|
On April 10 2011 22:07 imbs wrote:
lets take idra as an example, he is always gonna drop games to cheese i think, but he has proved time and time again that he probably has the best understanding and macro of any foreigner. he has something absurd like a 95% win ratio in a volatile matchup that cannot ever be imbalanced; the mirror. compare this to his 52~% vs protoss where he appears to lose to protoss who don't actually do anything. take cruncher for example. one of his wins was basically take 3 bases that are close enough together that its nearly impossible to effectively harass, then amove across the map. his second win was a well disguised warp gate all in. idra sacrificed 3 overlords that game and had overlord speed on the way but it was not enough to know what was coming.
take the series vs huk too, one of his wins was a random warp gate unit all in, the other was the famous hallucination game. but huk didn't actually do anything that game, idra was all over the place doing a ton of stuff whilst huk sat on his thumbs with inferior macro, and i think if protoss was not favored idra would have had the game won 10 minutes prior to the incident.
i honestly think protoss changes would really help the game, as we can see from the gsl group drawings, all 3 races want to avoid protoss in general. the correct nerf could even fix the mirror which i think would be most welcome to protoss players themselves.
no he lost the one game to cruncher because he ran up the ramp getting owned by forcefields and not targeting with his corruptors...
|
Please make IdrA a pillar :3!
|
On April 10 2011 23:08 TRAP[yoo] wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2011 22:07 imbs wrote:
lets take idra as an example, he is always gonna drop games to cheese i think, but he has proved time and time again that he probably has the best understanding and macro of any foreigner. he has something absurd like a 95% win ratio in a volatile matchup that cannot ever be imbalanced; the mirror. compare this to his 52~% vs protoss where he appears to lose to protoss who don't actually do anything. take cruncher for example. one of his wins was basically take 3 bases that are close enough together that its nearly impossible to effectively harass, then amove across the map. his second win was a well disguised warp gate all in. idra sacrificed 3 overlords that game and had overlord speed on the way but it was not enough to know what was coming.
take the series vs huk too, one of his wins was a random warp gate unit all in, the other was the famous hallucination game. but huk didn't actually do anything that game, idra was all over the place doing a ton of stuff whilst huk sat on his thumbs with inferior macro, and i think if protoss was not favored idra would have had the game won 10 minutes prior to the incident.
i honestly think protoss changes would really help the game, as we can see from the gsl group drawings, all 3 races want to avoid protoss in general. the correct nerf could even fix the mirror which i think would be most welcome to protoss players themselves. no he lost the one game to cruncher because he ran up the ramp getting owned by forcefields and not targeting with his corruptors...
What was the other option? Not run up and just let protoss get a 200 / 200 void ray collosus stalker army undetered? Before the infestor buff?
|
On April 10 2011 15:49 Ribbon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2011 14:58 Treehead wrote:On April 10 2011 14:40 Treehead wrote:On April 10 2011 14:04 loveeholicce wrote:On April 10 2011 11:20 godemperor wrote:On April 10 2011 10:33 flowSthead wrote:On April 10 2011 06:18 redux46 wrote:Looking at the GSL though, Zergs are doing fine against PvZ statistically. The fact that a Zerg has not won the whole thing (at least in Code S) since GSL2, is more that individual players have not won since then, not that Zergs are doing predominantly worse than Protoss.
Are there other tournaments you can give me information on that show Zergs doing substantially worse?
Looking at the GSL predominantly, Zergs are not doing significantly worse against Protoss. It is fairly even, which according to your criteria suggests that perhaps there is no imbalance. Including IEM, Zergs seem to be doing worse against Terran.
GSL 3 had way more Zerg than Protoss, with Protoss just having a phenomenal 62.5% win rate against Terran and Terran having a 57% win rate against Zerg, thus it seems like Protoss is dominating Zergs.
Code S January, equal number of Zerg and Protoss, Zerg makes it farther.
Code A, January, equal number of Zerg and Protoss, both make it to round of 8, and lose to Terrans. Code A statistics favors protoss at 80%, but only 5 games played. TvZ is an even 50%, and PvT is a phenomenal 21.1% out of 19 games, favoring Terran.
Code S March, one less Zerg than Protoss and make it to the final round.
Code A March, more Zergs than Protoss, and wins.
