Racial Distribution in Patch 1.0 - Diamond Ladder - Page 13

Duban

United States548 Posts

September 02 2010 14:07 GMT

#241

Looks to me like terran definately has a biased. Think about it this way. On every rating and level until the very top the win/loss ratio is 50/50 because the player skill is shifted by the race. A deservingly 1000 rated Terran will have a 1200 rating and face players that are outright better than they are. an 800 will face 1000 level players, 800 will face 600 etc. For most of those levels the population will be representative of the SC2 population as a whole.

This breaks down on the highest level of play where there simply aren't any 1500 rated Zerg/Protoss to face the 1300 level terrans. Therefore at top levels Terrans dominate because there aren't any players who are outright better than they are to mix in and keep a “fair” score.

Its as if the entire population of SC2 is shifted 200 points in favor of Terran.

TheAngelofDeath

United States2033 Posts

September 02 2010 14:12 GMT

#242

LOL at all the T players at the end. And again, random is obviously OP. :p

ggrrg

Bulgaria2717 Posts

September 02 2010 14:21 GMT

#243

The graph in the OP surely does look worrying but after seeing the absolute number graph, it doesn't look that bad. Sample size seems really quite small in the upper level.

Snowfield

1289 Posts

September 02 2010 14:23 GMT

#244

Protoss OP at 600 points obviously

But it would seem that there are just more active "experts" playing terran atm

EnderCN

United States499 Posts

September 02 2010 14:26 GMT

#245

Looks about right to me. The balance isn't bad until you are really good and really understand how to exploit the issues. Balance is always going to be hardest to tweak properly at the highest levels of play.

clickrush

Switzerland3257 Posts

September 02 2010 14:27 GMT

#246

On September 02 2010 23:21 ggrrg wrote:
The graph in the OP surely does look worrying but after seeing the absolute number graph, it doesn't look that bad. Sample size seems really quite small in the upper level.

its not a sample its the population (which was stated 10 times in this thread).

but still... the chart doesnt show anything at all IMO. there are many possible meanings:

1) good players just happen to like playing terran
2) terran is easyer to master than the other races
3) the other races havent yet figured out their matchups (especially vT)
4) terran is overpowered

maybe its a little bit of everything but I think the main reason comes from reason nr3.

gillon

Sweden1578 Posts

September 02 2010 14:32 GMT

#247

On September 02 2010 08:08 Doomrok wrote:
Terran is perfectly balanced, I mean, look at my Terran vs Zerg win rate! http://www.danrok.com/stats/

r:r

And your ZvT is high aswell, what's your point?

Sleight

2471 Posts

September 02 2010 15:05 GMT

#248

Hey y'all...

Look at the graph again and the n values at the bottom of each graph. The rightmost bar as TWENTY people in it. This will barely be statistically significant when referencing a bigger population that is known not to be perfectly balanced.

Could this graph by rescaled via (n * percentwithin subgroup)? That way we can see that the "huge terran imbalance" is only in a tiny population that none of us will be part of.

Y'all are freaking monkeys if you didn't notice the fact that the population subsets these are pulled out of are VASTLY DISPARATE.

EDIT: Upon doing calculations, this graph actually shows that Protoss is the most overrepresented race above 600. In fact, it is statistically significantly higher than Terran or Zerg. WHOOPS! Looks like we should be discussing Protoss IMBA?

kGold

Canada66 Posts

September 02 2010 15:13 GMT

#249

Arghhhhh whether terran is extremely overpowered or not, these stats mean nothing. It's a representation of how many players are playing each race.

Lots of top players being terran =/= terran stronger than the other races.

Obviously the game needs balancing but you can't prove it with numbers. With the way matchmaking works, and the point system, we can not provide any reasonable arguments. We KNOW the game needs balancing because of the games we've watched and the strategies we have seen and the counters to those strategies we've come up with. Blizzard also knows this, which is why they are releasing a balance patch...

Im probably not the only one sick of people trying to make it look worse than it actually is with these retarded numbers.

Does anyone remember in Beta phase 1 when terran was weak? Blizzard openly admitted Terran was doing poorly compared to the other races. Sure the race was buffed throughout the beta test, but what also happened was that players learned how to use all the handy Terran mechanics.

Sentient

United States437 Posts

September 02 2010 15:18 GMT

#250

On September 03 2010 00:05 Sleight wrote:
Hey y'all...

Look at the graph again and the n values at the bottom of each graph. The rightmost bar as TWENTY people in it. This will barely be statistically significant when referencing a bigger population that is known not to be perfectly balanced.

The trend holds over 160 players (the top 3 groups, more if you count the decline in Protoss). 20 players is a decent sample size, contrary to the random assertions otherwise. I will see if I have time tonight to actually do the numbers. You can draw statistics from these, and my intuition says there is a fair chunk of significance to them.

