On May 03 2011 05:45 Sporadic44 wrote: correct me if im wrong but the OP made these graphs himself based off of data posted on liquipedia? it would be cool if we could get more information like this on the site. not necessarily line graphs but sets of observable data. for example if you click on metalopolis you could pull up some data on wins/losses regarding matches. played on that map. or other information such as average match length. just some examples. i have limited knowledge on statistics, entry level college math, and a scientific understanding of analyzing and displaying data through biology labs. but i feel this could be something worth at least trying to work on. if anyone else likes the idea send a pm my way.
All stats in the data set are linked to a map, so it's very easy to make analysis based on maps. If anyone has any good ideas on how to visualize it let me know.
On May 03 2011 16:51 vOdToasT wrote: Also, even in Korea, protoss isn't actually doing poorly. The race is winning tournaments a lot. If it's just one tournament, it doesn't necessarily make the race balanced (Z did win GSL 1 during 1.00), but as far as I know, Protoss is doing just fine.
Correct me if I'm wrong, and Protoss isn't winning any korean tournaments.
Well, there aren't many Korean tournaments to win, but TLPD says that no Protosses except MC (who won 2 GSLs and the "2010 Ygosu Invite") have won a Korean tournament since Genius won the Blizzcon qualifier.
Thanks for all the effort making the charts. I've always strongly believed in two things - first is that the game is generally pretty balanced, second is that protoss was probably the weakest race in Korea. And both these charts seem to validate that. All these protoss OP complaints really only started when they saw MC dominate the scene; but if you look closely, aside from him (and a bit of San/Alicia), the race has generally performed pretty mediocre especially when compared to terrans, and I really doubt its just because all the protoss players in Korea happen to be less skilled.
This is really interesting. I really don't understand how these kinds of numbers can still result in a huge difference between individual statistics and tournament statistics. For example, a player may have a fantastic win percentage on ladder (e.i. Happy), but still not be able to win a bo3 vs a pro, let alone an entire tournament. This is similar to these statistics because a race may be able to have a good individual game statistic, but if you were to look at, for example, Zerg's tournament win statistics for the past couple months, I'm sure you'd notice a huge digression.
I think the reason we see so much fluctuation with Protoss in Korea is twofold: Protoss are always the, screw up and die immediately, play perfectly and be extremely scary race. And obviously the very small sample size combines with this.
The Korean graph really shows how much the winner of tournaments effects the statistics.
Zerg peak in November is during GSL 2 where a Zerg won(Nestea) Protoss peak in December is during GSL 3 where a Protoss won(MC) Terran peak is huge in January due to MVP destroying the Gainsward tournament and GSL Jan. Second Protoss peak in March due to MC's win This month due to MVP winning WC.
On May 03 2011 17:08 Zealot Lord wrote:All these protoss OP complaints really only started when they saw MC dominate the scene
..And when a certain prominent pro player started shitting all over protoss when in reality it was over his lack of tournament results. This, in a way greenlighted a shitstorm to be unleashed by other narcisistic zerg players who just couldn't live up to their parents praises and promises of a bright future.
On May 03 2011 17:08 Zealot Lord wrote:All these protoss OP complaints really only started when they saw MC dominate the scene
..And when a certain prominent pro player started shitting all over protoss when in reality it was over his lack of tournament results. This, in a way greenlighted a shitstorm to be unleashed by other narcisistic zerg players who just couldn't live up to their parents praises and promises of a bright future.
lol i totally agree, zergs follow that certain prominent player like sheep and hang on his every word. You couldnt say the same for protoss or terrans, zergs really do have the hive mind mentality
Any chance of outputting graphs with confidence intervals? I am concerned that some of the "trends" we see in the graph is simply random fluctuations due to some months having smaller sets of data.
