that there's a reason why zerg is underrepresented? Could it be that at diamond level zerg is considered to weak compared to terran/protoss?
considering the fact you get placed into gold after going 5-0 to follow with a 90% win ratio and over 30 games you still remain in gold and people with the same amount with 60% win ratio make it into platinum i have to say your premise is a little wrong :[
|
I do not understand how anyone could claim that terran macro is more straightforward than protoss...
warpgates? no scv building? dont have to return to base to mule.... no annoying addons messing up ctrlgroups.
Not saying P is OP, that is another debate.
|
Dear god I hope you didn't do that manually, I'm planning on fetching the race soon but right now i'm focusing on making the ladder update automatically...
|
Congrats to dayvie for crushing his way into #21 with random race and only 43 games played. That's awesome. I was skeptical back when they released the alpha battle reports how well David Kim would do versus the top players, and it's great to see he's doing just fantastic.
|
On July 17 2010 09:43 Empyrean wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I'd actually argue that Terran is more straight-forward than Protoss is, especially in their macro mechanic.
Protoss macro mechanic isn't exactly complicated. It's the kid in the candy shop mentality "I want this and this and this" You just put it on what you want faster. Sure there's a lot of subtle chrono boost timings at high level play but at diamond level you just chrono boost what you want to get out faster more or less.
And I think its easiest to win with protoss if you just play 1 base style, which is the easiest style to play because you have the initiative so its up to the other players to learn to defend.
Definitely having the easiest time with protoss right now of the 3. Zerg proving the most troublesome. (As my BW, and "best" race, as well)
|
On July 17 2010 09:57 gillon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:53 ohN wrote:On July 17 2010 09:44 TheKing. wrote:On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races Why is zerg going to " OP the crap out of all the other races" I do not think Zerg is considered overpowered at all. Please explain what you mean I think he means something like this: As P, your standard units are zealot/stalker/sentry + a few higher tier units As T, its either marine/maurader/medivac + etc or hellion/tank/thor + etc As Z, you don't have anything like that so zergs have to try out and experiment with different unit comps. In other words, it's not as "straight-forward" as the other two races so it takes a while longer to figure things out. Wow, sure is simplifying races here. Don't try to make it out as if making roach hydra or mutaling/bling requires some sort of strategic genius. I know zerg differs in alot of ways from the other two races, but zerg gets glorified way too much on TL.
Good thing neither of those unit compositions will beat a strong diamond player except in the case of muta/bling vs Bio Terran.
|
On July 17 2010 09:14 FatkiddsLag wrote:A thread was created with a list of all the known diamond league players. http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/index.phpI decided to go through each of the top 100 players and see what races they are. Here are my findings. Protoss: 38 Terran: 36 Zerg: 22 Random: 4 Also, I found these surprising. I'll soon get a bigger pool of maybe the top 1000. Edit: I quickly went through the next 100. so here is a pool of the top 200 players. Protoss: 75 Terran: 68 Zerg: 47 Random: 10 this is boring so im going to take a break. 
This just prooves that zerg are underpowered.
|
As a random player, I'm amused by these stats. In 2v2s, I find it easy to barrel roll over any protoss in the early going.
On July 17 2010 09:53 Morphs wrote:
Considering the fact that diamond level players learn the races the fastest, is it safe to say that there's a reason why zerg is underrepresented? Could it be that at diamond level zerg is considered to weak compared to terran/protoss?
Over on Asia the roles are a bit reversed still. Lots of the top guys are playing zerg.
|
How is zerg doing on the other servers atm? I recall them being the strongest on the Asian servers and that's with basically no changes to the balance of the three.
|
I'm not surprised. Lots of newer players tend to follow with the "cool" alien race with all the neat tech stuff, so Protoss is quite popular both in BW and SC2. Then, lots of people are familiar with their own race (obviously) and possibly enjoy the straightforward feel to the mechanics. Then there's the Zerg, which is not so straightforward and thus yields less popularity.
|
On July 17 2010 10:42 DarthLeader wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:14 FatkiddsLag wrote:A thread was created with a list of all the known diamond league players. http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/index.phpI decided to go through each of the top 100 players and see what races they are. Here are my findings. Protoss: 38 Terran: 36 Zerg: 22 Random: 4 Also, I found these surprising. I'll soon get a bigger pool of maybe the top 1000. Edit: I quickly went through the next 100. so here is a pool of the top 200 players. Protoss: 75 Terran: 68 Zerg: 47 Random: 10 this is boring so im going to take a break. This just prooves that zerg are underpowered.
i believe in asia, zerg is more represented in the top than either terran or protoss.
|
These numbers are fun to throw around, but just know that they mean nothing, as it is irrelevant to actual game balance. Statistics tells us not to be so keen to say that "well, terran is fine cause its not played as much as protoss".
