|
On November 16 2010 23:14 Barca wrote:
Protoss is hardly the A-move army it was in BroodWar. Storms, Blink, Sentries, even Collosus make Protoss a way more micro-intensive race than Terran, who only need to learn to kite and press "T" before engaging. If you A-move a Protoss army, you're doing it wrong.
Blink: only used in small fights.
Collossus: kite micro, nothing more.
Micro that toss players are using in large battles: storm, forcefield, guardianshield. Terrans: stim, kite, emp, pdd (and siege with tanks when used).
|
Why are you so angry with these stats? What do you mean "it doesn't say a thing"? It does. It is not the whole information one can get, but still a part of it. How would you choose the border to distinguish beetwen "the best diamond players" and all other guys there? 20%? Why not 40% or 10% or 1%? I don't get your point... It would just be interesting to see other stats, that's all I can say. Or even the rough data so that everyone can make his own statistical researches on them. Why are there so many people eager to critizise everything that is posted on the internet?
|
On November 16 2010 23:14 Barca wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 22:48 xzidez wrote:On November 16 2010 22:44 PulseSUI wrote:
Korea – Diamond – 11/11
PvT: 58.0%
i call bullshit on this one. 2 weeks ago, it was at 48%, i do not believe that it is possible over, according to blizzard, "millions" of games beeing played, to have a shift of 10% over the period of 2 weeks. it would mean that, over the period of the last 2 weeks, protoss would have to win close to 80% of all games to make that HUGHE of a shift even possible. Its the entire diamond which mostly consist of bad players. If those number would have been only of the top it wouldnt look like that. Protoss is simply stronger in A-move games with colossi backing up. Protoss is hardly the A-move army it was in BroodWar. Storms, Blink, Sentries, even Collosus make Protoss a way more micro-intensive race than Terran, who only need to learn to kite and press "T" before engaging. If you A-move a Protoss army, you're doing it wrong. Blizzard needs to nerf early game MMM and buff late game Terran, give them something to transition into. Terrans have no reason to change their tech because MMM can do everything they want it to, while Protoss and Zergs need heavy-hitter late game units to really seal the deal. Look at all the upgrades for Terran bio vs the upgrades for zealots and stalkers, something isn't fair there.
You dont get my point at all... Those number are generated over the entire diamond. All the way from 0 rating to 3000 rating, which means that the majority of games are "a-move" games.
And yes obviously Im doing something wrong because im stuck at 2400~~, but thats not the point. The fact that on Protoss is favored in blizzards numbers but hardly have any real good players representing them in GSL is what bothers me. Also the fact that most "pro terran" said that they are very comfortable with playing against protoss, while the numbers say otherwise.
|
I am very curious too see what the GSL 3 protoss players have in store for PvT and PvZ, all five of them to be exact  . Maybe korean tosses have figured out PvT better than we have.
EDIT: my bad there are actually 12
|
This means jack shit about balance. Matchmaking will always try to make the win percentage out to be 50% or so. So this basically means that the coders did a decent job at making the system, but not a great one, since some match ups are heavily in favor of one race. We are much better looking at not even the Diamond leagues, but high level tournament results from the very best of players, like the GSL
|
On November 17 2010 00:11 Gecko wrote:I am very curious too see what the GSL 3 protoss players have in store for PvT and PvZ, all five of them to be exact . Maybe korean tosses have figured out PvT better than we have. EDIT: my bad there are actually 12
My guess is that you can expect a lot of cheese, like in Season 2. It was quite a while since I saw a straightup game PvX without any DT / Voidray / 4gate rush at a high level.
|
I remember hearing something on Weapon of Choice where they were saying that balance in either WC3 or Brood War (I really do not remember which) was very heavily weighted towards mathematical algorithims and considerations as such.
What this tells me is that as far as Blizzard is concerned, there are no serious red flags going on and in the current state of Starcraft metagame, there are no true overpowered strategies.
And if you trust statistical models, aggregately collected data is certainly more reliable than individual data points (i.e. watching Protoss get crushed in various tournaments.)
It's a strong argument that those are truly not enough statistical data points to reasonably conclude on a statistically significant scale that Protoss are in fact losing more often then winning. Note that Blizzard said that this is not the only factor they consider in balance. And what they're telling us (subtly) is that they have no red flags that suggest they should invest significant resources in investigating a supposed imbalance in any particular matchup currently.
Also, to the guy that cited the bullshit... they didn't say that they were talking about an aggregate number of percentage win/loss. Maybe it's just the win/loss for the time ending when they last checked to the time when they polled these numbers. They didn't clarify that - you're making mathematical assumptions of their data set.
TL:DR - Blizzard sees no problems at least on this mathematical spread. Don't hold your breath for a Protoss buff or other race nerf anytime soon.
