|
On January 19 2011 14:26 5unrise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:24 travis wrote:On January 19 2011 09:06 haffy wrote:On January 19 2011 08:57 Silidons wrote:
but yet zerg has won 2 GSL's, which if you wanted to win any tournament, you would want to win that one.
sorry but zerg UP isn't going to work, GSL has the best players in the world. Yeah well done. When presented with a larger number of statistics you chose to use a smaller sample to discredit them. When using numbers you always use the larger sample size because it is less likely to be effected by variance. Also I play Zerg and I don't think they're UP. But I think your arguement is pretty badly flawed. well the largest number of statistics includes all ladder playing, even bronze do you want to use that? But bronze is irrelevant for obvious reasons for an indication of winrates at the tip level, whereas top level international tournaments aren't. You must have knew that before you posted >_>;; Why post this?
Then use the top international tournaments, not the small 16 man no known names ones. Double standard ftw.
I just counted 29 players the first page of the 1st link that I have NEVER heard of before. I know a lot of top tier players, and these are not them. Should their stats weigh as much as IdrA's? That's an insult to IdrA imo.
|
Regardless of the overall state of game balance, it should be eminently clear that Zerg and to a lesser extent Protoss suffer from a lack of stable, safe, middle-of-the-road builds like Terran have access to. Whether this means that any of these races are "overpowered" or "underpowered" is obviously contested, but it is undeniable that having safe openings translates very well into improved tournament performance, particularly for the bo1 format or when map vetos are disallowed.
|
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance.
|
On January 19 2011 14:44 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:26 5unrise wrote:On January 19 2011 14:24 travis wrote:On January 19 2011 09:06 haffy wrote:On January 19 2011 08:57 Silidons wrote:
but yet zerg has won 2 GSL's, which if you wanted to win any tournament, you would want to win that one.
sorry but zerg UP isn't going to work, GSL has the best players in the world. Yeah well done. When presented with a larger number of statistics you chose to use a smaller sample to discredit them. When using numbers you always use the larger sample size because it is less likely to be effected by variance. Also I play Zerg and I don't think they're UP. But I think your arguement is pretty badly flawed. well the largest number of statistics includes all ladder playing, even bronze do you want to use that? But bronze is irrelevant for obvious reasons for an indication of winrates at the tip level, whereas top level international tournaments aren't. You must have knew that before you posted >_>;; Why post this? Then use the top international tournaments, not the small 16 man no known names ones. Double standard ftw. I just counted 29 players the first page of the 1st link that I have NEVER heard of before. I know a lot of top tier players, and these are not them. Should their stats weigh as much as IdrA's? That's an insult to IdrA imo.
Sorry was there a part of this argument I missed?
Or do you mean the names supplied in the OP's link to TL records aren't top level? There are mostly "top" foreign players in these tournaments, a few of which has IdrA's involvement, should you want to defer into that.... So yes, these tournaments are indication of top level play outside of Korea
Is this another attempt to play around with the statistics? >_>;;
|
It's fairly transparent that Zergs aren't performing well at the moment.
I don't see why people even try to dispute that. On the ladder Top 200, in tournaments, in every way, it is fairly obvious Zerg isn't doing as well as the other races.
Does this mean they need a patch? Not necessarily. I'm not going to comment on balance here, because maybe Zerg in the current metagame just hasn't been figured out, and some different playstyles could yield better results for them.
But as it stands, I don't see how anyone could argue against the fact that Zergs are underperforming. UP? Not necessarily. Underperforming? Absolutely.
|
On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance.
...
TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups
|
On January 19 2011 14:47 Expurgate wrote:
Regardless of the overall state of game balance, it should be eminently clear that Zerg and to a lesser extent Protoss suffer from a lack of stable, safe, middle-of-the-road builds like Terran have access to. Whether this means that any of these races are "overpowered" or "underpowered" is obviously contested, but it is undeniable that having safe openings translates very well into improved tournament performance, particularly for the bo1 format or when map vetos are disallowed.
uh, why is that eminently clear?
|
On January 19 2011 15:12 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance. ... TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups
Don't sell yourself short you gosu beast.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
It will be interesting to see if this changes when the new maps trickle down to smaller events. I'm inclined to say this is because the maps blow, given how much better GSL zergs do when given a more wide open area, but even on Shakuras its right at 50% when you filter for international events.
Maintaining zerg economy/army once you're in the midgame has always felt much more difficult to me than T/P which is maybe also relevant. Any bias skill has between races is going to be amplified at the more middling level tournaments.
|
The stats only tell you what's already obvious.
Watch the games and analyse that; that's how you see the problems in the game.
A lot of the problems are linked directly to maps.
The game will never be perfect, BW isn't perfect either.
But at the end of the day no-one picks your race for you so as long as it's fair enough that's ok.
|
As a Z player myself, I'm fairly fed up of the over represented self entitlement of Zergs on this forum.
Just the overall image of Zerg players forces me away from Z and I now spend more and more time practising off races.
Subjectively Zerg when played "on full cylinders" as iNcontrol puts it can get a lot more out of it than say P/T, and i myself don't quite understand the notion that creep spreading and injecting is "hard" or somehow makes Zerg a lot harder than the other races, a couple of clicks every 29 seconds, but the reward is total map vision, where creep has reached and the ability to create 10 of what you need instantly.
In a game of limited information, at least in my eyes Zerg has some very nice mechanics to help out, and due to this Zerg inferiority complex there are a LOT of Zerg resources available for the average player. (mrBitter, "the art of Zv* guides" and so on)
I'd also like to take this chance to agree with a poster a few pages back.. that perhaps the average TL poster isn't as good as they make out to be.. this would have been a great topic for the community to be able to read about (not post about) in a "pro poster only" forum.