Its kind of like hunters in s8 of WoW, they were overpowered but no one played them. (sorry for non wow players, basically hunters were awesome but no one rolled one cause they were boring).
|
actually according to the blizzard executives that were on the best buy live chat, terran is the most played race
|
it's still beta, there are still tons of changes/strats not yet found out, so these numbers aren't really important. Not to mention the matching system is wierd... ( on a 14 win streak in diamond with like a 450 rating and i match a silver league player with a 50% record and hes slightly favored? and his rating was lower aswell) Then there is the bonus pool which completely changes things even more... atleast there isnt decay, like in wc3 where you had to play 10 games a week or you lose exp
|
I quickly parsed the csv file at starcraftrankings (which says that it has 98%+ of the players in US/EU Silver+ and above) and found that there are 1062 Protoss, 889 Terran, 834 Zerg, and 425 Random players, for anyone who's interested.
|
odd that in both of those polls that the order is protoss, terran, zerg, random.....
for starcraft 3 do you think there will be 4 races?????? lol
|
That the Terran is the most played race combined with the fact that it is still not no1 on the list should be some indication that Terran is not overpowered. That said, not sure how many in the top 100 chooses race based on how powerfull they are.
Edit: nm. Read invasmani's post above. Apparently protoss is the most played race.
|
everyone says that asian zergs are so good id really like to see this kind of data from the asian ladder so we can get some concrete evidense as to why or why not
|
this is no basis to form an opinion on whether a race is OP or not....
what it shows is probably more like; how fun is the race to play in terms of, do you feel like you have many options to vary your gameplay
and in this regard zerg DOES do the worst no questions asked...
|
On July 17 2010 10:01 professorjoak wrote:
Congrats to dayvie for crushing his way into #21 with random race and only 43 games played. That's awesome. I was skeptical back when they released the alpha battle reports how well David Kim would do versus the top players, and it's great to see he's doing just fantastic.
I played him on the ladder in a zvz, he did a nydus roach queen push, it was cool, i had never seen it before
|
On July 17 2010 10:01 arnold(soTa) wrote:
I do not understand how anyone could claim that terran macro is more straightforward than protoss...
warpgates? no scv building? dont have to return to base to mule.... no annoying addons messing up ctrlgroups.
Not saying P is OP, that is another debate.
But you have to return to base to Chronoboost and most of the time to warp in more units (and if u got proxy Pylons u have to return to them). Doing rallypoints to the front and just klick your buildings and produce something seems more straight forward to me than warpgating to a Pylon somewhere on the map.
|
On July 18 2010 01:13 invasmani wrote:
I quickly parsed the csv file at starcraftrankings (which says that it has 98%+ of the players in US/EU Silver+ and above) and found that there are 1062 Protoss, 889 Terran, 834 Zerg, and 425 Random players, for anyone who's interested.
these numbers cant be right because there are over 3500 players in the known diamond leagues alone.
|
|
|
On July 17 2010 09:47 superman. wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:44 FatkiddsLag wrote:On July 17 2010 09:43 Empyrean wrote:On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I'd actually argue that Terran is more straight-forward than Protoss is, especially in their macro mechanic. Terran is straight forward macro because they can build anything. so just do 1/1/1. Protoss has to commit to something Protoss can chronoboost probes, put gates anywhere, not build units in battles, and then boom, 13 zealots warping in... I believe protoss is by far easier to macro than terran.
Sure, you can do that, but if you do then you'll still be 1 production cycle behind than if you had macroed in battle. It's exactly the same as terran macro except the wait time is after production instead of before it. They're a lot more similar than you might think.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
recently made the switch from protoss to terran and i find the mechanics a lot more satisfying to play. switching tech is more forgiving then protoss and there is a lot of versatiliy. plus the passive/active-harass playstyle suits me better.
imho zerg is the hardest race to master since its a reactionary race where it rewards you for the on the spot thinking. its mechanics are quite foreign compared to the other races and you have so much to focus on like spawn larvae, spreading creep, overlord positioning and when to macro/build army. i dont think i'll ever fully grasp playing it.
|
Suprised that there are only 10 randoms in 200 ( and i am one of them ^^ actually the third one) and i am not suprised that there are so little zergs. It's actually really hard to play it versus terran and protoss. What's more some people might be bored by ling/bane in ZvZ even if, what i can say from the experience, is not the only option!
Playing zerg i find it quite hard to play vs Protoss, and lately it's not that hard against terran after u find some kind of strategic build.
Right now i find Terran a little bit 'too able' to switch between different paths of tech.
From tank you can go into cloak banshee in less than 2 minutes then turn into mass viking and MMM... that's quite funny.
|
On July 18 2010 01:39 FatkiddsLag wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 01:13 invasmani wrote:
I quickly parsed the csv file at starcraftrankings (which says that it has 98%+ of the players in US/EU Silver+ and above) and found that there are 1062 Protoss, 889 Terran, 834 Zerg, and 425 Random players, for anyone who's interested. these numbers cant be right because there are over 3500 players in the known diamond leagues alone.
You're right, it appears the file I was using was incomplete. My mistake.
|
The maps are dreadful.
No, the maps are fucking dreadful.
These stats are completely pointless without map stats. As soon as Blizzard lets the community off its leash the maps will be bigger, more defensive and cheese will become more difficult.
Once that happens we'll see how good the balance is.
|
On July 18 2010 01:55 Klive5ive wrote:
The maps are dreadful.
No, the maps are fucking dreadful.
These stats are completely pointless without map stats. As soon as Blizzard lets the community off its leash the maps will be bigger, more defensive and cheese will become more difficult.