There are predominantly more Terrans overall in the GSL than both Zerg and Protoss, but individual Protoss have been doing well (MC). Zergs overall are not doing worse in GSL than Protoss.
This is basically my point. All of the things that Idra was saying, were things that he feels are happening with the game, not the actual "State of the Game". That could be because Idra himself is in a slight slump in regards with how he plays against Protoss. The actual statistics, and Zerg performance in tournaments, does not seem to back this up.
I've taken the ZvP stats from all the GSL events this year http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-korean/individual-leagues#tblt-8315-1-default-0-gslZvP is 35:52 (40.2%) With a good sample of 87 total games, having a close to 60% win rate implies either on the whole there are better skilled protoss players and/or there is inherent difficulty in the race matchup. Just give some more detail into this let us look at the games more closely. Code S Jan ZvP 6:5 Code A Jan ZvP 1:4 Code S Mar ZvP 9:13 Code A Mar ZvP 8: 9 GSL S1 up/down ZvP 1:6 (Moon loses 4 wins 1, JookTo loses 2) Code A Mar Qualifiers ZvP 4:3 (MinSeOk wins 2, CoCa wins 2 loses 1, SiKaRi loses 2) Code S Mar Wildcard ZvP 2:0 (Jookto wins 2) GSL S2 Up/down ZvP 2:2 (Losira wins 2, Zenio loses 2) Code A May Qualifiers 2:10 (Terious loses 2, Moon loses 2 wins 1, Junwi loses 2, Royal loses 2, Cezanne loses 2 wins 1) Looking only at the actual Code S and Code A we have 24:31 which is 43.6%. Removing the last one which is at 2:10 we get 33:42 which is 44%. This indicates to me, that yes this does seem pretty bad, and it is not only because of one tournament (why I tested removing the last one which is at 2:10). Let's compare PvT: Code S Jan PvT 8:15 Code A Jan PvT 4:15 Code S Mar PvT 18:8 Code A Mar PvT 6: 7 GSL S1 up/down PvT 0:2 Code A Mar Qualifiers PvT 2:2 Code S Mar Wildcard PvT 0:0 GSL S2 Up/down PvT 4:5 Code A May Qualifiers PvT 2:6 Total 44:60 (42.3%) only CodeS/Code A 36:45 (44.4%) This indicates to me that PvT is broken, and Terran should be nerfed. Do you see the flaw in the reasoning? In my original post I included how far Zergs had made it in tournaments, not just the statistical results to show that individual Zergs are doing pretty well. I think although 87 sounds like a lot, and I appreciated that you did the statistical analysis to show that it was significant, you have to remember that this is not 87 different Protoss versus 87 different Zerg. Moon has 8 games in the 87, making his results almost 1/10 of the data. What is good about you actually checking it, shows that my reasoning is flawed as well. I cannot actually claim that ZvP is not doing well, but then neither can Zergs claim that ZvP is broken. We need more data. 87 results, of which a few players make up a lot of it, cannot be enough to get a good read on this. My reasoning depended on how individual Zergs have been doing in tournaments (relatively well although not quite as well compared to individual Protoss, making it just as far most of the time). That is clearly flawed. Your reasoning depended on how Zergs overall are doing, which I think is the better way, but with too few samples. Either way, I don't think calls for balance are justified considering how few games we have to judge it by. first lets not fight over statistics again, it never ends well. Second, im going to completely ignore my first statement. There is a big difference between the winrate difference in pvt and pvz, pvt is about 11% (which is still ok), but PvZ is is at 20% (which is a lot bigger.) There wa a huge thread a while back that took the winrates of the top 50 (or 100, i forget) european non Zergs, then compared the overall win rate against their vZ win rate. On average the players' vZ winrates were higher by 7%. I don't really know how much evidence people need. Yes 87 isn't conclusive but its still quite a bit. Small sets of data will never be conclusive, but when they all show the same consistent trend I think you can start to make some reasonable assumptions.Basically all tournament first second and third place statistics show Zergs doing considerably worse than other races. Winrates have almost never shown Zerg winrate above 50% except for maybe a 3 week stretch after a patch like the roach range increase. Zerg has quite a talented player pool, definitely at least equal to that of the other races, yet Zerg hasn't even found a fraction of the success other races have. Several respected pros, including idra, morrow, ret, dimaga, catz and slush have said Zerg is weaker. And yet a majority of people will tell you there's nothing wrong, that