EPTFurthermore, the correlation between popularity and balance isn't necessarily perfect. For example, because there are undeniably less Zerg players all around (i.e., if you took silver stats, there would still be less Zerg than Toss/Terran), the stats would be a lot more troubling if there were more Zerg at the top than Terran or Toss.
Racial Distribution in Patch 1.0 - Diamond Ladder - Page 18
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
starckr
26 Posts
Furthermore, the correlation between popularity and balance isn't necessarily perfect. For example, because there are undeniably less Zerg players all around (i.e., if you took silver stats, there would still be less Zerg than Toss/Terran), the stats would be a lot more troubling if there were more Zerg at the top than Terran or Toss. | ||
|
Opinion
United States236 Posts
Protoss is considered balanced in relation to the other 2 races. Zerg is considered UP in relation to the other 2 races. This data correlates with this observation. What we need now is for a new race to become OP and run the data again. Hypothetically speaking if this data is related to racial balance and Zerg was the OP race and Terran was the UP race we should see a reverse of the data. So it is easy to solve the problem. We intentionally OP Zerg, UP Terran and run the test again. keeping Toss balanced as the control. We intentionally OP Toss, UP Zerg and run the test again. keeping Terran balanced as the control. We intentionally OP Terran, UP Toss and run the test again. keeping Zerg balanced as the control. Run the test over and over until we have sufficient data to conclude that the OP race will end up the most played with the most wins at the highest levels of diamond (1500 +) It is the simplest way to solve this once and for all. I'll contact Blizzard and let them know what needs to be done, be right back. | ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
I'm just going to quote a few informative posts from earlier in the thread, before it got trolled by certain posters. On September 02 2010 07:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote: As far as I know, sc2ranks is pretty damn comprehensive of Diamond, especially high Diamond (where it seems some people have a problem with the "sample size"). Yeah, the number of people in the 1500+ group is small but that doesn't mean that there is a problem with the sample size. These numbers aren't extrapolated from a small population of the 1500+ Diamond group. These numbers directly represent that group. On September 02 2010 08:34 StarDrive wrote: There are 360 players 1200+. The null hypothesis is that 1/3 of them prefer Terran. We observe around 1/2 of them preferring Terran. Doing some basic statistics with normal approximation of the binomial distribution, the z-score is 6.7. We would observe this Terran favored skew with probability far less than one in a billion. The probability that this Terran favored skew is purely by chance is less than the probability a randomly chosen person has an IQ > 200. On September 02 2010 08:51 ryanAnger wrote: Okay, I'm looking at various groupings of the Top Players in the world, and these are the stats (excluding random): Top 5000 Players in the World - 33.57% (1687) Terran, 25.19% (1266) Zerg, 36.22% (1820) Protoss Top 2500 - 36.38 (911) T, 23.80 (596) Z, 36.50 (914) P Top 1000 - 39.80 (398) T, 21.30 (213) Z, 36.90 (369) P Top 500 - 43.63 (219) T, 20.72 (104) Z, 34.06 (171) P Top 250 - 51.20 (128) T, 18.80 (47) Z, 28.00 (70) P Top 100 - 50.50 (51) T, 16.83 (17) Z, 29.70 (30) P This is essentially the same information the graph shows (supports the same idea) just presented in a manner that the lesser-minded might understand. Regardless of what the balance issue is at the moment, it is very obvious that Terran is dominating at the highest level, and only an idiot would try to dispute that. Can we attribute these statistics to overall popularity of the race? Extremely doubtful, considering out of the ~65,000 players in Diamond (Global) Protoss is the most popular with 35%, while Terran is second at 31%. If there were a direct correlation between popularity and overall rank, Protoss should be at the very least tied with Terran at the higher levels, if not leading. | ||
Chill
Calgary26003 Posts