Once that happens we'll see how good the balance is.
yeah I can see zerg would do a lot better in those kinds of maps
|
On July 18 2010 01:07 FatkiddsLag wrote:
actually according to the blizzard executives that were on the best buy live chat, terran is the most played race
I wouldn't be surprised if this is the way they want it. Since the first set of the trilogy is "Wings of Liberty," the majority of newcomers will be blasting through the campaign as Terran, and then try to go online with whatever basic knowledge they have with Terran. I'm not saying Terran is OP, but I do feel Blizzard is not as willing to nerf Terran as they are with Protoss and Zerg. I think they are trying to make it as "friendly" as possibly for new people learning the game, so the new players won't be completely discouraged when going online for the first time. I'm sure when the other two expansions are released, things will balance out much better (in terms of racial balance and gameplay balance).
|
This data doesn't surprise me all that much.
As others have said, Protoss has the easiest macro mechanic. If you screw up and aren't prepared for something, you can usually warp in something to help you because the gateway units are so versatile. You can use chrono boost pretty frequently, so if you use it needlessly it's not a huge deal.
Terran macro requires you to constantly be building units and it requires a little forethought as to what you will need to build. OC abilities are very useful but you really need to control when you use them.
Zerg probably has the most intensive macro mechanics. You are forced to constantly use the queens spawn larva, which is aggravating. More importantly, your unit production interferes with your drone production which makes Zerg play more complicated.
|
the execs think that there is some imbalance between terran and zerg, but that the data doesnt show it.
|
This doesn't really tell us anything because we don't know how evenly people choose their race.
|
Went through the data real quick with excel, here's the numbers as of July 18th, 2010 1PM PDT
1120 Protoss
921 Terran
891 Zerg
440 Random
|
i think its funny how the top 3 players are, protoss, terran, zerg.
|
On July 17 2010 10:42 DarthLeader wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:14 FatkiddsLag wrote:A thread was created with a list of all the known diamond league players. http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/index.phpI decided to go through each of the top 100 players and see what races they are. Here are my findings. Protoss: 38 Terran: 36 Zerg: 22 Random: 4 Also, I found these surprising. I'll soon get a bigger pool of maybe the top 1000. Edit: I quickly went through the next 100. so here is a pool of the top 200 players. Protoss: 75 Terran: 68 Zerg: 47 Random: 10 this is boring so im going to take a break. This just prooves that zerg are underpowered.
It just shows that people just see more success playing P and T than Z atm because P and T are easier races are easier to play and win with.
|
Cool data, but I'm afraid what it is going to do regarding which race is the most op up etc. This does not clearly say which race is overpowered but I'm sure people are going to make conlcusions of their own.
|
I had posted this in the original thread, this is clearly a more appropriate venue. Some quick stats from the Diamond league data as of today:
Out of the 3364 players currently in Diamond:
883 Zerg
1119 Protoss
920 Terran
Out of top 1000 in Diamond:
241 Zerg
359 Protoss
298 Terran
Out of top 100
19 Zerg
39 Protoss
36 Terran
Observations:
1) Zerg is pretty uncommon in Diamond and at the top level.
2) Protoss is more popular than Terran in lower level Diamond. This is not really the case in the top 100.
|
%In Top200_%Total_%Comparison
P 37.5_33.2 +4.3%
T 34.0_27.3 +6.7%
Z 23.5_26.4 -2.9%
R 5.0_13.0 -8.0%
terran is obv ez 
these stats are obviously flawed because players don't play 100% one race, but you can still make some interesting inferences.
|
On July 19 2010 05:16 Primadog wrote:
Went through the data real quick with excel, here's the numbers as of July 18th, 2010 1PM PDT
1120 Protoss
921 Terran
891 Zerg
440 Random
Protoss - 33.21%
Terran - 27.13%
Zerg - 26.42%
Random - 13.05%
That's really not that bad guys. Stop with these random accusations about how one race is easier or one race is underpowered. The statistics are actually pretty darn close. Game is obviously not totally balanced, but going around acting like you have statistics to support your arguments now really doesn't help.
|
I wonder at the accuracy of stuff like this. I'm pretty sure I'm in the top 1000, and I'm probably counted as terran since the majority of my games are with them (2v2 and the first few hardcore days of playing). However, I've played nothing but zerg for the past week and a half. I'm sure I'm not the only one like this. I'd imagine the high protoss numbers are a by-product of just such a scenario, as most of my friends started with protoss (thus racking up a bunch of games with them) and then moved on to another race.
|
i still think terran is op, no matter what the stats say.
|
On July 19 2010 05:51 FatkiddsLag wrote:
i still think terran is op, no matter what the stats say.
Thanks for your opinion, so we can immediately disregard it thanks to your acknowledging that the stats disagree!
|
Racedistribution (%) from TheThor data.
Diamond top1000 top100
zerg 26,25 24,1 19
protoss 33,26 35,9 39
terran 27,35 29,8 36
random 13,14 10,2 6
Change in share when nearing the top
Diamond top1000 top100
zerg 1 -8,19 -27,61
protoss 1 7,92 17,24
terran 1 8,96 31,63
random 1 -22,37 -54,33
From these stats there are tendencies towards:
1) random having a hard time competing at high level play, shown by a 50% decrease when nearing the top of the ladder
2) zerg having trouble when the competitive level is rising, shown by a 25% decrease when
nearing the top
3) protoss gaining a steady increase of 8 and 15% when nearing the top
4) terran gaining a huge momentum, going from a 9% to 30% increase nearing the top. Momentum gain could be strategic and/or tactical differences between lower and higher level players of the race or an artifact of uncertainty.