Zerg players aren't talented enough, and all the QQ is baseless and irrational. It's so ridiculous, I have no idea what it would take for people to actualy admit that something is wrong. A few seasons of zerg not going to the finals in the GSL would be the first step towards a concensus that something is wrong imo. In a season where the GSL finals are PvZ and the WC is + Show Spoiler + it's hard to convince most reasonable folk that zerg are "obviously so underpowered that a balance patch is needed". Zergs in the GSL not stating that they would like to play against protoss might also do something for your argument. It means that there is a perception that P is advantaged against Z. But the only way to know that Z is weak, and that's an inherent problem with the game that needs a patch, is a lot of high-level games. In statistics, "a lot" is generally around 1,000 samples (high-level games). That's needed to wash out the effects of random chance. As someone before me posted, a disproportionally huge chunk of GSL ZvPs were played by Moon. So, it won't be until at least after the NASL Season 1 championships (which incidentally gives the metagame time to evolve) that we can go "Yeah, I think a patch might be called for". Then, if the numbers say Z is UP, it's up to the pros to give their thoughts on potentially why. I understand that July and Nestea and I guess Idra are pretty friggen good, but that doesn't give them the magical ability to say "Despite the fact that new Zerg styles and builds are appearing, none of them will ever fix a core issue". Edit: Actually, since it's ZvP that's considered broken and not ZvT (or at least ZvT is "less" broken), we have a way of testing for that pretty thoroughly: It's it's indeed much harder to ZvP than it is to ZvT (regardless of whether ZvT is balanced or not), then we should expect to see a lot of Zergs with much better winrates versus Terran than versus Protoss, right?
Here's the thing: if you have a fair number of people that are more likely than not to be wrong (arguably the high level zerg players), you don't actually need that large a sample to be confident in your analysis of their results (see the Condorcet Jury Theorem). The real question is whether or not Zerg players are more likely to be right than wrong when it comes to perceiving imbalance.
|
I was sent the link to the old thread about international pros and how well zerg does. Here is the link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=185691¤tpage=All
If you notice, it was made in January 19, so what I did was look at the links he gave for his data, and then checked in regards to more recent data. I separated the data going backwards based on April 4th to March 1st (basically the month of March) and February 28th to Jan27 (basically the month of February).
Here is what I got:
March Gold:
Terran 39
Protoss 26
Zerg 26
March Silver:
Terran 36
Protoss 27
Zerg 27
Random 1
February Gold:
Terran 46
Protoss 33
Zerg 23
February Silver:
Terran 39
Protoss 38
Zerg 25
So what do we see? In the last month, Zergs have been doing equally as well in tournaments as Protoss, and I mean exactly equally. Terrans have been dominating in all aspects for the last two months, and back a month ago Zergs were doing substantially worse than both races.
Admittedly, this has the same weaknesses as before. These are just individual stats of tournaments wins of 1st and 2nd place, not a large amount of statistical data. But if anything, the trend seems to be positive for Zerg, negative for Protoss, and neutral to negative for Terran.
Looking back at the original link, I have not had a chance to look at individual winrates of top pros, I will do that a bit later possibly.
Edit: If anyone does not trust me or wants to double check, here is the data, I used an excel spreadsheet to count:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Asv1-ALiHzT8dE5GYmFyMUI1ZUk0ZzUteERYMS16V2c&hl=en#gid=0
And here is where the data came from: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues
The first one is 2011 US Go4SC2 Cup #44 Attero MarinekngXPn
The last one is 2011 Viking Cup #27 Jimpo elfi
|
After tyler being eliminated, it's time to bring the Kas topic on the table,
does top NA player underestimate EU player? Next on Sotg!
|
On April 10 2011 23:09 Nomadic wrote:
Please make IdrA a pillar :3!
I second this motion!
|
It is pretty obvious that they do. But I don't think you can fault them for it in the case of Kas. He never entered a big lan torunament in Europe and only plays online tournaments with little prize money.
|
i was just hyping a little not flaming :p
|
On April 11 2011 06:32 relyt wrote:I second this motion!