It's amazing how some people can remain ignorant or intentionally dismiss clear evidence as faulty when it is actually their own logic that is at fault (since they lack even the most basic understanding of statistics). My guess is that they're trying to get this thread locked by starting a flame war with their awful posting. I hope they get banned before this happens. I'm just going to quote a few informative posts from earlier in the thread, before it got trolled by certain posters. On September 02 2010 07:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote: As far as I know, sc2ranks is pretty damn comprehensive of Diamond, especially high Diamond (where it seems some people have a problem with the "sample size"). Yeah, the number of people in the 1500+ group is small but that doesn't mean that there is a problem with the sample size. These numbers aren't extrapolated from a small population of the 1500+ Diamond group. These numbers directly represent that group. On September 02 2010 08:34 StarDrive wrote: There are 360 players 1200+. The null hypothesis is that 1/3 of them prefer Terran. We observe around 1/2 of them preferring Terran. Doing some basic statistics with normal approximation of the binomial distribution, the z-score is 6.7. We would observe this Terran favored skew with probability far less than one in a billion. The probability that this Terran favored skew is purely by chance is less than the probability a randomly chosen person has an IQ > 200. On September 02 2010 08:51 ryanAnger wrote: Okay, I'm looking at various groupings of the Top Players in the world, and these are the stats (excluding random): Top 5000 Players in the World - 33.57% (1687) Terran, 25.19% (1266) Zerg, 36.22% (1820) Protoss Top 2500 - 36.38 (911) T, 23.80 (596) Z, 36.50 (914) P Top 1000 - 39.80 (398) T, 21.30 (213) Z, 36.90 (369) P Top 500 - 43.63 (219) T, 20.72 (104) Z, 34.06 (171) P Top 250 - 51.20 (128) T, 18.80 (47) Z, 28.00 (70) P Top 100 - 50.50 (51) T, 16.83 (17) Z, 29.70 (30) P This is essentially the same information the graph shows (supports the same idea) just presented in a manner that the lesser-minded might understand. Regardless of what the balance issue is at the moment, it is very obvious that Terran is dominating at the highest level, and only an idiot would try to dispute that. Can we attribute these statistics to overall popularity of the race? Extremely doubtful, considering out of the ~65,000 players in Diamond (Global) Protoss is the most popular with 35%, while Terran is second at 31%. If there were a direct correlation between popularity and overall rank, Protoss should be at the very least tied with Terran at the higher levels, if not leading. This is a good post. I removed the embedded quotes (sorry teamsolid) to hope that people read it. | ||
|
noD
2230 Posts
| ||
|
Jenslyn87
Denmark527 Posts
| ||
|
MamiyaOtaru
United States1687 Posts
On September 03 2010 06:31 noD wrote: so protoss would be the imba race for the ones that doesnt play pretty godly =P that conclusion would be a lot harder to draw. Sucks for Zerg either way  | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
On September 02 2010 08:29 Sfydjklm wrote: thats like saying that oil CEO's are not really wealthy because sample size is too small. That really made me laugh. So seriously though... pretty sure there is no question that Terran have too many strong options. Blizzard is going in the right direction with the next patch. These numbers back that up a fair bit, although tournament results are quite important, too. | ||
|
starckr
26 Posts
thats like saying that oil CEO's are not really wealthy because sample size is too small. hmmmm.... it's more like saying "90% of top 10 richest people in the world are male." while those are the actual statistics of the top 10 richest people in the world, are they really that helpful in determining overall balance between men and women? | ||
|
Winter_mute
Germany40 Posts
On September 03 2010 07:19 starckr wrote: hmmmm.... it's more like saying "90% of top 10 richest people in the world are male." while those are the actual statistics of the top 10 richest people in the world, are they really that helpful in determining overall balance between men and women? Well it would be helpfull under the condition that men and women all earn their money with the same job specific to women or men. And if there were a higher power, that compares individual men and women against each other, rates their performance and then compares them again, adjusts their payment etc. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On September 03 2010 06:31 noD wrote: okay the better 340 players in the world are terran and the 28k bellow them are protoss, so protoss would be the imba race for the ones that doesnt play pretty godly =P That's... an odd hypothetical scenario, and the only explanation I can think of for it is that there's a very specific skill point that one must pass to be any good with Terran, and once that point is passed, it becomes incredible. Unfortunately, it isn't relevant to this discussion in the slightest as those statistics simply aren't true. | ||
|
Uhh Negative
United States1090 Posts
| ||
|
Black Gun
Germany4482 Posts