This doesn't tell much without knowing the effects of mapselection or having more data from europe and asia. However, the american zergs seems to be less competitive than american protosses and american terrans.
|
woah, the terrans are DOMINATING top10 on asia pretty hard :O
|
On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races
I don't know how having one hotkey to build all your units is the least straight forward. Sure, creep and queens but the easy as hell unit producing makes up for that.
|
On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races
The reason why I started playing Zerg, and has used Zerg almost exclusively throughout the entire beta was actually because of it's straight-forwardness. There is little unit and spell/ability diversity. Its mostly expanding and massing units, which I love to do.
As with everyone (I think), I'm surprised there is so many randoms. Perhaps the advantage of being unknown for the first minute of the game is actually greater than one would suspect.
|
On July 19 2010 07:18 sjschmidt93 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I don't know how having one hotkey to build all your units is the least straight forward. Sure, creep and queens but the easy as hell unit producing makes up for that.
Zerg unit production is probably the most difficult imo, balancing between units and drones is what separate the good ones from the bad ones, one bad decision and its GG. T and P have it easier that way.
|
Ironically, while Protoss macro mechanics might be the most lenient on execution, it's the most inflexible, AND we're usually the race that's required to do the tech switching to stay ahead. The only telling statistic would be a ratio between top % and total %.
|
On July 17 2010 09:57 gillon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:53 ohN wrote:On July 17 2010 09:44 TheKing. wrote:On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races Why is zerg going to " OP the crap out of all the other races" I do not think Zerg is considered overpowered at all. Please explain what you mean I think he means something like this: As P, your standard units are zealot/stalker/sentry + a few higher tier units As T, its either marine/maurader/medivac + etc or hellion/tank/thor + etc As Z, you don't have anything like that so zergs have to try out and experiment with different unit comps. In other words, it's not as "straight-forward" as the other two races so it takes a while longer to figure things out. Wow, sure is simplifying races here. Don't try to make it out as if making roach hydra or mutaling/bling requires some sort of strategic genius. I know zerg differs in alot of ways from the other two races, but zerg gets glorified way too much on TL.
Yeah totally overglorified and actually entirely op, as the statistics suggest. All you have to do is attack move roach hydra, right!?
On July 19 2010 05:37 Alou wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 05:16 Primadog wrote:
Went through the data real quick with excel, here's the numbers as of July 18th, 2010 1PM PDT
1120 Protoss
921 Terran
891 Zerg
440 Random
Protoss - 33.21% Terran - 27.13% Zerg - 26.42% Random - 13.05% That's really not that bad guys. Stop with these random accusations about how one race is easier or one race is underpowered. The statistics are actually pretty darn close. Game is obviously not totally balanced, but going around acting like you have statistics to support your arguments now really doesn't help.
But as you get higher and higher up, the statistics start clearly favoring p/t
|
On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss?
I get as few as 1 point for a win and in the 30's for a loss. The higher rank you get the harder it is to continue going up because the points are not given as liberally.
|
United States47024 Posts
On July 19 2010 05:28 nitdkim wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 10:42 DarthLeader wrote:On July 17 2010 09:14 FatkiddsLag wrote:A thread was created with a list of all the known diamond league players. http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/index.phpI decided to go through each of the top 100 players and see what races they are. Here are my findings. Protoss: 38 Terran: 36 Zerg: 22 Random: 4 Also, I found these surprising. I'll soon get a bigger pool of maybe the top 1000. Edit: I quickly went through the next 100. so here is a pool of the top 200 players. Protoss: 75 Terran: 68 Zerg: 47 Random: 10 this is boring so im going to take a break. This just prooves that zerg are underpowered. It just shows that people just see more success playing P and T than Z atm because P and T are easier races are easier to play and win with.
Or the maps are just awfully designed for zerg right now.
|
Guys Guys, the race I play is the most difficult because of x mechanic and y matchup problems and z styles. The race you play is way easier.
Anyways, thanks for the guy that did the excel for the top 1000. Only really interesting result is the rather large amount of randoms.
|
Wow, zerg is so down, I wonder if its a lot different in Asia.
|
On July 17 2010 10:46 tathecat563 wrote:
How is zerg doing on the other servers atm? I recall them being the strongest on the Asian servers and that's with basically no changes to the balance of the three.
this was a few patches ago. terran is going strong on asia, but not in the way they are on US.
|
There are some timed attack strategies (as P&T) which are easy win against zergs in ladder.
Everyone is using them. This explains those stats I think.
But in tourneys, I think (hope) it's different.
You shouldn't think about balance just looking at ladder stats. Most people are doing the same "easy strats against average player" every game.
We need to wait big tourneys at the release of the game to begin to talk about balance.