I third it!
|
On April 10 2011 18:26 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2011 15:49 Ribbon wrote:On April 10 2011 14:58 Treehead wrote:On April 10 2011 14:40 Treehead wrote:On April 10 2011 14:04 loveeholicce wrote:On April 10 2011 11:20 godemperor wrote:On April 10 2011 10:33 flowSthead wrote:On April 10 2011 06:18 redux46 wrote:Looking at the GSL though, Zergs are doing fine against PvZ statistically. The fact that a Zerg has not won the whole thing (at least in Code S) since GSL2, is more that individual players have not won since then, not that Zergs are doing predominantly worse than Protoss.
Are there other tournaments you can give me information on that show Zergs doing substantially worse?
Looking at the GSL predominantly, Zergs are not doing significantly worse against Protoss. It is fairly even, which according to your criteria suggests that perhaps there is no imbalance. Including IEM, Zergs seem to be doing worse against Terran.
GSL 3 had way more Zerg than Protoss, with Protoss just having a phenomenal 62.5% win rate against Terran and Terran having a 57% win rate against Zerg, thus it seems like Protoss is dominating Zergs.
Code S January, equal number of Zerg and Protoss, Zerg makes it farther.
Code A, January, equal number of Zerg and Protoss, both make it to round of 8, and lose to Terrans. Code A statistics favors protoss at 80%, but only 5 games played. TvZ is an even 50%, and PvT is a phenomenal 21.1% out of 19 games, favoring Terran.
Code S March, one less Zerg than Protoss and make it to the final round.
Code A March, more Zergs than Protoss, and wins.
There are predominantly more Terrans overall in the GSL than both Zerg and Protoss, but individual Protoss have been doing well (MC). Zergs overall are not doing worse in GSL than Protoss.
This is basically my point. All of the things that Idra was saying, were things that he feels are happening with the game, not the actual "State of the Game". That could be because Idra himself is in a slight slump in regards with how he plays against Protoss. The actual statistics, and Zerg performance in tournaments, does not seem to back this up.
I've taken the ZvP stats from all the GSL events this year http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-korean/individual-leagues#tblt-8315-1-default-0-gslZvP is 35:52 (40.2%) With a good sample of 87 total games, having a close to 60% win rate implies either on the whole there are better skilled protoss players and/or there is inherent difficulty in the race matchup. Just give some more detail into this let us look at the games more closely. Code S Jan ZvP 6:5 Code A Jan ZvP 1:4 Code S Mar ZvP 9:13 Code A Mar ZvP 8: 9 GSL S1 up/down ZvP 1:6 (Moon loses 4 wins 1, JookTo loses 2) Code A Mar Qualifiers ZvP 4:3 (MinSeOk wins 2, CoCa wins 2 loses 1, SiKaRi loses 2) Code S Mar Wildcard ZvP 2:0 (Jookto wins 2) GSL S2 Up/down ZvP 2:2 (Losira wins 2, Zenio loses 2) Code A May Qualifiers 2:10 (Terious loses 2, Moon loses 2 wins 1, Junwi loses 2, Royal loses 2, Cezanne loses 2 wins 1) Looking only at the actual Code S and Code A we have 24:31 which is 43.6%. Removing the last one which is at 2:10 we get 33:42 which is 44%. This indicates to me, that yes this does seem pretty bad, and it is not only because of one tournament (why I tested removing the last one which is at 2:10). Let's compare PvT: Code S Jan PvT 8:15 Code A Jan PvT 4:15 Code S Mar PvT 18:8 Code A Mar PvT 6: 7 GSL S1 up/down PvT 0:2 Code A Mar Qualifiers PvT 2:2 Code S Mar Wildcard PvT 0:0 GSL S2 Up/down PvT 4:5 Code A May Qualifiers PvT 2:6 Total 44:60 (42.3%) only CodeS/Code A 36:45 (44.4%) This indicates to me that PvT is broken, and Terran should be nerfed. Do you see the flaw in the reasoning? In my original post I included how far Zergs had made it in tournaments, not just the statistical results to show that individual Zergs are doing pretty well. I think although 87 sounds like a lot, and I appreciated that you did the statistical analysis to show that it was significant, you have to remember that this is not 87 different Protoss versus 87 different Zerg. Moon has 8 games in the 87, making his results almost 1/10 of the data. What is good about you actually checking it, shows that my reasoning is flawed as well. I cannot actually claim that ZvP is not doing well, but then neither can Zergs claim that ZvP is broken. We need more data. 87 results, of which a few players make up a lot of it, cannot be enough to get a good read on this. My reasoning depended on how individual Zergs have been doing in tournaments (relatively well although not quite as well