|
On June 08 2011 02:16 Slakter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 02:11 minhchi1211 wrote:stats look so peculiar  So Protoss OP isnt true at all Dont judge anything from stats like this. First of all the graphs LOOK a lot more extreme than they are since none of them start at 0% and goes up to 100%. Also, you can NEVER judge a games balance from gamestatistics, you have to look at the games themself, otherwise you have to deny things like Metagame advantages (Zerg has a strat right now that protosses have trouble with, doesnt mean it´s imba) and also Skill differences.
Actually those stats are better than looking at the games unless you have close to full understanding of the game. And none has at this time. So yes his statement that protoss is not OP is too hasty, so is/was zerg whining about protoss being OP.
|
On June 08 2011 01:37 Hristiyan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 01:30 Thrombozyt wrote:
So you say that building defense instead of workers stopped all-in aggression? What a strange concept! But why do you call it blind? Don't you think that it might have something to do with Zergs sending out a worker just like the other 2 races in order to scout their opponents opening BO?
It doesn't work that way dude. There are situations in which, the chances to get any intel inside of a terran's base are entirely based on the skill level of the terran. Playing a blind guessing game will not make your game play skill based and there will be many,many, many situations vs macro terrans in which you'll be like "Why did i loose ? I did everything right". And the answer is "Because you lost the macro game, while trying to win the guessing one". I personally as a Master league zerg in EU server HIGHLY disagree win Day[9] and his "assumptions" but thats just me. As i said, in that ZvT graphics, the blue and red lines will never cross paths, untill the guessing game is over and the result of the match up, actually becomes skill based.
In the HotS Q&A Blizzard talked about this.
They agreed with the point that players needed to guess to much, but they said that this was true for all three races, not just Zerg. As a counter argument they said that players can hold off a lot more than players where able to 5 months ago, so they wanted to give it more time to see if this "guessing game" would stop to exist.
If it would turn out that scouting is really to hard in sc2 they would make sure there are better scouting options in HotS.
|
On June 08 2011 02:01 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 01:37 Hristiyan wrote:On June 08 2011 01:30 Thrombozyt wrote:
So you say that building defense instead of workers stopped all-in aggression? What a strange concept! But why do you call it blind? Don't you think that it might have something to do with Zergs sending out a worker just like the other 2 races in order to scout their opponents opening BO?
It doesn't work that way dude. There are situations in which, the chances to get any intel inside of a terran's base are entirely based on the skill level of the terran. Playing a blind guessing game will not make your game play skill based and there will be many,many, many situations vs macro terrans in which you'll be like "Why did i loose ? I did everything right". And the answer is "Because you lost the macro game, while trying to win the guessing one". I personally as a Master league zerg in EU server HIGHLY disagree win Day[9] and his "assumptions" but thats just me. As i said, in that ZvT graphics, the blue and red lines will never cross paths, untill the guessing game is over and the result of the match up, actually becomes skill based. Dude, there are situations where the chances to get any intel inside of a zerg base are entirely based on the skill level of the Zerg. Namely all situations after lings are out and where you cannot expend 3+ scans to check the Zerg tech..
Bulls**t! Even though i'm sure a terran player can determine the zerg tech route only with 2 scans ( one early game on the natural , to see the drone saturation and determine if he is all-ining or not and another to see if he is going mutas or infestors ), even if you needed more, many people are building macro orbitals nowadays just to scan, produce extra SCVs and drop mules. You are having reapers too, which are very hard to deny without leaving them with any intel , if the terran player is good.
Terran's scout is undeniable and your problems ( if there is any chance that you have any with that race ) comes from the fact that you are greedy. However it doesn't matter if i decide to sack overlords or not, since the amount of intel that i'm gonna be able to gain by sacking those overlords is entirely based on the skill level of the terran.
|
you can visibly see the removal of the khaldarin amulet. ^^"
|
These stats are great but in reality balance is worse than this because it only includes the best players and those players change based on race balance. If a certain race starts doing bad than at first it shows the imbalance and then members of that race start to drop out of the group from which you are gathering data and that race's group becomes more skilled and starts winning more.
I'll give the opposite example. Lets say we buff stalkers to do 20 damage! With this completely op buff even the most scrub of scrub Protoss masters players like myself now start competing in tournaments. A bunch of semi pro much more skilled Zerg and Terran players now stop being included in your data and instead my scrub ass is put in there and because I'd still lose to any pro player the data ends up looking not as bad as it is in reality.
So we have to keep in mind that most of the top players happen to be Terran and not Zerg and that in reality Terran's win rate would be much higher were we only considering the top 100 Terrans and the top 100 Zergs. Protoss is also the most played race so it would be natural if they had the most players at the top and so like Zerg they are both doing worse than these statistics suggest.