About the low number of zerg players. I think there are less zerg players than at the start of the beta just because actually zerg is the race which has to play defensive a lot, suffer a lot of harassments. It's more about the actual style of the race than about balance (suffer, suffer, macro).
|
On July 19 2010 07:56 HubertFelix wrote:
You shouldn't think about balance just looking at ladder stats. Most people are doing the same "easy strats against average player" every game.
We need to wait big tourneys at the release of the game to begin to talk about balance.
Indeed, and even then it takes years. Look at Broodwar. 3 Zerg wins in the first 20 OSLs (2 of them by  July). There have been 7 Zerg wins in the 10 OSLs since then. The MSL has the same story - 0 Zerg wins in the first 8 tournaments, followed by 9 Zerg wins in the most recent 15.
It's too early to cry for Zerg or whatever. Broodwar was last patched in 2001 but that didn't stop Zerg from being unable to win tournaments for years before becoming the most winnable race that they are now.
|
On July 19 2010 07:49 Tazza wrote:
Wow, zerg is so down, I wonder if its a lot different in Asia.
I wouldn't say alot different but zerg certainly isnt dominating the asian server like people are suggeting.
http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/krranks.php
|
Omg @oGsEnsnare's stats 75% of wins.
|
On July 19 2010 08:07 Crisium wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 07:56 HubertFelix wrote:
You shouldn't think about balance just looking at ladder stats. Most people are doing the same "easy strats against average player" every game.
We need to wait big tourneys at the release of the game to begin to talk about balance. Indeed, and even then it takes years. Look at Broodwar. 3 Zerg wins in the first 20 OSLs (2 of them by July). There have been 7 Zerg wins in the 10 OSLs since then. The MSL has the same story - 0 Zerg wins in the first 8 tournaments, followed by 9 Zerg wins in the most recent 15. It's too early to cry for Zerg or whatever. Broodwar was last patched in 2001 but that didn't stop Zerg from being unable to win tournaments for years before becoming the most winnable race that they are now.
Echoing the above post, Blizzard needs to balance with the highest level of play in mind (ie. pros). Ladder statistics should be ignored for the most part. Let SC2 evolve first before crying imbalance.
Also some(most?) of the maps are horrible right now. Kulas Ravine is especially bad for Zerg.
|
On July 19 2010 05:37 Alou wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 05:16 Primadog wrote:
Went through the data real quick with excel, here's the numbers as of July 18th, 2010 1PM PDT
1120 Protoss
921 Terran
891 Zerg
440 Random
Protoss - 33.21% Terran - 27.13% Zerg - 26.42% Random - 13.05% That's really not that bad guys. Stop with these random accusations about how one race is easier or one race is underpowered. The statistics are actually pretty darn close. Game is obviously not totally balanced, but going around acting like you have statistics to support your arguments now really doesn't help.
This
I actually see these stats very close. Differences are not that huge at all. So these numbers are very positive to my eyes. And which race is the most played doesn't mean that race is OP, it only means is more popular.
|
Hmmm add another toss cause i jsut got into top 100
|
Percentages are closer than I expected. Hopefully Blizzard doesn't increase marine and zergling life too much and ruin pro balance in the future.
Btw, this is on the NA server?
What's more important are the asian servers imo.
edit: I'll hold off on anything this data is implying at the moment. I really don't know enough to make any assumptions, but the observations of this thread are great. Thanks.
|
On July 17 2010 09:43 Phayze wrote:
Lol oh yeah, rank 200 and I havent played a game since the third day of beta. Protoss is too easy, Most games come down (ZvP) either a all in 4gate, or a gateway forgebuild into a hard to stop 2base collosus. It's so easy to do either of these builds, and it's truly really hard for a zerg to come out ahead.. Dealing with collosus with roach hydra is hard, and if you make 5 too many drones, you lose to a good timing push. It's too demanding in comparison to the protoss strategy. Roaces need a buff against collossi. Hydras are completely useless by any sort of collosus micro.
I have to agree here. For any game, its hard to say which character/race/class is the easiest to play because it depends on the skill level you are currently at in the beginning. For instance in street fighter 4, balrog starts off being a very easy character when all you know is how to do heavy kicks and jump ins. Later when ppl are starting to learn how to do moves, balrog becomes a very hard character to use cuz his moves are hard to pull off for a beginner. He becomes very hard to use until a more advanced stage where everybody knows link ins and combos into ultras as his gameplay becomes a little generic and basic.
For SC2, I think at low-mid diamond level play. Protoss has the easiest time with these timing pushes, 4 gating and collosis builds. For a zerg player of a similar level, its hard to defend against early aggression and even after u successfully defend against it, the collosus army can crush you easily.
|
http://starcraftrankings.com/
22- Protoss
19- Terran
7- Zerg
2- Random
Assuming the random wouldn't change because it is always equal power level this should be closer to 16 per race with Zerg making up less than 50% of what it should and protoss making up 37% of what it should and Terran 18% of what it should be. I would assume that because these are the 50 "Best" players in the beta that favoritism doesn't have as much to do with it as it would other times. Simply put Zerg is under-represented (opposed to Toss, Terran over-represented)
EDIT:
18-Terran
16-Toss
13-zerg
3- Random
These are the results on the above site for europe players and is about equal when you bring in factors such as favoritism and the development of strategies.