And this deserves reposting:

TT: People who don't know statistics throwing around jargon like 'sample size'.

"Terran players make up the majority of 1300+ Diamond ladder players" - FACT. This is a population census. It is fully comprehensive in what it measures. There is no confidence to consider. These are the exact numbers for the moment in time when they were collected.

kunstprodukt

25 Posts

September 02 2010 15:21 GMT

#251

Just to complete this topic a bit.
Taken from a 200.000 Players database / Europe. Showing the Win / Loss Ratio and the Amount of Races within a Pointrange.

Diamond only:

Pointrange: 500 - 600
Terran Players: 399 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.8325814536)
Protoss Players: 464 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.6056034483)
Zerg Players: 302 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.6768211921)
Random Players: 121 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.6049586777)

Pointrange: 600 - 700
Terran Players: 535 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.4304672897)
Protoss Players: 678 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.2837758112)
Zerg Players: 514 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.9593385214)
Random Players: 164 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.662195122)

Pointrange: 700 - 800
Terran Players: 412 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.4825242718)
Protoss Players: 477 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.8161425577)
Zerg Players: 420 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.7042857143)
Random Players: 117 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.3222222222)

Pointrange: 800 - 900
Terran Players: 255 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.7874509804)
Protoss Players: 363 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.9438016529)
Zerg Players: 278 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.1960431655)
Random Players: 66 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.7045454545)

Pointrange: 900 - 1000
Terran Players: 173 (Win/Loss Ratio: 56.2150289017)
Protoss Players: 208 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.2403846154)
Zerg Players: 167 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.0862275449)
Random Players: 31 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.8774193548)

Pointrange: 1000 - 1100
Terran Players: 98 (Win/Loss Ratio: 57.0183673469)
Protoss Players: 106 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.408490566)
Zerg Players: 76 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.6763157895)
Random Players: 11 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.0272727273)

Pointrange: 1100 - 1200
Terran Players: 51 (Win/Loss Ratio: 57.1196078431)
Protoss Players: 50 (Win / Loss Ratio: 56.056)
Zerg Players: 33 (Win / Loss Ratio: 56.0575757576)
Random Players: 3 (Win / Loss Ratio: 59.4)

Pointrange: 1200 - 9999
Terran Players: 49 (Win/Loss Ratio: 60.2224489796)
Protoss Players: 32 (Win / Loss Ratio: 58.74375)
Zerg Players: 21 (Win / Loss Ratio: 57.4333333333)
Random Players: 2 (Win / Loss Ratio: 59)

And sorry. No Graph. Maybe someone wants to make one

edit:
now with "Random" Players.

tipakee

United States127 Posts

September 02 2010 15:25 GMT

#252

On September 03 2010 00:21 kunstprodukt wrote:
Just to complete this topic a bit.
Taken from a 200.000 Players database / Europe. Showing the Win / Loss Ratio and the Amount of Races within a Pointrange.

Diamond only:

Pointrange: 500 - 600
Terran Players: 399 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.8325814536)
Protoss Players: 464 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.6056034483)
Zerg Players: 302 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.6768211921)

Pointrange: 600 - 700
Terran Players: 535 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.4304672897)|
Protoss Players: 678 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.2837758112)|
Zerg Players: 514 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.9593385214)

Pointrange: 600 - 700
Terran Players: 535 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.4304672897)|
Protoss Players: 678 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.2837758112)|
Zerg Players: 514 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.9593385214)

Pointrange: 700 - 800
Terran Players: 412 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.4825242718)|
Protoss Players: 477 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.8161425577)|
Zerg Players: 420 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.7042857143)

Pointrange: 800 - 900
Terran Players: 255 (Win/Loss Ratio: 55.7874509804)|
Protoss Players: 363 (Win / Loss Ratio: 54.9438016529)|
Zerg Players: 278 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.1960431655)
Pointrange: 900 - 1000
Terran Players: 173 (Win/Loss Ratio: 56.2150289017)|
Protoss Players: 208 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.2403846154)|
Zerg Players: 167 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.0862275449)

Pointrange: 1000 - 1100
Terran Players: 98 (Win/Loss Ratio: 57.0183673469)|
Protoss Players: 106 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.408490566)|
Zerg Players: 76 (Win / Loss Ratio: 55.6763157895)

Pointrange: 1100 - 1200
Terran Players: 51 (Win/Loss Ratio: 57.1196078431)|
Protoss Players: 50 (Win / Loss Ratio: 56.056)|
Zerg Players: 33 (Win / Loss Ratio: 56.0575757576)

Pointrange: 1200 - 9999
Terran Players: 49 (Win/Loss Ratio: 60.2224489796)|
Protoss Players: 32 (Win / Loss Ratio: 58.74375)|
Zerg Players: 21 (Win / Loss Ratio: 57.4333333333)

And sorry. No Graph. Maybe someone wants to make one

Im confused what was the exact website where this info came from? i see no random in this. Does this website count random as whatever race they spawned in that specific game?