compared to individual Protoss, making it just as far most of the time). That is clearly flawed. Your reasoning depended on how Zergs overall are doing, which I think is the better way, but with too few samples. Either way, I don't think calls for balance are justified considering how few games we have to judge it by. first lets not fight over statistics again, it never ends well. Second, im going to completely ignore my first statement. There is a big difference between the winrate difference in pvt and pvz, pvt is about 11% (which is still ok), but PvZ is is at 20% (which is a lot bigger.) There wa a huge thread a while back that took the winrates of the top 50 (or 100, i forget) european non Zergs, then compared the overall win rate against their vZ win rate. On average the players' vZ winrates were higher by 7%. I don't really know how much evidence people need. Yes 87 isn't conclusive but its still quite a bit. Small sets of data will never be conclusive, but when they all show the same consistent trend I think you can start to make some reasonable assumptions.Basically all tournament first second and third place statistics show Zergs doing considerably worse than other races. Winrates have almost never shown Zerg winrate above 50% except for maybe a 3 week stretch after a patch like the roach range increase. Zerg has quite a talented player pool, definitely at least equal to that of the other races, yet Zerg hasn't even found a fraction of the success other races have. Several respected pros, including idra, morrow, ret, dimaga, catz and slush have said Zerg is weaker. And yet a majority of people will tell you there's nothing wrong, that Zerg players aren't talented enough, and all the QQ is baseless and irrational. It's so ridiculous, I have no idea what it would take for people to actualy admit that something is wrong. A few seasons of zerg not going to the finals in the GSL would be the first step towards a concensus that something is wrong imo. In a season where the GSL finals are PvZ and the WC is + Show Spoiler + it's hard to convince most reasonable folk that zerg are "obviously so underpowered that a balance patch is needed". Zergs in the GSL not stating that they would like to play against protoss might also do something for your argument. It means that there is a perception that P is advantaged against Z. But the only way to know that Z is weak, and that's an inherent problem with the game that needs a patch, is a lot of high-level games. In statistics, "a lot" is generally around 1,000 samples (high-level games). That's needed to wash out the effects of random chance. As someone before me posted, a disproportionally huge chunk of GSL ZvPs were played by Moon. So, it won't be until at least after the NASL Season 1 championships (which incidentally gives the metagame time to evolve) that we can go "Yeah, I think a patch might be called for". Then, if the numbers say Z is UP, it's up to the pros to give their thoughts on potentially why. I understand that July and Nestea and I guess Idra are pretty friggen good, but that doesn't give them the magical ability to say "Despite the fact that new Zerg styles and builds are appearing, none of them will ever fix a core issue". Edit: Actually, since it's ZvP that's considered broken and not ZvT (or at least ZvT is "less" broken), we have a way of testing for that pretty thoroughly: It's it's indeed much harder to ZvP than it is to ZvT (regardless of whether ZvT is balanced or not), then we should expect to see a lot of Zergs with much better winrates versus Terran than versus Protoss, right? Most of the people out there don't understand anything about Z's claiming P is imbalanced. You will never "see" it in the stats, because it's more about in game match up design. Most of the time a zerg player win against a protoss, I'm sorry to say, but it's because the zerg is better.
"When I win, I'm better. When you win, it's imba". We have no way of proving that or measuring that, so it's worthless. We are men of science!
We're talking about one match-up. That means we have a "control": If Zs do a lot worse against P than against T, and P do a lot better against Z than against T, over a large sample size, then PvZ has imbalances.
That's science, that's numbers.
Watch IdrA vs HuK, seriously, as good as HuK is, IdrA is superior in everything during the match, more bases, stronger eco, special tactics and shit. Look at the hallucinate void ray game, IdrA is dropping all over the place, taking a lead bit by bit over HuK.
And he would've won, had he not ragequit. This isn't indicative of anything.