Based on both calculations I would like to see where the asia server is compared to us/eu
|
Zerg is totally weak, it's clearly obvious.
|
On July 19 2010 08:21 Jokah wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 07:49 Tazza wrote:
Wow, zerg is so down, I wonder if its a lot different in Asia. I wouldn't say alot different but zerg certainly isnt dominating the asian server like people are suggeting. http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/krranks.php
Thanks for the link, jokah, and thanks to martinni for updating the list.
Of the 3635 players in asia diamond division 1v1.
- 1244 are protoss
- 1187 are terran
- 750 are zerg
- 454 are random
So
- 34.22% are protoss
- 32.65% are terran
- 20.63% are zerg
and
- 12.49% are random
Observations:
- The number of zerg is less than what we've all been told. Perhaps next time everyone (myself included) will try not to fall prey to rumors anymore.
- Used source data, word, and replace tool to find the number of players in each category
- Don't go about posting definite conclusions to this information, we don't know very much yet
- I don't know if martinni has updated his list of asian players in diamond division completely.
|
it a lot of the tournaments, it ends up being 15 terrans and 1 toss in the ro16
|
why are people saying this proves anything about races? almost every time, people pick their race before they get good at it, and will stay with that race regardless of changes. all this proves is people are more likely to get pissed off while trying to learn zerg and switch than any other race, and even that isn't really proved, just suggested
|
Well, but it's a fact that we saw lots of terrans in the ro8 of most open tourneys in the end of phase 1 and now in phase 2 of the beta
Not saying terran is overpowered, just saying that they are dominant in tourneys now.
|
all these zerg players that are complaining how zerg is weak... DONT PLAY IT THEN! haha
i believe they are strong, people like idra, cool, sen have shown us the strength of zerg.
|
On July 17 2010 09:18 Rea wrote:
whats the point of such a list aslong you get 5-30 times more ELO for a win then a loss?
Ya this is not true, because when i win i get like 5-9 points when I lose I lose 10 - 22 points.
|
On July 19 2010 09:44 Looky wrote:
all these zerg players that are complaining how zerg is weak... DONT PLAY IT THEN! haha
i believe they are strong, people like idra, cool, sen have shown us the strength of zerg.
did you notice that out of the top 100 players, the only zergs are well known good/decent players and a lot of the T and P are straight no namers?
|
updated again. adding asian servers
|
Asia server is
36/100 Terran
33/100 Toss
18/100 Zerg
11/100 Random
If this doesn't show something about zergz playability (using these stats) than one might as well not even try. Asians are notorious for switching to whatever is the most powerful and This clearly shows that zerg is lacking in that dept.
it should be 29/30/30 assuming that random doesn't change, this means that zerg is 62% below equivalency and 83% below Toss >.>
|
idk, it does say something about the balance if all servers are like this
|
I like how Terran is 50% of the top 10 in every region.
|
On July 19 2010 08:07 Crisium wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 07:56 HubertFelix wrote:
You shouldn't think about balance just looking at ladder stats. Most people are doing the same "easy strats against average player" every game.
We need to wait big tourneys at the release of the game to begin to talk about balance. Indeed, and even then it takes years. Look at Broodwar. 3 Zerg wins in the first 20 OSLs (2 of them by July). There have been 7 Zerg wins in the 10 OSLs since then. The MSL has the same story - 0 Zerg wins in the first 8 tournaments, followed by 9 Zerg wins in the most recent 15. It's too early to cry for Zerg or whatever. Broodwar was last patched in 2001 but that didn't stop Zerg from being unable to win tournaments for years before becoming the most winnable race that they are now.
But the map pool shifted frequently and in the direction of macro-based play and was largely in control of the users rather than blizzard. But on that note, perhaps re-evaluating the map pool would be the best way to try and get things more balanced. I wish blizzard was doing more detailed statistics tracking. I'd be curious to see winrates on scrap station, metalopolis, and desert oasis vs kulas or lt. On the other hand, zergs would also sometimes lose independently of the map. 200/200 of ultra/hydra/ling/infestor can't beat 200/200 collosi/gateway units with even upgrades, and the maps will never change this..
On July 19 2010 10:11 ixi.genocide wrote:
Asia server is
36/100 Terran
33/100 Toss
18/100 Zerg
11/100 Random
If this doesn't show something about zergz playability (using these stats) than one might as well not even try. Asians are notorious for switching to whatever is the most powerful and This clearly shows that zerg is lacking in that dept.
it should be 29/30/30 assuming that random doesn't change, this means that zerg is 62% below equivalency and 83% below Toss >.>
BUT I HEARD ZERGS WERE DOMINATING ASIA LIKE 2 MONTHS AGO THEREFORE THERE'S NO PROBLEM!!11
|
@Drowsy
But that is the concept of the Protoss race. Their units are strong but take time to replace. Zerg on the other hand can macro up a 200/200 army really quickly at really late game. So matching 200/200 armies and saying one loses isn't really a fair analysis of the races.
|
On July 19 2010 10:32 Psychopomp wrote:
I like how Terran is 50% of the top 10 in every region.
Yeah. Strange right...?
