| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
On October 08 2010 07:32 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: They show what I suspected, that PvZ is the most imbalanced matchup right now. 49.6% (PvT) seems more balanced to me then 52.8% (PvZ). | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
On October 08 2010 13:51 klauz619 wrote: Explain protoss 60% win vs T/Z everywhere but high diamond. what excuse we gonna hear? Rushes. Not needing anything but a probe to build stuff makes it very easy to outright win from the start. And probably 4 Gate. Every time I play against protoss I am super paranoid and I think 20% of the games were proxy 2gates, in base 2gates, cannon rushes, cannons@ramp and it takes a bit of game understanding to break these if they managed to start them and they know where to place stuff. | ||
|
Buddhist
United States658 Posts
On October 08 2010 07:41 nemahsys wrote: I want to know how they are "accounting for player skill" when coming up with these numbers. Not really sure how you go about doing that. As far as I'm aware, it's completely impossible. Blizzard's only measure of skill is your MMR, which is also what ensures that you get a 50% win ratio. There's no way they could separate the two. | ||
|
Cashout
115 Posts
| ||
|
Mearis
Italy76 Posts
| ||
|
Mooncat
Germany1228 Posts
While it is a valiant effort from Blizzard to try and balance the game at every level, I think it is almost impossible. I understand this has to suck for Bronze/Silver/Gold/Plat/Low Diamond players, but you have to understand that this is a competitive, e-sports oriented game and thus has to be balanced at the very highest level of play. The level I'm talking about most likely hasn't even been touched yet by any SC2 "progamer". What's my point? If you're in Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, or low level Diamond, don't even THINK about balance. You have so many aspects of your game to improve that balancing is the least of your problems. Even if you're mid to high level Diamond without reaching a competitive level of play, balance shouldn't concern you much. While your understanding of the game might be good enough to reasonably think about whether something might be a touch overpowered at the highest level, you're probably still miles away from that level. Imho Blizzard did a damn good job already at balancing this game across all the various levels of play and that's exactly what these recently released numbers show. Now they should focus on high level balancing, and not stuff that low level players feel to be imbalanced because it's simply a bit easier to execute than what their own race can do at their respective level. Edit: To all those saying that these statistics don't show the actual skill etc. Imho skill is what you are able to do with your race. That's your current skill level. Thus the matchmaking system matches you with players of the same skill, at least by my definition. If you feel like another race would be more rewarding to play with your abilities, feel free to switch and see if it's true. Sometimes what makes a race "easier" to play doesn't have anything to do with the actual mechanics. It's just that it suits your personal style better. | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
While overall the zerg buffs are quite nice they can simply remove reaper from the game. Not seen anyone starting to make reapers mid-late game yet, stimmed marauders are much more reliable and don't die instantly. Barracks requiring supply means a bit longer reliance on just SCVs to fight off rushes, just solved by being even slightly more paranoid now and scouting your base and surroundings way earlier, it's a bit difficult to stop a proxy smth if the buildings have gone over 25% with just SCVs, especially protoss that blocks pylon access to just 1 unit. They do need to do something about Protoss rushes though if they ever want to balance the games < diamond - though at least to me it didn't seem that bad, it's actually funny to watch the rushers curse their way out of a game with anti-terran insults after they massively failed; it only takes a bit of paranoia, a bit of luck and good placement of troops/buildings. | ||
|
Titanidis
Greece132 Posts
| ||
|
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
| ||
|
haffy
United Kingdom430 Posts
I'm only going to do TvP because it'll just get too complicated for a simple concept even if it doesn't feel right. The simple answer is Protoss is easier to play at equal skill levels when the skill level is low. But when the skill level evens out to a certain degree at higher levels apparently, Terran start becoming over powered over Protoss. Now think about how close the stats are in PvT at dimond, but how many Terran win tornmanets? Well it makes sense if Terran are worse for less skillful players to play and more of an advantage for more skillfull players to play. This advantage should be widening the higher up you go making Terran easier for very top level play. Also with the statistics if you go into the top percentile it should show more Terran in the top 100 or what ever and if you look at the ranks it does. Look at it this way too. Terran in my opinion have an advantage early game against Protoss and Protoss have the advantage late game.Lower level players don't understand the importance of early pressure so less of them will do it or if they do not as effective, which could be one of the factors that make Protoss easier to play for lower levels. | ||
|
eksert
France656 Posts
 | ||
|
Zog
57 Posts
If you want to check for imbalances, check the repartition of the races in terms of points, not win ratio -_- ... | ||
|
dakalro
Romania525 Posts
Win ratio if you remove games that are clearly in your favor or clearly favored to lose actually has some relevance. The matchmaking system will give you some of those opponents because it doesn't have an infinite pool to choose from but that doesn't mean Blizzard has to use those results, they're not limited to only what you see on your screen, remember that. | ||