The problem is if you watch the match up the over way around: protoss never try to harass, never try to hinder zerg's economy... it's all about massing a force and crushing the zerg. That's why everybody feel it is imbalance when, in fact, maybe it's not, but the design of the protoss race is fucked up. What happen when Morrow loose ? He work his ass off, play the best he can, and then he get crushface by a a+click superior force. You have to think the game is "imbalance" in some way after that.
But that's just a gut feeling.
On April 11 2011 02:17 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2011 15:49 Ribbon wrote:On April 10 2011 14:58 Treehead wrote:On April 10 2011 14:40 Treehead wrote:On April 10 2011 14:04 loveeholicce wrote:On April 10 2011 11:20 godemperor wrote:On April 10 2011 10:33 flowSthead wrote:On April 10 2011 06:18 redux46 wrote:Looking at the GSL though, Zergs are doing fine against PvZ statistically. The fact that a Zerg has not won the whole thing (at least in Code S) since GSL2, is more that individual players have not won since then, not that Zergs are doing predominantly worse than Protoss.
Are there other tournaments you can give me information on that show Zergs doing substantially worse?
Looking at the GSL predominantly, Zergs are not doing significantly worse against Protoss. It is fairly even, which according to your criteria suggests that perhaps there is no imbalance. Including IEM, Zergs seem to be doing worse against Terran.
GSL 3 had way more Zerg than Protoss, with Protoss just having a phenomenal 62.5% win rate against Terran and Terran having a 57% win rate against Zerg, thus it seems like Protoss is dominating Zergs.
Code S January, equal number of Zerg and Protoss, Zerg makes it farther.
Code A, January, equal number of Zerg and Protoss, both make it to round of 8, and lose to Terrans. Code A statistics favors protoss at 80%, but only 5 games played. TvZ is an even 50%, and PvT is a phenomenal 21.1% out of 19 games, favoring Terran.
Code S March, one less Zerg than Protoss and make it to the final round.
Code A March, more Zergs than Protoss, and wins.
There are predominantly more Terrans overall in the GSL than both Zerg and Protoss, but individual Protoss have been doing well (MC). Zergs overall are not doing worse in GSL than Protoss.
This is basically my point. All of the things that Idra was saying, were things that he feels are happening with the game, not the actual "State of the Game". That could be because Idra himself is in a slight slump in regards with how he plays against Protoss. The actual statistics, and Zerg performance in tournaments, does not seem to back this up.
I've taken the ZvP stats from all the GSL events this year http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-korean/individual-leagues#tblt-8315-1-default-0-gslZvP is 35:52 (40.2%) With a good sample of 87 total games, having a close to 60% win rate implies either on the whole there are better skilled protoss players and/or there is inherent difficulty in the race matchup. Just give some more detail into this let us look at the games more closely. Code S Jan ZvP 6:5 Code A Jan ZvP 1:4 Code S Mar ZvP 9:13 Code A Mar ZvP 8: 9 GSL S1 up/down ZvP 1:6 (Moon loses 4 wins 1, JookTo loses 2) Code A Mar Qualifiers ZvP 4:3 (MinSeOk wins 2, CoCa wins 2 loses 1, SiKaRi loses 2) Code S Mar Wildcard ZvP 2:0 (Jookto wins 2) GSL S2 Up/down ZvP 2:2 (Losira wins 2, Zenio loses 2) Code A May Qualifiers 2:10 (Terious loses 2, Moon loses 2 wins 1, Junwi loses 2, Royal loses 2, Cezanne loses 2 wins 1) Looking only at the actual Code S and Code A we have 24:31 which is 43.6%. Removing the last one which is at 2:10 we get 33:42 which is 44%. This indicates to me, that yes this does seem pretty bad, and it is not only because of one tournament (why I tested removing the last one which is at 2:10). Let's compare PvT: Code S Jan PvT 8:15 Code A Jan PvT 4:15 Code S Mar PvT 18:8 Code A Mar PvT 6: 7 GSL S1 up/down PvT 0:2 Code A Mar Qualifiers PvT 2:2 Code S Mar Wildcard PvT 0:0 GSL S2 Up/down PvT 4:5 Code A May Qualifiers PvT 2:6 Total 44:60 (42.3%) only CodeS/Code A 36:45 (44.4%) This indicates to me that PvT is broken, and Terran should be nerfed. Do you see the flaw in the reasoning? In my original post I included how far Zergs had made it in tournaments, not just the statistical results to show that individual Zergs are doing pretty well. I think although 87 sounds like a lot, and I appreciated that you did the statistical analysis to show that it was significant, you have to remember that this is not 87 different Protoss versus 87 different Zerg. Moon has 8 games in the 87, making his results almost 1/10 of the data. What is good about you actually checking it, shows that my reasoning is flawed as well. I cannot actually claim