On September 03 2010 06:31 noD wrote: okay the better 340 players in the world are terran and the 28k bellow them are protoss, so protoss would be the imba race for the ones that doesnt play pretty godly =P this was pretty much the case in bw: protoss were less mechanically demanding and thus the most popular and most successful race among amateurs and up to the korean semipros. at the same time, protoss were the by far least successful race in terms of starleagues, ie the very top end of the hierarchy. btw displaying this stuff in percent is kinda misleading as it inflates the graph: if there are more terrans at the cost of fewer zergs at the top end, the distance between the terran bar and the zerg bar increases by twice this change in player base. for a single subsample, e.g. the players above 1.3k, the bars themselves still do make sense as they correspond to the number of players of this population. the comparison between subsamples, e.g. those between 1k and 1.3k and those above 1.3k, will get graphically distorted though. the increase of racial disparity between different regions of diamond ladder seems bigger than it actually is on this figure. | ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
On September 03 2010 07:51 Black Gun wrote: this was pretty much the case in bw: protoss were less mechanically demanding and thus the most popular and most successful race among amateurs and up to the korean semipros. at the same time, protoss were the by far least successful race in terms of starleagues, ie the very top end of the hierarchy. btw displaying this stuff in percent is kinda misleading as it inflates the graph: if there are more terrans at the cost of fewer zergs at the top end, the distance between the terran bar and the zerg bar increases by twice this change in player base. for a single subsample, e.g. the players above 1.3k, the bars themselves still do make sense as they correspond to the number of players of this population. the comparison between subsamples, e.g. those between 1k and 1.3k and those above 1.3k, will get graphically distorted though. the increase of racial disparity between different regions of diamond ladder seems bigger than it actually is on this figure. The number of players at the top can not be discounted, even if it is a smaller amount. If all the SUPERSTAR KOREAN players were all protoss, that would be big deal, even if the amount of players causing that descepancy is small | ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that, given equal skill- Zerg is going to lose. There is so much more to do, and so much more that can go wrong. I played Terran all though Beta and up to release. Last 4 weeks have been playing Zerg- both at low Diamond level. I'm not sure if its 100% the "strength of the units" type of imbalance. I may favor the argument that fundamentally, Zerg is just far more difficult to play. The scouting, the macro, the fragility of the units, the need to creep- the need to have More workers and More units than a Terran with Mule- it's just harder mechanically. Thank you and have a good day. | ||
|
rackdude
United States882 Posts
On September 02 2010 08:34 StarDrive wrote: There are 360 players 1200+. The null hypothesis is that 1/3 of them prefer Terran. We observe around 1/2 of them preferring Terran. Doing some basic statistics with normal approximation of the binomial distribution, the z-score is 6.7. We would observe this Terran favored skew with probability far less than one in a billion. The probability that this Terran favored skew is purely by chance is less than the probability a randomly chosen person has an IQ > 200. This part is actually wrong. The null hypothesis should not be that 1/3 of them prefer Tarran. That would measure how unlikely it is for this deviation to randomly occur IF everyone had an equal chance of choosing any of the races. Even though this model is too broad, it might still work in many cases. However, a much better model would be a Goodness of Fit. The null hypothesis should be that the percent of Tarran players in the high diamond represents the general population of players (all of Bnet). This test will probably show that the high diamond population does not represent the general population (at a given alpha), and thus you can conclude that Tarran players are over represented in the upper rungs of the ladder. The main reason you would want to do this is because your hypothesis would be affected by many things you would not want to show up in the statistics. What race do more people play? Then people can begin to go, "maybe that's because of the campaign". However, a Goodness of Fit test takes into account what the actual population is like, and therefore what race is the most played has no bearing as you are just testing whether the subgroup fits the whole. Now, if you find that the subgroup of the upper rungs of the ladder does not statistically fit the general population, then you can begin to conclude things like "Tarran is OP, which makes them able to move up the ladder easier since the matchmaking system is going to move them up until they have a 50% winrate" or any "Tarran is not OP" reasoning you like. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On September 03 2010 08:07 rackdude wrote: This part is actually wrong. The null hypothesis should not be that 1/3 of them prefer Tarran. That would measure how unlikely it is for this deviation to randomly occur IF everyone had an equal chance of choosing any of the races. Even though this model is too broad, it might still work in many cases. However, a much better model would be a Goodness of Fit. The null hypothesis should be that the percent of Tarran players in the high diamond represents the general population of players (all of Bnet). This test will probably show that the high diamond population does not represent the general population (at a given alpha), and thus you can conclude that Tarran players are over represented in the upper rungs of the ladder. The main reason you would want to do this is because your hypothesis would be affected by many things you would not want to show up in the statistics. What race do more people play? Then people can begin to go, "maybe that's because of the campaign". However, a Goodness of Fit test takes into account what the actual population is like, and therefore what race is the most played has no bearing as you are just testing whether the subgroup fits the whole. Now, if you find that the subgroup of the upper rungs of the ladder does not statistically fit the general population, then you can begin to conclude things like "Tarran is OP, which makes them able to move up the ladder easier since the matchmaking system is going to move them up until they have a 50% winrate" or any "Tarran is not OP" reasoning you like. Look at the end of the previous page. I examined this possibility. It's still pretty absurd. | ||
|
Phayze
Canada2029 Posts
On September 03 2010 06:22 Chill wrote: Teamsolid wrote: It's amazing how some people can remain ignorant or intentionally dismiss clear evidence as faulty when it is actually their own logic that is at fault (since they lack even the most basic understanding of statistics). My guess is that they're trying to get this thread locked by starting a flame war with their awful posting. I hope they get banned before this happens. I'm just going to quote a few informative posts from earlier in the thread, before it got trolled by certain posters. This is a good post. I removed the embedded quotes (sorry teamsolid) to hope that people read it. Hero chill fighting the trolls with appropriate quotes and statistics. Chill fightinggg! I love how zerg just quickly drops as players get better. Tester has been supporting this evidence since the beginning of beta, anyone who disagrees with what the statistics are showing is just plain ignorant. | ||
|
yourwhiteshadow
United States442 Posts
HOWEVER...no one really knows exactly how blizzard's ladder system works. its mind boggling that it can be so skewed. even protoss seems advantaged compared to zerg. this graph is also skewed. should be # of players not percentages, percentages makes it seem weird. # of players should also be normalized. this graph is full of fail. author probably has not taken a stats class. can OP send me the raw data as in... 600 pts level: xxx # of protoss players yyy # of zerg ... ... i'd like to do a better representation. edit: this can't be a bell curve because its just such a poorly represented graph. | ||
|
Toxigen
United States390 Posts
This is a race distribution of early phase 1 in the beta, when Zerg was much more powerful than its current incarnation due to roaches still being 1 supply and having 2 base armor. Now, you'd have to make a couple assumptions to disprove the argument that Zerg are unpopular for reasons not related to effectiveness/underpoweredness: 1. The race distribution of all leagues in phase 1 platinum isn't very different from the distribution within phase 1's platinum leagues (i.e., no race was over- or under-represented in platinum at the time). 2. The race distribution of all leagues in the beta would have been similar to the distribution of the live game had the game been released as it was balance-wise on 3/26/2010 (when this data was gathered). It seems that the non-humanoid insect-like nature of the Zerg didn't bother 29.8% of the platinum players back then. Furthermore, Terran and Protoss are closer to each other and to Zerg (30.1% and 29.2%). If it were possible to find, it would be interesting to find population data from earlier in the game's development (i.e., back when Zerg was overrepresented and considered "OP" in Korea in phase 1). While it's impossible to say either way, I'd be leaning towards the notion that Zerg population was overall was proportionally higher back then -- and maybe not just on Asian servers. Furthermore, if one accepts the two assumptions above, one could also say that a race's ease-of-use or viability DOES affect how much of the population chooses to play that race, if you compare this distribution to today's diamond league. Food for thought. | ||
| ||