|
On November 16 2010 23:41 xzidez wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 23:14 Barca wrote:On November 16 2010 22:48 xzidez wrote:On November 16 2010 22:44 PulseSUI wrote:
Korea – Diamond – 11/11
PvT: 58.0%
i call bullshit on this one. 2 weeks ago, it was at 48%, i do not believe that it is possible over, according to blizzard, "millions" of games beeing played, to have a shift of 10% over the period of 2 weeks. it would mean that, over the period of the last 2 weeks, protoss would have to win close to 80% of all games to make that HUGHE of a shift even possible. Its the entire diamond which mostly consist of bad players. If those number would have been only of the top it wouldnt look like that. Protoss is simply stronger in A-move games with colossi backing up. Protoss is hardly the A-move army it was in BroodWar. Storms, Blink, Sentries, even Collosus make Protoss a way more micro-intensive race than Terran, who only need to learn to kite and press "T" before engaging. If you A-move a Protoss army, you're doing it wrong. Blizzard needs to nerf early game MMM and buff late game Terran, give them something to transition into. Terrans have no reason to change their tech because MMM can do everything they want it to, while Protoss and Zergs need heavy-hitter late game units to really seal the deal. Look at all the upgrades for Terran bio vs the upgrades for zealots and stalkers, something isn't fair there. You dont get my point at all... Those number are generated over the entire diamond. All the way from 0 rating to 3000 rating, which means that the majority of games are "a-move" games. And yes obviously Im doing something wrong because im stuck at 2400~~, but thats not the point. The fact that on Protoss is favored in blizzards numbers but hardly have any real good players representing them in GSL is what bothers me. Also the fact that most "pro terran" said that they are very comfortable with playing against protoss, while the numbers say otherwise.
Better execution of early game harass/limiting the Protoss econ/army. MMM is really good in the right hands just loses steam compared to a same food size Protoss in late tech. Only issue is that it's still the best tool a terran has.
VS Zerg losing control and going late game is a lot worse than vs Protoss, probably that's why Protoss is the easiest.
From what I've seen as long as you can force skirmishes that use up enemy forces/force tech that is not that great in large army encounters you're peachy as a terran but the moment you lost that control and armies go supersize it's a lot harder. Seems like too much MM just means impossible to micro against AoE properly while also actually using the famed DPS of stim.
|
On November 16 2010 23:38 Radison wrote:
Why are you so angry with these stats? What do you mean "it doesn't say a thing"? It does. It is not the whole information one can get, but still a part of it. How would you choose the border to distinguish beetwen "the best diamond players" and all other guys there? 20%? Why not 40% or 10% or 1%? I don't get your point... It would just be interesting to see other stats, that's all I can say. Or even the rough data so that everyone can make his own statistical researches on them. Why are there so many people eager to critizise everything that is posted on the internet?
i think the new the new leagues will distinguish this better. Diamond is just a league with many horrible players that never played an RTS before, making alot of the statistics coming from diamond really pointless. Top level tournament play records indicated something way different then what was posted here.
GOM posted win percentages for GSL 2 and 1 in one of their streams, does anyone have a screen shot of that?
|
I think Blizzard should consider releasing W/L data on the map pool for a subsect of top Diamond players. I think it would produce much more useful information and potential for analysis.
|
I'm really interested to see how the Korean Protosses in GSL3 are going to play. They're very under-represented compared to the other two races, reminiscent of Zerg in GSL1.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Don't forget that 90% of the Diamond league is 4WG vs 3 rax all-in with occasional 8 pools added into the mix.
|
Protoss do 4 gate all the way to like 2k diamond. Probably why the win ratio is high.
|
Maybe European Terrans (such as myself) are more aggressive than those in NA and Korea?
I always try to put on early pressure because P/Z late game is so devastating.
|
On November 17 2010 01:04 Kelorienne wrote:
Protoss do 4 gate all the way to like 2k diamond. Probably why the win ratio is high.
If by 2k you mean like sub-1k, then yes
|
On November 16 2010 14:25 Logo wrote:
Honestly I think if you want to help Protoss you have to nerf colossi. It's that simple. They ruin the game for Protoss and until they're adjusted to be less stupid the rest of Protoss can't be equalized to a reasonable state.
Every single thing that happens in any Protoss related match-up happens because of colossi.
The win % means nothing as there's still tons of new strategies coming out like the 6 gate that are insanely hard to stop without opening yourself up to other strategies.
I agree
|
despite solid winratios, maybe protoss as a race is not that well suited to do stable builds. this would lead to a weakness in tourneys. E.g if a lot of ladder wins are by cheese, this can't be done in a tourney. i think zerg is the most reliable race, solid builds with little risk taking. same should be possible with T (macro style terran). protoss play relies on kind of surprise and tec hiding, so it may be harder to perform consitent.
|
The comments about ruining warp gates is pretty funny, but not entirely inaccurate. A big thing that makes Protoss hard to balance is the way they get warp gates. It's not the warp in that hurts (though losing the defenders advantage certainly does hurt), it's the extra cycle. The unit produced -> change to warp gate -> warp in unit gives a huge boost to an army size very quickly and that bump is a big part of what makes x-gate pushes so strong. I think that change is a big problem in balancing the base warp gate units. If stalker/sentry/zealots are too strong then players can exploit the big jump in army size to have a dominating army at a certain point in the game.
I wouldn't mind seeing some extra time in transforming warp gates in exchange for some other things like stalkers getting +1(+1vs armored) per upgrade instead of just +1. Stalkers are the only core armored early game unit (marauder, stalker, roach) that doesn't get some form of +2 dmg/upgrade. Though Stalkers did have this is beta and it was taken out, so who knows.
|
Yeah, for the GSL:
Terran: 40% of entries, 37% of Ro64 entrants
Zerg: 24% of entries, 42% of Ro64 entrants
Protoss: 33% of entries and . . . 19% of Ro64 entrants.
That is to say, a randomly chosen Zerg in the qualifiers was slightly more than three times as likely to qualify for the GSL as a randomly chosen Protoss.
|
On November 16 2010 13:16 Liquid`Jinro wrote:IMO protoss need certain things nerfed and then other areas really buffed, they are a bit too unbalanced (not imbalanced, just they seem to alternate between unbeatable and helpless).
Agreed
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