that ZvP is not doing well, but then neither can Zergs claim that ZvP is broken. We need more data. 87 results, of which a few players make up a lot of it, cannot be enough to get a good read on this. My reasoning depended on how individual Zergs have been doing in tournaments (relatively well although not quite as well compared to individual Protoss, making it just as far most of the time). That is clearly flawed. Your reasoning depended on how Zergs overall are doing, which I think is the better way, but with too few samples. Either way, I don't think calls for balance are justified considering how few games we have to judge it by. first lets not fight over statistics again, it never ends well. Second, im going to completely ignore my first statement. There is a big difference between the winrate difference in pvt and pvz, pvt is about 11% (which is still ok), but PvZ is is at 20% (which is a lot bigger.) There wa a huge thread a while back that took the winrates of the top 50 (or 100, i forget) european non Zergs, then compared the overall win rate against their vZ win rate. On average the players' vZ winrates were higher by 7%. I don't really know how much evidence people need. Yes 87 isn't conclusive but its still quite a bit. Small sets of data will never be conclusive, but when they all show the same consistent trend I think you can start to make some reasonable assumptions.Basically all tournament first second and third place statistics show Zergs doing considerably worse than other races. Winrates have almost never shown Zerg winrate above 50% except for maybe a 3 week stretch after a patch like the roach range increase. Zerg has quite a talented player pool, definitely at least equal to that of the other races, yet Zerg hasn't even found a fraction of the success other races have. Several respected pros, including idra, morrow, ret, dimaga, catz and slush have said Zerg is weaker. And yet a majority of people will tell you there's nothing wrong, that Zerg players aren't talented enough, and all the QQ is baseless and irrational. It's so ridiculous, I have no idea what it would take for people to actualy admit that something is wrong. A few seasons of zerg not going to the finals in the GSL would be the first step towards a concensus that something is wrong imo. In a season where the GSL finals are PvZ and the WC is + Show Spoiler + it's hard to convince most reasonable folk that zerg are "obviously so underpowered that a balance patch is needed". Zergs in the GSL not stating that they would like to play against protoss might also do something for your argument. It means that there is a perception that P is advantaged against Z. But the only way to know that Z is weak, and that's an inherent problem with the game that needs a patch, is a lot of high-level games. In statistics, "a lot" is generally around 1,000 samples (high-level games). That's needed to wash out the effects of random chance. As someone before me posted, a disproportionally huge chunk of GSL ZvPs were played by Moon. So, it won't be until at least after the NASL Season 1 championships (which incidentally gives the metagame time to evolve) that we can go "Yeah, I think a patch might be called for". Then, if the numbers say Z is UP, it's up to the pros to give their thoughts on potentially why. I understand that July and Nestea and I guess Idra are pretty friggen good, but that doesn't give them the magical ability to say "Despite the fact that new Zerg styles and builds are appearing, none of them will ever fix a core issue". Edit: Actually, since it's ZvP that's considered broken and not ZvT (or at least ZvT is "less" broken), we have a way of testing for that pretty thoroughly: It's it's indeed much harder to ZvP than it is to ZvT (regardless of whether ZvT is balanced or not), then we should expect to see a lot of Zergs with much better winrates versus Terran than versus Protoss, right? Here's the thing: if you have a fair number of people that are more likely than not to be wrong (arguably the high level zerg players), you don't actually need that large a sample to be confident in your analysis of their results (see the Condorcet Jury Theorem). The real question is whether or not Zerg players are more likely to be right than wrong when it comes to perceiving imbalance.
I would say they're not.
|
So I just came back from Cavalia, a theatrical circus show combining horses and acrobats that only French Canadians could come of with.
http://www.cavalia.net/index.aspx?lang=EN-CA
As I watched these beautiful, majestic animals prance and trot around, I had this giant smirk on my face. I couldn't stop imagining what must be going on in these horses minds. Like, "Why is my hair braided? Why am I dancing around in a circle? What the fuck are we trying to accomplish here?"