As an aside, Good luck today IdrA.
|
On January 19 2011 15:14 Vari wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:47 Expurgate wrote:
Regardless of the overall state of game balance, it should be eminently clear that Zerg and to a lesser extent Protoss suffer from a lack of stable, safe, middle-of-the-road builds like Terran have access to. Whether this means that any of these races are "overpowered" or "underpowered" is obviously contested, but it is undeniable that having safe openings translates very well into improved tournament performance, particularly for the bo1 format or when map vetos are disallowed. uh, why is that eminently clear?
Because safe openings make it less likely that you lose a game based on blind counters or bad luck (in map pool or spawns) and are dropped from the tournament, and Z has no "safe" openings, and P has few of the caliber that T does? It mystifies me how that could conceivably be unclear.
|
statistic-based arguments wont even convince the publicity that there is a problem with the balance, because there is outright impossible to not be countered by some othe statistic.
For example, you take into consideration the same TLPD does, which is logical, but im sure there are like 50 people before me stating that if we look at GSLs Zergs have 66% winrate and could be higher by now. Or if that would not work, they would go for korean only tournaments, or include the Beta too, or go for the general ladder, the Korean ladder, anything untill they find a stat which proves that there's a balance / Z is OP. We had many discussions like this
An argument like :
Average winrate against ALL players = 59.5
Average winrate against ZERG players = 71.0
Will always be countered by Zergs won GSL even if winning the first one was ouright miracuolous and it included bug-abuse, luck and one single zerg player being on fire.
|
On January 19 2011 15:12 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance. ... TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups
nevermind im done
|
On January 19 2011 15:12 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance. ... TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups
Clearly you feel that this is a result of imbalance. What specific matches so far do you think were won by the lesser skilled player, with the Z player being eliminated due to imbalance?
(this question is for anyone else, as well, since I doubt you're reading TL an hour before your match)
|
On January 19 2011 16:41 iEchoic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 15:12 IdrA wrote:On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance. ... TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups Clearly you feel that this is a result of imbalance. What specific matches so far do you think were won by the lesser skilled player, with the Z player being eliminated due to imbalance? (this question is for anyone else, as well, since I doubt you're reading TL an hour before your match)
That's not necessarily true. He said that they (the two Zergs) had relatively easy Ro32 groups. That doesn't mean that he feels those results were due to imbalance, or even that any specific matches so far in this season were won by the less skilled player.
EDIT: fixed typo.
|
On January 19 2011 16:53 Expurgate wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 16:41 iEchoic wrote:On January 19 2011 15:12 IdrA wrote:On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance. ... TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups Clearly you feel that this is a result of imbalance. What specific matches so far do you think were won by the lesser skilled player, with the Z player being eliminated due to imbalance? (this question is for anyone else, as well, since I doubt you're reading TL an hour before your match) That's not necessarily true. He said that they (the two Zergs) had relatively easy Ro32 groups. That doesn't mean that he feels those results were due to imbalance, or even that any specific matches so far in this season were won by the less skilled player. EDIT: fixed typo.
Idra's made it clear many times, including earlier in this thread, that he thinks that Zergs do 'disproportionately badly', including in the GSL (except for obviously Fruitdealer and Nestea). I don't believe he thinks that Z players are less skilled. So if Z players are equally skilled, and they do 'disproportionally badly', then that means that there had to have been situations where the more skilled player actually lost. Am I wrong here?
One example would be Nestea vs Rain last season. But I'm curious to see if anyone has examples from this season.
I'm talking about the zergs already eliminated, not the two that got into the ro16.
|
I'm pretty sure these massively skewed stats is due to the fact that most of the top EU and NA pros play either Terran or Protoss, not Zerg. If the GSL is anything to go by Zerg is anything but UP in the right hands.
|
On January 19 2011 15:12 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 14:49 branflakes14 wrote:
The GSL proves that when the game is pushed, it's fairly balanced. A bunch of Terran and Protoss wins at sub-Code A tournaments isn't evidence of imbalance. ... TWO zergs earned a spot in the ro16 and we both had relatively easy ro32 groups
You and Nestea made it through, based on skill. I think if either of you played a different race you'd still get through.
Leenock, Check, Zenio, and Fruitdealer did not deserve to move on. Fruitdealer has been playing very nonstandard and has been failing on one base. Leenock played sub-par and was unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of a (rare) good game by Rainbow. Check has bad economy management, especially compared to the players in his group (you and Jinro) I never thought he had a chance of advancing from your group. I don't think it's racial imbalance, it's just that most of the top Zergs right now aren't playing well compared to the likes of MC, MVP, MKP, and others (everyone who made the RO8 except Choya basically)
As for the original topic, the data you used was trash. TLPD is not up to date and it doesn't use all of the tournament results. Idra doesn't have a 100% winrate vs Zerg, for example.
You can't draw any conclusions from your "data"
EDIT: Or maybe I'm misunderstanding. Are these all tournament FINALS wins, or tournament results through every round?
|
On January 19 2011 17:09 Ryuu314 wrote:
I'm pretty sure these massively skewed stats is due to the fact that most of the top EU and NA pros play either Terran or Protoss, not Zerg. If the GSL is anything to go by Zerg is anything but UP in the right hands.
That's just straight up wrong. You can't possible have watched all 3 GSLs and come up with a definitive statement like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