However, according to this list it shows that the #1 player is a Zerg player...Does anyone have any info on who this guy is. Sorry, I am too lazy to look through the thread if it has been talked about already...
|
On July 18 2010 02:04 kawazu wrote:
Terran macro requires you to constantly be building units and it requires a little forethought as to what you will need to build. OC abilities are very useful but you really need to control when you use them.
Totally correct. Terran IS powerful, but that does NOT mean it is easy. Sure there are some builds which seem easy (Marauder / Marine spam), but they usually only win if you win fast; most other terran army compositions REQUIRE multiple production building types and if you can screw up the composition of the army by eliminating one the whole army suffers A LOT. Examples:
- Tanks need an aircraft spotter to be able to fire at maximum range
- Thors need Marine / Marauder support against swarms of small stuff
- Marines / Marauders need Medivacs (compared to a Medic which can be built from Barracks too!) to be able to use Stim Pack regularly
So lets stop with the myth that terran is easy to play.
On July 18 2010 02:04 kawazu wrote:
Zerg probably has the most intensive macro mechanics. You are forced to constantly use the queens spawn larva, which is aggravating. More importantly, your unit production interferes with your drone production which makes Zerg play more complicated.
Right again. Zerg have the fastest macro mechanic due to the fact that they have the cheapest main building (which also doubles as their unit production building, so that is ok). The big problem for Zerg is managing the shift from economy to aggression and once the players learn to do this the Zerg will be very very powerful due to superior economy (usually) and the greatest flexibility.
|
Numbers are only numbers, you can't take it seriously in any way.
Like, you can scew the numbers any way you want:
Top 10 is 6 terran 2 toss 2 zerg.
"Zomg 60% of top players are terran".
|
i wonder if this will change when the game goes live
|
On July 19 2010 12:44 Carrierhasarrived wrote:
@Drowsy
But that is the concept of the Protoss race. Their units are strong but take time to replace. Zerg on the other hand can macro up a 200/200 army really quickly at really late game. So matching 200/200 armies and saying one loses isn't really a fair analysis of the races.
With 10+ Warpgates even Toss is back at 200/200 very fast. But even though I don't think it's a problem if one race has the most powerfull 200/200 army blob (a Terran Mech ball in SC:BW is also stronger than a Protoss army). If Zerg can't beat Protoss in a straight up fight Zerg has to find another way to win (doing more herass, etc.).
|
Could it also be that there are less Zerg players overall??
|
nice info to have, thanks!
if i can give my 2 cents, i have a feeling that when sc2 is released to the general public, the trend will naturally augment itself towards that of sc1. Lots of people will be playing with prior sc1 experience and 1 base play will likely dwindle down and Protoss will revert to the adaptive race. Zerg will also likely rise up once people begin to figure out timings and such. Their macro mechanic is so versatile in a sense and while they can be fragile at times, played properly have the potential to roll over strong armies. I think the majority of the issue is centered around the aggressive 1 base play that's so common right now. Zergs need good eco to fund they're armies, but with all the aggression, they just don't have the time and safety to power up.
maybe i'm totally wrong, but i just feel like with a lot of sc1 gamers transferring over, sc2 will follow a similar but highly accelerated path in development to the original (micro → macro → timing → harass)
EDIT: replying to some other comments
On July 19 2010 07:18 sjschmidt93 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2010 09:39 Nal_rAwr wrote:
it was like this in BW too
protoss is the most straight-forward
terran is a little less straight-forward
and zerg is the least straight-forward
people are going to change, and later on in the highest level, zerg is going to OP the crap out of all the other races I don't know how having one hotkey to build all your units is the least straight forward. Sure, creep and queens but the easy as hell unit producing makes up for that.
but the issue is that you have to decide whether to make drones or attacking units. power drones too long and you can't scrap together an army to fight. overcommit to attacking units and you're behind on eco. with the building style of zerg, everything lies in a fine balance where even the smallest mistake can end the game - that's why zerg over here isn't doing so hot. i'm not saying they're underpowered, but playing zerg properly takes good game sense and a lot of quick decision making. the fact that have one hotkey to build all their units makes it difficult because they have to CHOOSE what to build. With protoss and terran, you can make units while you make workers and almost never feel one affect the other. with zerg, the two paths are tied together.
|
On July 20 2010 05:55 CruelZeratul wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 12:44 Carrierhasarrived wrote:
@Drowsy
But that is the concept of the Protoss race. Their units are strong but take time to replace. Zerg on the other hand can macro up a 200/200 army really quickly at really late game. So matching 200/200 armies and saying one loses isn't really a fair analysis of the races. With 10+ Warpgates even Toss is back at 200/200 very fast. But even though I don't think it's a problem if one race has the most powerfull 200/200 army blob (a Terran Mech ball in SC:BW is also stronger than a Protoss army). If Zerg can't beat Protoss in a straight up fight Zerg has to find another way to win (doing more herass, etc.).
I don't understand people that say this. Are you seriously suggesting that players aren't trying to win and find new ways to win if they constantly are losing to a certain strategy? Terrans like to say this when zerg are complaining about mech like we are stupid or something. I can understand if people are arguing that we haven't had enough time to work out a viable solution, but the notion that people haven't been trying hard is complete bullshit.
|
You are looking way too much into figures over a two week period that should mean nothing. People arent laddering hard because they know its not long before everything gets reset I know resets happened before but we all know when it is this time.