On May 03 2011 17:08 Zealot Lord wrote:All these protoss OP complaints really only started when they saw MC dominate the scene
..And when a certain prominent pro player started shitting all over protoss when in reality it was over his lack of tournament results. This, in a way greenlighted a shitstorm to be unleashed by other narcisistic zerg players who just couldn't live up to their parents praises and promises of a bright future.
lol i totally agree, zergs follow that certain prominent player like sheep and hang on his every word. You couldnt say the same for protoss or terrans, zergs really do have the hive mind mentality
Please stop spreading misinformation on the forums. I've never seen any Zerg Pro player complain about imbalance before. Artosis doesn't count because he is not qualified to be a pro player(best commentator though). Zergs are the gentleman race: they play fair and indulge in long, good macro games. You're making Zergs sound like small little whiny kids that complain about everything, which is completely untrue.
On May 03 2011 19:12 setmeal wrote: Please stop spreading misinformation on the forums. I've never seen any Zerg Pro player complain about imbalance before.
On May 03 2011 17:08 Zealot Lord wrote:All these protoss OP complaints really only started when they saw MC dominate the scene
..And when a certain prominent pro player started shitting all over protoss when in reality it was over his lack of tournament results. This, in a way greenlighted a shitstorm to be unleashed by other narcisistic zerg players who just couldn't live up to their parents praises and promises of a bright future.
lol i totally agree, zergs follow that certain prominent player like sheep and hang on his every word. You couldnt say the same for protoss or terrans, zergs really do have the hive mind mentality
Please stop spreading misinformation on the forums. I've never seen any Zerg Pro player complain about imbalance before. Artosis doesn't count because he is not qualified to be a pro player(best commentator though). Zergs are the gentleman race: they play fair and indulge in long, good macro games. You're making Zergs sound like small little whiny kids that complain about everything, which is completely untrue.
You've clearly not seen IdrA complaining about the Protoss deathball / Protoss in general numerous times. Baneling / Roach drops at multiple spots at once quite easily tear deathballs apart (or rather, prevent them from getting too scary) as he is showing nowadays, but in those days that was something Zergs somehow managed to overlook.
On May 03 2011 18:27 Primadog wrote: Any chance of outputting graphs with confidence intervals? I am concerned that some of the "trends" we see in the graph is simply random fluctuations due to some months having smaller sets of data.
Assuming all the match are independant event, the standard deviation for a given matchup is:
sqrt(p(1-p)/N) where p≈0.5 is the win rate of a race, and N the number of played games.
Let's take the PvZ match up as example. There are 2244 games over 6 months, 374 games/months gives a standard deviation of 2.5%
Considering an error of twice the standard deviation, your confidence interval is +/- 5%. Conclusion: the fluctuations we observe for the PvZ match up can very well be due to the sample size.
For ZvT however the sample size is large enough to say the matchup was unbalanced.
On May 03 2011 17:08 Zealot Lord wrote:All these protoss OP complaints really only started when they saw MC dominate the scene
..And when a certain prominent pro player started shitting all over protoss when in reality it was over his lack of tournament results. This, in a way greenlighted a shitstorm to be unleashed by other narcisistic zerg players who just couldn't live up to their parents praises and promises of a bright future.
boom nailed it. IdrA single-handedly lowered the level of discourse in the sc2 community back to beta levels as a way of covering a total lack of results for 3-4 months.
Every stat, tournament wins, tops of ladder say Terran is most OP. So obvious I just laugh when ppl say toss. Zerg and toss are fighting for a distant second with toss a little stronger. The pros are just as full of crap as any bronze and probably more when they balance whine because real money is on the line so it's to their financial benefit to see things change in their favor.
On May 03 2011 18:27 Primadog wrote: Any chance of outputting graphs with confidence intervals? I am concerned that some of the "trends" we see in the graph is simply random fluctuations due to some months having smaller sets of data.
Assuming all the match are independant event, the standard deviation for a given matchup is:
sqrt(p(1-p)/N) where p≈0.5 is the win rate of a race, and N the number of played games.
Let's take the PvZ match up as example. There are 2244 games over 6 months, 374 games/months gives a standard deviation of 2.5%
Considering an error of twice the standard deviation, your confidence interval is +/- 5%. Conclusion: the fluctuations we observe for the PvZ match up can very well be due to the sample size.
For ZvT however the sample size is large enough to say the matchup was unbalanced.
I would love to do his, trying to figure out how now. =P
EPT