|
starckr
26 Posts
Surely it is better to go by aggregate tourney results rather than these dubious stats produced from a system that tries to auto-balance players. I have seen many absolutely atrocious (skill-wise) terrans getting reasonably high diamond (terrible, terrible macro compared to toss and zerg counterparts of the same matchmaking). Stats like Terran winning 12 consecutive Zotac cups is what should be looked at by blizzard. Balancing based on the highest level of play will hardly impact the OP's stats imo and seems like the better way to proceed. That's even worse IMO because then you start to balance around the handful of players that are capable of winning tournaments. And if you do that, you might as well say Zerg is fine because a Zerg player won the biggest Sc2 tournament to-date. | ||
|
starckr
26 Posts
Jesus, when will people stop caring about win ratio, which means only that the ladder system is working as intended, and nothing more... If you want to check for imbalances, check the repartition of the races in terms of points, not win ratio -_- ... Because this is the first time that Blizzard expressly says they accounted for the system pushing people to 50% when producing the stats....... | ||
|
Buddhist
United States658 Posts
On October 08 2010 19:51 starckr wrote: Because this is the first time that Blizzard expressly says they accounted for the system pushing people to 50% when producing the stats....... Blizzard saying they did it doesn't mean much, when there's no conceivable way that they could actually do it. I love the way people just say "Oh yeah, Blizzard pulled out numbers from their vast raw data from games played!", like there's some mystical data hidden in each game played, which can tell you how skilled a player is, while ignoring who won the game. Blizzard's only way to determine your skill is with MMR, and MMR is also what gives you a 50% win ratio. How then does Blizzard possibly compensate for the 50% win ratios? Vast amounts of RAW UNTAPPED MAGIC -- er -- DATA!! | ||
|
starckr
26 Posts
Blizzard saying they did it doesn't mean much, when there's no conceivable way that they could actually do it. I love the way people just say "Oh yeah, Blizzard pulled out numbers from their vast raw data from games played!", like there's some mystical data hidden in each game played, which can tell you how skilled a player is, while ignoring who won the game. Blizzard's only way to determine your skill is with MMR, and MMR is also what gives you a 50% win ratio. How then does Blizzard possibly compensate for the 50% win ratios? Vast amounts of RAW UNTAPPED MAGIC -- er -- DATA!! Huh? What drives people to 50% is that the system pairs you against people you are likely to lose against or win against to try and drive you to 50%. Now, along the way, you play people that are both higher in skill, lower in skill, and the same skill. Blizzard eliminates the higher skill / lower skill games to arrive at games involving equally skilled opponents. That stat has at least more value than the overall stats, which unquestionably drive you to 50% because it includes games vs. lower and higher MMR. The question of how much value is in it is debatable, but saying it only represents the system that drives people to 50% is clearly false. That is a function of the system pairing you vs. stronger and weaker opponents. | ||
|
Zog
57 Posts
On October 08 2010 20:41 starckr wrote: Huh? What drives people to 50% is that the system pairs you against people you are likely to lose against or win against to try and drive you to 50%. Now, along the way, you play people that are both higher in skill, lower in skill, and the same skill. Blizzard eliminates the higher skill / lower skill games to arrive at games involving equally skilled opponents. That stat has at least more value than the overall stats, which unquestionably drive you to 50% because it includes games vs. lower and higher MMR. The question of how much value is in it is debatable, but saying it only represents the system that drives people to 50% is clearly false. That is a function of the system pairing you vs. stronger and weaker opponents. No. If you take only the players of the same 'skill' (not favored), and say this is the win ratio when you remove the 50% phenomenon, you are wrong. It is a result of the system of 50% win ratio that some players are around your hidden mmr, so all the results are biased. Statistically, if the system works well and you make only even matches, you should have 50%. I don't how they can account for it, or if it is even possible (I doubt it), but if they do like you say it's definitely wrong. But then we will never know since they won't release their way of calculating it. | ||
|
hephaestos
France54 Posts
- Assume that the skill distribution among every player is the same for the three races (you can then infer the skill of an individual player knowing its MMR, its race, and the skill distribution). - Consider mirror match-ups to compute a skill rating, independant of the race ; For inter racial comparison, this works, though, only if the skill distribution is the same for the three races now that I think about it. I guess this leaves us with one possibility, quite dubious in my opinion. | ||
|
JeJeFlak
Romania52 Posts
There was a discussion at some point regarding this but it would be nice to see the stats remade to date.This would be made with public data so that would be a starting point of discussion witch we dont have here. Even in online armature tourneys the field is mostly made of top diamonds.Maybe from this only the last rounds can be taken in consideration where the level of play increases and the difference in skill disappears. As was said before looking at the games at the higher level of play is the only way to determine balance because in the lower levels( battlenet ladder) the data is irelevant due to different factors(the match making system). | ||
| ||
|
|
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
