EPTGetting 2nd or 3rd place at a major LAN event carries a lot more prestige and reward than winning 10 small weekly online events, but if you win lots of small events then it may be more profitable than getting 8th at a major event.
Tournament winners since release - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
phuzi0n
United States308 Posts
Getting 2nd or 3rd place at a major LAN event carries a lot more prestige and reward than winning 10 small weekly online events, but if you win lots of small events then it may be more profitable than getting 8th at a major event. | ||
|
Ghazwan
Netherlands444 Posts
| ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
On September 14 2010 01:29 TurpinOS wrote: Hope this was sarcastic, if you really think that the stat shows anything at all on the balance I dont know what to say. (im not debating if there is a balance problem or not here, but that stats without knowing the amount of players of each race doesnt prove nothing at all) It does not if you just look at the statistics, but it does if you use simple logic... Pro/Semipro-Players want to win, so they'll often choose the race which seems to be the best. Better players per race ---> more wins per race More wins per race ---> better players per race AND Better race ---> more wins per race Better race ---> better players per race (just because more players means a higher chance of better players) If you look at those statistics and say that theres nothing to worry about with the balance, you're just trying to convince you/others of sth. that apparently isn't true at all. | ||
|
Pekkz
Norway1505 Posts
You would think that when there are so few zergs on the top, atleast they would be better at ZvT and ZvP since they (allmost)never get to play mirrors. I think the most obvious balance issues are: Protoss: warpgates power ( no travel time for reinforcements) when pushing zergs early. Terran: You have to account for 5-6 completely different openings every fucking game that will crush you if you dont know its coming with very limited scouting options. Also wall off and bunkers completely shut down any sort of harassment or attack zerg can do before muta for NO investment in defence. They also have the 3 best harassment units in the game that can end the game with some easy drone kills. Last im just gonna say that in todays GSL Gerrard vs Clide you can see how retarded it is. Gerrard stopped Clides harass in game 2 without losing anything. He took down dropship in the end with 4 hellions in it. This failed harass for clide that could have killed every single drone didnt seem to set him back at all. When he pushed out he completely crushed gerrard easy since zerg made some tiny micro misstakes and didnt land too many banelings on the marines. My point is, terran can make stupid ammount of misstakes and still win. If zerg makes one misstake, its usually GG. | ||
|
cuppatea
United Kingdom1401 Posts
After that I checked Gosugamers.net and added the tournament results that weren't listed on TL, as long as they featured multiple high level players. If I wanted to include beta results (or prize money) I'd have had to individually sift through 100 different tournament pages, which would have taken hours, which really wasn't something I felt like doing. If anyone wants to compile a list of beta tournament results (or prize earnings) then feel free. As for not including players with 0 tournament wins, as I said, I was originally planning to but there were like 30 players with only 2nd place finishes and adding them all would have taken too much time and made the list too long. I might come back to that later, though. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
@Pekkz: Right on the head bro! | ||
|
Escape
Canada306 Posts
Tournament wins by race: ![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/Ticon_small.png) - 48![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/common/gold.png) ![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/Picon_small.png) - 22![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/Zicon_small.png) - 4Tournament winners by race: - 21 - 12 - 2[/QUOTE]I think you also need to include the % of race entry to make this more meaningful. example: if 75% terran entries gave 75% terran winners, then it's pretty "balanced". | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
Banshees (cloaked or uncloaked): insta-lose you the game if not prepared (two come in and pick off one queen, or take out like 10 drones before you can do anything to counter it). Reactor hellions: easiest to deal with IF scouted but retardedly strong if not scouted. Quick thor push w/ scvs: impossible to stop with only speedlings, which sucks if you dind't go roaches. Incredibly hard either way Reaper --> Marauder tech switch with requiring the opposite counter Bunker rush in mineral line --> prevents most FE builds if scouted (unlike BW where you needed to 8rax or 10rax proxy for a bunker rush, you can do a normal standard build and still have plenty of time to bunker rush). Bunkers at ramp with reapers... not to mention you can salvage the bunkers... Zerg: Roach all-in: impossible not to see if scanned Baneling bust: impossible not to see if scanned, build an extra two depots on your walloff and you're protected at no cost to you, or a bunker which you can salvage anwways, or just go reaper play and once your wall falls your 5+ reapers >> bling bust. Not to mention reapers give you unlimited scouting. | ||