If you could include the number of players for each race and possibly map statistics it would be great.
|
On June 08 2011 02:16 Slakter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 02:11 minhchi1211 wrote:stats look so peculiar So Protoss OP isnt true at all Dont judge anything from stats like this. First of all the graphs LOOK a lot more extreme than they are since none of them start at 0% and goes up to 100%. Also, you can NEVER judge a games balance from gamestatistics, you have to look at the games themself, otherwise you have to deny things like Metagame advantages (Zerg has a strat right now that protosses have trouble with, doesnt mean it´s imba) and also Skill differences.
lol, that stats don't start at 0% b/c 0% start at 7/27, not september 2010. Pls you need to learn statistic. Everything on the world is pretty much base on statistic. That's why we count world population.
|
good chart, it goes almost exactly as I have been playing as Protoss. One thing I thought was funny about the graph was the labeling of October and May. Everything is in English up until those two month abbreviations. 
|
I'm surprised P win rate is as high as it is given most P are still stubbornly sticking to old styles.
|
On June 08 2011 02:36 CScythe wrote:
I'm surprised P win rate is as high as it is given most P are still stubbornly sticking to old styles.
I'm surprised how many people arrogantly think they understand the game better than the top pro's.
|
Ａｓ ｄｒａｓｔｉｃ ａｓ ｔｈｅ ｇｒａｐｈ ｍａｙ ｌｏｏｋ． ｔｈｅ ｄｉｆｆｅｒｅｎｃｅ ｉｓ ｌｅｓｓ ｔｈａｎ １ ％ ｐｒｅｔｔｙ ｍｕｃｈ
|
lovett and xiaot should be able to bring up that protoss win ratio vs zerg w their stalker blink "abuse" =)
|
Terran is always on top...and yet no one complains about that? Lol, I don't understand the fixation wit protoss and zerg >_>
|
Balance depends so much on maps, players, and the overall metagame that you can't look at this one study and say "X race is OP or not OP". Statistics just don't work that way, and anyone who wants to suggest that they do should go back and retake STA101.
The only method that could compare the races would have to eliminate the map and player variables, and unfortunately the metagame variable will never be removed, so a purely objective conclusion is virtually impossible to obtain.
Also, people are interpreting the TvZ spike in January wrong. That was the GSL with MVP rolling through Code S, losing only one game in the process, and that was to Nestea, the best Zerg in the world.
|
I'd like to see the PvT results on Crossfire. I bet they're laughable.
|
On June 08 2011 02:38 Blasterion wrote:
Ａｓ ｄｒａｓｔｉｃ ａｓ ｔｈｅ ｇｒａｐｈ ｍａｙ ｌｏｏｋ． ｔｈｅ ｄｉｆｆｅｒｅｎｃｅ ｉｓ ｌｅｓｓ ｔｈａｎ １ ％ ｐｒｅｔｔｙ ｍｕｃｈ
No..? I don't know where you got 1% from but the difference is 3-4%, Or 5% in the case of PvZ. That is huge in a graph such as this, where 5% is around 100 games that went in Zergs favour at the top level of play.
As I said in the last thread , this may or may not show that Protoss is underpowered or that Zerg is OP.
However it 100% shows that in PvZ:
Protoss is definitely not OP and MAY be UP.
Zerg MAY be OP and is definitely not UP.
These are facts supported by the graph and are great anti-whine material.
|
On June 08 2011 03:22 bovineblitz wrote:
I'd like to see the PvT results on Crossfire. I bet they're laughable.
You can use TLPD to check that.
TvP record: 38-36 (51.4%)
On-topic: Nice, thanks for these stats. Very interesting to see how the balance shifts between the races. Things looking to be becoming more balanced in general which is good, hopefully the trend continues.
|
After studying the graph I came to the following conclusion.
Terran has been given small nerfs all throughout the game and has stayed for the most part level through out game launch. As zerg slowly climbed up in winrate as they small changes started to compound on the them self. Now Protoss took a sharp dive meaning either one of their nerfs or another races buff was to much.
So which one was it??
|
On June 08 2011 03:42 Parodoxx wrote:
After studying the graph I came to the following conclusion.
Terran has been given small nerfs all throughout the game and has stayed for the most part level through out game launch. As zerg slowly climbed up in winrate as they small changes started to compound on the them self. Now Protoss took a sharp dive meaning either one of their nerfs or another races buff was to much.
So which one was it??
The one where 4gate became stoppable. I don't really think it was too much, I think the Protoss needed to suddenly change their playstyle and they still haven't adapted IMO. (it might prove too much, but that'll take a while to be certain)
EDIT: Also, drawing conclusions from this graph aside from "in the current metagame protoss has it more difficult against Z than vice versa" is pure speculation.
|
On June 08 2011 02:37 KillerPenguin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 02:36 CScythe wrote:
I'm surprised P win rate is as high as it is given most P are still stubbornly sticking to old styles. I'm surprised how many people arrogantly think they understand the game better than the top pro's.
I don't mean to start an argument here, but remember when this was said for zerg? And Zerg(Myself included) responded just how you did?
And now Zerg play has changed things up, and started winning a lot more?
|
I am generally surprised that Terran doing much better than zerg in TvZ. I guess im going to have to belt up and get on with the fact that its not zerg being OP its that I am just terrible in that matchup. ( and also I need to stop asking zerg at the start of the game how it is possible to beat them XD )
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