I do think something needs to change for the ZvT matchup though.
|
On July 20 2010 07:22 nihlon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 05:55 CruelZeratul wrote:On July 19 2010 12:44 Carrierhasarrived wrote:
@Drowsy
But that is the concept of the Protoss race. Their units are strong but take time to replace. Zerg on the other hand can macro up a 200/200 army really quickly at really late game. So matching 200/200 armies and saying one loses isn't really a fair analysis of the races. With 10+ Warpgates even Toss is back at 200/200 very fast. But even though I don't think it's a problem if one race has the most powerfull 200/200 army blob (a Terran Mech ball in SC:BW is also stronger than a Protoss army). If Zerg can't beat Protoss in a straight up fight Zerg has to find another way to win (doing more herass, etc.). I don't understand people that say this. Are you seriously suggesting that players aren't trying to win and find new ways to win if they constantly are losing to a certain strategy? Terrans like to say this when zerg are complaining about mech like we are stupid or something. I can understand if people are arguing that we haven't had enough time to work out a viable solution, but the notion that people haven't been trying hard is complete bullshit.
People have tried, thats why we don't see many people complaining about ZvP being absolutely Protoss favoured, even though Protoss potentionally has the stronger amry when maxed.
|
Theres always some pretender to the throne but throughout time Terran Emperors always reign supreme.
|
On July 19 2010 13:59 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 02:04 kawazu wrote:
Terran macro requires you to constantly be building units and it requires a little forethought as to what you will need to build. OC abilities are very useful but you really need to control when you use them. Totally correct. Terran IS powerful, but that does NOT mean it is easy. Sure there are some builds which seem easy (Marauder / Marine spam), but they usually only win if you win fast; most other terran army compositions REQUIRE multiple production building types and if you can screw up the composition of the army by eliminating one the whole army suffers A LOT. Examples: - Tanks need an aircraft spotter to be able to fire at maximum range - Thors need Marine / Marauder support against swarms of small stuff - Marines / Marauders need Medivacs (compared to a Medic which can be built from Barracks too!) to be able to use Stim Pack regularly So lets stop with the myth that terran is easy to play.
terran isnt particularly easy, in some ways it is actually the hardest to play well, but it is so ridiculously overpowered that you dont even have to play it well for the strength to show through.
plus the quick kill builds are quite strong in their own right.
|
I think the problem might be in tech switching.
If Zerg gets to a tech, they have the longest waiting time to get new units. Lair and Hive take a lot of time, and so do the extra buildings. Might the problem be that most mid- game Zerg units have hardcounters and it's very hard to switch your tech? Maybe Hydra/Muta with mass expand for gas will work!?!
Also, Zergs T3 is sooo late compared to Protoss' or Terrans. Terran has to build an Armory, the Thor could even be considered Mid game, as fast as it can come. The Collosus is a bit later, but it's still WAAAAAAAAAAAY before Broodlords or Ultras even get their tech buidlings started!?
Maybe people hate working hard to get to a tech, to see it hardcountered and untransitionable?
|
Let's not forget the fact that to alot of people (including me) Zerg are flat out boring to play. It has nothing to do with how good or balanced the race is, sometimes.
|
On July 20 2010 20:39 DannyJ wrote:
Let's not forget the fact that to alot of people (including me) Zerg are flat out boring to play. It has nothing to do with how good or balanced the race is, sometimes.
Although true, it's exactly the same the other way around.
There are people that find Zerg interesting and Terran and Protoss boring.
So that probably cancels itself out by default.
EDIT: grammar.
|
Now instead of top 100, try top 50, then top 20 and top 10, and you'll see protoss vanish, terran be dominant with zerg on 2nd
On another thread with winning rates, above 70% it was
11 T
4 P
4 Z
above 75%
5 T
2 Z
Highest with 80%
T
|
On July 20 2010 21:48 Duelist wrote:Now instead of top 100, try top 50, then top 20 and top 10, and you'll see protoss vanish, terran be dominant with zerg on 2nd On another thread with winning rates, above 70% it was 11 T 4 P 4 Z above 75% 5 T 2 Z Highest with 80% T
link? Couldn't find with search
|
I dislike the non-use of the Zerg Race. I love Zerg but they are imho too weak. Switched to Protoss.
|
|
|
i wonder if these figures will still be like this when release happens
|
Look at the korean server and see the difference...
|
I think its settled then, zerg players apparently need to practice more.
|
3 Zergs in the Top25...
Why am I not surprised.
|
i like the numbers. Somewhat surprising
|
As a regular scrub player (a platinum Z) i don't find race imbalance a problem.
It is annoying to get killed by the same early tank push, but i cant bring my self to call imba. I've beat Ts with the same muta tech switch multiple games in a row, does that mean its imba?
I cant call imba because I'm not good enough to. I always feel that a better zerg could have handled the situation, or a better T could have defended. Seeing even a few zergs amongst the top players validates this for me.
So yes, the stats don't favor the zergs at the nose bleed high level play, but there not ridiculously skewed like 4 Zs, 38 Ps, 60 Ts. So for my level of play the game is effectively balanced. And until I am good enough to be in the nose bleed end of the ladder i feel i can't claim otherwise, stats be dambed.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