|
Morphs
Netherlands645 Posts
I think you also need to include the % of race entry to make this more meaningful. example: if 75% terran entries gave 75% terran winners, then it's pretty "balanced". True, but that would still mean another thing: that people just don't want to play Zerg (because it's not as fun to play). | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
Hopefully this thread will shut up the noob terran trolls who make up ridiculous claims like 'zerg has won the most tournaments' or 'zerg players are actually the most dominant at the pro level'. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On September 14 2010 02:11 Escape wrote: Tournament wins by race: - 48 - 22 - 4Tournament winners by race: - 21 - 12 - 2I think you also need to include the % of race entry to make this more meaningful. example: if 75% terran entries gave 75% terran winners, then it's pretty "balanced". [/QUOTE] Not really, since there has to be a reason 75% of of the entries are Terran. A race can only be "popular" to a certain extent. When it should be ~33% (excluding random), anything beyond a margin of error of 10% pts starts to get sketchy (10% is off the top of my head) | ||
|
Escape
Canada306 Posts
Tournament wins by race: - 48 - 22 - 4Tournament winners by race: - 21 - 12 - 2I think you also need to include the % of race entry to make this more meaningful. example: if 75% terran entries gave 75% terran winners, then it's pretty "balanced". Not really, since there has to be a reason 75% of of the entries are Terran. I respectfully disagree. Just because there's a lot of players chose Terran, it doesn't necessary mean it is OP or anything. | ||
|
Gigaudas
Sweden1213 Posts
 | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
Not really, since there has to be a reason 75% of of the entries are Terran. A race can only be "popular" to a certain extent. When it should be ~33% (excluding random), anything beyond a margin of error of 10% pts starts to get sketchy (10% is off the top of my head) Exactly, it's not like top-players choose their race at random with exactly 33% chance of choosing one of the 3. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On September 14 2010 02:18 Escape wrote: Not really, since there has to be a reason 75% of of the entries are Terran. I respectfully disagree. Just because there's a lot of players chose Terran, it doesn't necessary mean it is OP or anything. [/QUOTE] Percentage of players entering doesn't really mean much since most players aren't at a level to experience major imbalance. | ||
|
CruelZeratul
Germany4588 Posts
I'd like to see a similar list of korean tournaments. | ||
|
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
edit: just read how it was tabulated. | ||
|
ThE_ShiZ
United States143 Posts
Balance has everything to do with how well humans do in realistic situations with the tools they are given. You can sit there and theorycraft on how certain things are underused/understudied, have unlocked potential, etc. But in the end, it's results that matter. You can argue that zerg has the strongest macro mechanic and blah blah blah, but that's irrelevant if humans can't perfect that mechanic. Obviously balance needs to be put into context. In SSBM, fox is known to be the best character with "perfect play," but that is unnachievable, so Marth and shieks simplicity and easy to reach potential makes them better characters, even though they technically aren't. Statistics outweigh exceptions and "theory." Personally, the maps are the biggest problem, followed by the fact that Zerg's early game is very weak. The naturals are so huge that sunkens are almost worthless on certain maps, especially when there are numerous backdoors to bypass those sunkens. Sunkesna t certain naturals can be outmaneuvered in a way where nomatter how they're lined up, attacks from certain angles negate their effectivenenss. Terran can keep the zerg blind, turning the match into a guessing game. I've seen a terran block without any addons, hide his marines, faking a 1-1-1 build and instead doing a marine+scv allin. Likewise, I've seen T go dual rax and then banshee rush while hes pumping out marines. Forcing me to drop sunkens and make lings, just to get crushed by 2-3 cloaked banshees. All the while, T is safely macroing up and pulling ahead of the Zerg. Z can play perfectly, countering every move and macroing up, but still have an uphill battle against a Terran that f's up royally. Zergs midgame and endgame is quite good, and banelings may be in need of a nerf in the future, once Zerg's early problems are solved. T and P's strength comes from the fact that they can get away with anything and still pull out ahead. | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
I respectfully disagree. Just because there's a lot of players chose Terran, it doesn't necessary mean it is OP or anything. Yes it does, because the numbers entering the tourny arn't just a representation of total players by race, it's a representation of how many top level players are that race. A terran who is of the skill level to do decent in these tournies is objectively a lot less skilled then a zerg who can do the same. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On September 14 2010 02:20 Numy wrote: Percentage of players entering doesn't really mean much since most players aren't at a level to experience major imbalance. ... Obviously meant percentage of players entering tournaments. | ||
| ||