Daxten

Germany127 Posts

September 02 2010 15:26 GMT

#253

I love you for this Data! Hope this shows everyone how tiny the imbalance is atm. I accept that Terran needs some small Tweaks, but most of the time you should be better looking at yourself then on the balance

Zombo Joe

Canada850 Posts

September 02 2010 15:28 GMT

#254

Terran just has more options, which means that higher level players will be able to exploit them much more efficiently than lower level players.

Thats my hypothesis of why there are more Terran wins at higher levels.

I think Zerg, Protoss should be buffed by giving them more options, possibly new units but realistically new abilities. It would not affect lower levels too much due to the APM requirement and would help tremendously in the higher levels.

Something as simple as giving Warp Prism Energy Fields a boost to attack speed for Protoss units. Or adding an upgrade to make Transfuse AoE and also give a big speed increase for Queens. How often do you see Queens used on the offensive?

Grummler

Germany743 Posts

September 02 2010 15:28 GMT

#255

On September 02 2010 23:07 Duban wrote:
Looks to me like terran definately has a biased. Think about it this way. On every rating and level until the very top the win/loss ratio is 50/50 because the player skill is shifted by the race. A deservingly 1000 rated Terran will have a 1200 rating and face players that are outright better than they are. an 800 will face 1000 level players, 800 will face 600 etc. For most of those levels the population will be representative of the SC2 population as a whole.

This breaks down on the highest level of play where there simply aren't any 1500 rated Zerg/Protoss to face the 1300 level terrans. Therefore at top levels Terrans dominate because there aren't any players who are outright better than they are to mix in and keep a “fair” score.

Its as if the entire population of SC2 is shifted 200 points in favor of Terran.

Then terran should also get more points than other races, cause they fight stronger enemies. While losing less points and winning more AND having the same win ratio as other race, they should have 200 average points more.

RIght now (global Diamond):

Protoss 581
Terran 581
Zerg 585

But i guess someone will manage to argue why terran is op because of zerg having the most points.

On September 03 2010 00:28 Zombo Joe wrote:
Terran just has more options, which means that higher level players will be able to exploit them much more efficiently than lower level players.

Thats my hypothesis of why there are more Terran wins at higher levels.

Sounds reasonably.

kunstprodukt

25 Posts

September 02 2010 15:29 GMT

#256

On September 03 2010 00:25 tipakee wrote:

Im confused what was the exact website where this info came from? i see no random in this. Does this website count random as whatever race they spawned in that specific game?

The Data is not published, because it was crawled by my own bots.
Well, Random is within the DB, but i was not sure if it would be interesting to have it in the table here. So i skipped it.

tipakee

United States127 Posts

September 02 2010 15:31 GMT

#257

On September 03 2010 00:29 kunstprodukt wrote:

Show nested quote +

The Data is not published, because it was crawled by my own bots.
Well, Random is within the DB, but i was not sure if it would be interesting to have it in the table here. So i skipped it.

O ok, just checking since i'm a random player myself and the numbers just intrest me. thanks for the time to composite your table

TheStorm

France39 Posts

September 02 2010 15:38 GMT

#258

Agreed with Tyler... The end of the graph is not a sample, it's the entire population. How many people actually studied statistics past high school here?

What this graph means is "there is more terran top players than any other race, zerg is the worst". You draw your conclusions from here. At the very worst cut 1% at each end and you'll still get very smilar stats.

My conclusion is: the higher you are in diamond league, the higher the difference "little" imabalances make, and favor terran.

And I play random.

People at 1500 diamond don't play terran because "it's the campaign race" omg.

ReplayArk

Germany23 Posts

September 02 2010 15:38 GMT

#259

@kunstprodukt if you present this data as scv I would like to see it, I thought about doing a little crawling myself, maybe we can work together. Do you want to do a little query at your database and look at the matchups, I have not done so because I am not suceeding in getting enough profiles (also it increses the possibility of spam prevention ban a lot).

*Edit: I would like to see the data as CSV, not as SCV though I would look at a SCV with the data written on it.*

kunstprodukt

25 Posts

September 02 2010 15:39 GMT

#260

On September 03 2010 00:31 tipakee wrote:

Show nested quote +

O ok, just checking since i'm a random player myself and the numbers just intrest me. thanks for the time to composite your table

did an "edit" and added random players.