Thank you SOTG. Whenever I look at a horse all I'll see is a sad bastard resigned to quiet misery.
|
Change the download provider please...
|
On April 11 2011 06:39 Nik0 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2011 06:32 relyt wrote:On April 10 2011 23:09 Nomadic wrote:
Please make IdrA a pillar :3! I second this motion! I third it!
I second the thirding of this motion!
|
Idra actually did a good job on the show, he's not necessarily the most likable person, but he offers a good controversial viewpoint to the show. Five people on a talk show might be too many, so I hope you continue to bring him on anytime there's a cancellation or opening.
|
JP, Incontrol, Tyler & Day9 are all pretty conservative when talking about anything balance related, so it's kind of a good equalizer to throw an Idra wrench into the SOTG works. Of course even when you do none of them really wanna talk about it :p so maybe it's not that great after all. Incontrol might be bold enough to try to talk Idra down, but when he wasn't there we all saw what happened.
Idra also adds some drama that we lost when Incontrol decided to go all PC on us.
|
On April 11 2011 12:17 Redlol wrote:
Idra actually did a good job on the show, he's not necessarily the most likable person, but he offers a good controversial viewpoint to the show. Five people on a talk show might be too many, so I hope you continue to bring him on anytime there's a cancellation or opening.
I find that Idra offers a more compelling antagonist viewpoint than InControl does. I think of InControl more like the "color" commentary half the time.
|
On April 11 2011 05:17 flowSthead wrote:I was sent the link to the old thread about international pros and how well zerg does. Here is the link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=185691¤tpage=AllIf you notice, it was made in January 19, so what I did was look at the links he gave for his data, and then checked in regards to more recent data. I separated the data going backwards based on April 4th to March 1st (basically the month of March) and February 28th to Jan27 (basically the month of February). Here is what I got: March Gold: Terran 39 Protoss 26 Zerg 26 March Silver: Terran 36 Protoss 27 Zerg 27 Random 1 February Gold: Terran 46 Protoss 33 Zerg 23 February Silver: Terran 39 Protoss 38 Zerg 25 So what do we see? In the last month, Zergs have been doing equally as well in tournaments as Protoss, and I mean exactly equally. Terrans have been dominating in all aspects for the last two months, and back a month ago Zergs were doing substantially worse than both races. Admittedly, this has the same weaknesses as before. These are just individual stats of tournaments wins of 1st and 2nd place, not a large amount of statistical data. But if anything, the trend seems to be positive for Zerg, negative for Protoss, and neutral to negative for Terran. Looking back at the original link, I have not had a chance to look at individual winrates of top pros, I will do that a bit later possibly. Edit: If anyone does not trust me or wants to double check, here is the data, I used an excel spreadsheet to count: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Asv1-ALiHzT8dE5GYmFyMUI1ZUk0ZzUteERYMS16V2c&hl=en#gid=0And here is where the data came from: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leaguesThe first one is 2011 US Go4SC2 Cup #44 Attero MarinekngXPn The last one is 2011 Viking Cup #27 Jimpo elfi
I don't know how significant some of these are (ownmygroin > lobber in craftcup), and you gotta remember that so many of these are small tournaments playing on the crappy blizzard maps (where Terran >> all) but interesting none the less. Looks like Protoss haven't been findign their stride in these online tourneys either.
Would be pretty cool if you could calculate the winrates of the top players tho, i'd love to see that :D.
|
On April 11 2011 12:05 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2011 06:39 Nik0 wrote:On April 11 2011 06:32 relyt wrote:On April 10 2011 23:09 Nomadic wrote:
Please make IdrA a pillar :3! I second this motion! I third it! I second the thirding of this motion!
I fifth it? Sixth? I agree with this is what I'm trying to say. More imba talk please!
|
Sean instantly dismissing Idra's statement wasn't the greatest.
Though the full race is not explored, so it wasn't totally bad.
Idra should be on the show more often, but he sits too far back normally (not literally) he just doesn't talk enough at all.
Geoff is a necessity 
I wish nony would talk more too
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
