| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
Win rates per race over the last 9 months. [EDIT: TL.net colors] ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/yAbZn.png) There are a few changes from last time. First of all, the data is now both International and Korean games, combined. I've also expanded the scope to go back as far as September 2010. All data is from Team Liquids Player Database. If you like this I'd recommend you follow my twitter SC2StatisticsSC2Statistics where I also do live stats before big games and tournaments. And Reddit. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
| ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
I would suspect the rest, like inca/anypro/tester/hongun/sangho to fall out of code S soon. | ||
|
TitleRug
United States651 Posts
| ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:09 Mailing wrote: Not really. Korean protoss are falling apart, to the point where only Alicia, MC, Ace, Squirtle, and maybe Huk are having any form of consistent results, namely because they are actually really good players who belong in Code S >> I would suspect the rest, like inca/anypro/tester/hongun/sangho to fall out of code S soon. Uh yes? That's the trend: Korean Protosses are doing horribly. Not sure why you're disagreeing. | ||
|
Lynkilen
Norway211 Posts
 | ||
|
CursedFeanor
Canada539 Posts
| ||
|
Morphs
Netherlands645 Posts
| ||
|
Zaphid
Czech Republic1860 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:06 Yaotzin wrote: Please please separate Korean data from International. Even though the number of games is sadly small, Korea is still a very good indicator of future international trends - as we've now seen with ZvP. I believe Korean trends are more pronounced by whoever wins the GSL, as usual more games means better statistics. Interesting how in the last 1-2 months the zerg crying was turned on it's head, is it time for other races to start whining ? :D | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:11 Yaotzin wrote: Uh yes? That's the trend: Korean Protosses are doing horribly. Not sure why you're disagreeing. I am saying the good protoss are doing fine, and the bad protoss are doing bad. As opposed to months ago when the good protoss were winning and the bad protoss were still making top 16 | ||
|
Philip2110
Scotland798 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:13 Zaphid wrote: I believe Korean trends are more pronounced by whoever wins the GSL, as usual more games means better statistics. Interesting how in the last 1-2 months the zerg crying was turned on it's head, is it time for other races to start whining ? :D IdrA would disagree we are just bad and protoss is still broken. It would be better if you could split up the NA/EU from Korean stats if possible but thanks for info either way  | ||
|
SgtCoDFish
United Kingdom1520 Posts
Seems fine to me. Obviously we have to treat all data with a little caution, but nothing seems amiss here. | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
I'm used to Zerg = Red, Terran = Blue, Protoss = Green from years of surfing Teamliquid. Would it be possible to do some color swapouts? Regardless, I LOVE seeing data like this :D | ||
|
Philip2110
Scotland798 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:17 sgtcodfish wrote: So everything's within 3% balanced? Seems fine to me. Obviously we have to treat all data with a little caution, but nothing seems amiss here. If you are going by that PvZ has been even closer balanced than that since February. If you read the posts by zerg in the forums you would think it wasnt that close | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:15 Mailing wrote: I am saying the good protoss are doing fine, and the bad protoss are doing bad. As opposed to months ago when the good protoss were winning and the bad protoss were still making top 16 The good tosses are doing badly. Alicia has done nothing. MC has done poorly in last 2 GSLs. Ace is useless in Korea he just wins in foreigner tournaments. Squirtle has done nothing. | ||
|
mordek
United States12704 Posts
| ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
It should be possible to tell with a statistical test, though I'm not sure which one atm. | ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:18 Day[9] wrote: Fantastic graphs! I have a really stupid request if possible lol: I'm used to Zerg = Red, Terran = Blue, Protoss = Green from years of surfing Teamliquid. Would it be possible to do some color swapouts? Regardless, I LOVE seeing data like this :D Oh, are those the generally accepted colors? I was actually thinking quite a bit about this before settling on the ones I have now. It's incredibly easy to change though. I can also very easily bring up International and Korean numbers only, but it's not as useful as some of you may think. The sample size of the Korean games is small enough that you can't really draw any conclusions from them, and international numbers are basically unchanged if you remove Koreans. | ||
|
Grumblethorpe
36 Posts
| ||
|
aurum510
United States229 Posts
| ||
|
dani`
Netherlands2402 Posts
If I would actually want to be a whiny [lewd or immoral woman] I could even say Protoss is the weakest right now. But let's interpret these numbers in the wrong way and take into account the variance and such and simply conclude: the game approaches balances, yay! | ||
|
FrodaN
754 Posts
Also, I believe separating Korean and International results might really skew some data as Korean Ts are notoriously good and Korean Ps are struggling hardcore. Meanwhile players like Naniwa are dominating (still), etc. etc. Nonetheless, great work op! | ||
|
SolonTLG
United States299 Posts
| ||
|
naggerNZ
New Zealand708 Posts
| ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:22 Ctuchik wrote: Oh, are those the generally accepted colors? I was actually thinking quite a bit about this before settling on the ones I have now. It's incredibly easy to change though. I can also very easily bring up International and Korean numbers only, but it's not as useful as some of you may think. The sample size of the Korean games is small enough that you can't really draw any conclusions from them, and international numbers are basically unchanged if you remove Koreans.  MMA DongRaeGu AliciaThis is why the colors are generally accepted. Great work though. It shows very well how any complaining only gets going when the problem is almost solved. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:25 FrodaN wrote: These graphs are ALWAYS great to have in the back of our minds. Very interesting indeed! Also, I believe separating Korean and International results might really skew some data as Korean Ts are notoriously good and Korean Ps are struggling hardcore. Meanwhile players like Naniwa are dominating (still), etc. etc. Nonetheless, great work op! Obviously it has disclaimers attached, but it's still interesting to see the Korean only data. Korea is generally the best, and they generally create the big metagame shifts (most recent example the oh so popular roach ling allin vs 3gate expand), so.. | ||
|
RinconH
United States512 Posts
The TvZ one is beautiful how it is coming together lol | ||
|
lurked
Canada918 Posts
But as I'm an average TLer, I'll simply yell : PROTOSS UP! NEED A BUFF! GRAPH PROVED IT! I'M AN IDIOT TYPING IN CAPS! :D But yeah seriously, it's nice to see an "imaged" version of these results, but I also can't wait to see what everyone will get out of it... | ||
|
Kon-Tiki
United States402 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:27 Yaotzin wrote: Obviously it has disclaimers attached, but it's still interesting to see the Korean only data. Korea is generally the best, and they generally create the big metagame shifts, so.. Indeed. Even knowing that the sample size is far too small for reasonable data, the Koreans do set the trends in the game right now, so I think most of us would like to see that data. Even if its just for grins | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
Though it says almost nothing about balance. It's more about trends. If roach + ling allins works now, it doesn't mean the game is balanced or isn't. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
| ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
| ||
|
Blackk
South Africa226 Posts
| ||
|
Olinim
4044 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:30 Tuczniak wrote: Great work. Though it says almost nothing about balance. It's more about trends. If roach + ling allins works now, it doesn't mean the game is balanced or isn't. How come no one said this during the "deathball" phase? | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:31 awu25 wrote: I think many people still need to take a statistics course. These matches weren't all played under the same circumstances (different maps, different players, different skill levels) so to say that the game is balanced/imbalanced based on these statistics is wrong. Maps changing is something to bear in mind, but the player/skill level stuff cancels out. | ||
|
Piski
Finland3461 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:32 Olinim wrote: How come no one said this during the "deathball" phase? A lot of people said that actually. | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:32 Olinim wrote: I meant if in 50% cases you kill him before deathball and otherwise you die, it seems statistically balanced, but...How come no one said this during the "deathball" phase? | ||
|
jinixxx123
543 Posts
| ||
|
Lonyo
United Kingdom3884 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:20 Yaotzin wrote: The good tosses are doing badly. Alicia has done nothing. MC has done poorly in last 2 GSLs. Ace is useless in Korea he just wins in foreigner tournaments. Squirtle has done nothing. MC lost to Alicia in a PvP in GS ST In GSTL before that he went 3-1 He lost to Polt in GSL April, PvT, but won a PvZ and beat a terran in Up/Down matches. He won the GSL before that. Protoss may be doing worse against Zerg overall, but MC's performance isn't bad because of balance changes. He lost a PvT 2-0 and a PvP 2-0 and that's why he went out of the two recent GSLs. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:36 jinixxx123 wrote: do these count ladder games also in korea? if so how much games do you think are screwed due to close positions TvZ since ladder maps have not removed it. if we bear that in mind T=Z exactly? or maybe just slightly 1 or 2 % in favor for zerg? It's all pro games in competitions, from TLPD. Zero ladder games. | ||
|
Blackk
South Africa226 Posts
| ||
|
Condor
Netherlands188 Posts
Ah, and by the way, a good addition to this plot might be to make some vertical lines indicating when new patches were applied. | ||
|
Gescom
Canada3359 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... 53-47 is seriously not imba, especially if you were to look at it on a map by map breakdown and remove the outliers. | ||
|
TheSubtleArt
Canada2527 Posts
| ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:33 Yaotzin wrote: Maps changing is something to bear in mind, but the player/skill level stuff cancels out. That's definitely not true. You rarely see an even distribution of a races in the opening round of a tournament. It would be a very intensive study to perform but I can guarantee that it wouldn't be close to cancelling out when you start looking at professionals vs amateurs in early rounds. | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/Picon_small.png) ![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/Zicon_small.png) ![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/Ticon_small.png) | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:37 Lonyo wrote: MC lost to Alicia in a PvP in GS ST In GSTL before that he went 3-1 He lost to Polt in GSL April, PvT, but won a PvZ and beat a terran in Up/Down matches. He won the GSL before that. Protoss may be doing worse against Zerg overall, but MC's performance isn't bad because of balance changes. He lost a PvT 2-0 and a PvP 2-0 and that's why he went out of the two recent GSLs. Yeah I know, I suspect he's just spreading himself thin with so many trips abroad for tournaments. Anyway it's about Protoss overall, they aren't doing well, not even the good ones. That's definitely not true. You rarely see an even distribution of a races in the opening round of a tournament. It would be a very intensive study to perform but I can guarantee that it wouldn't be close to cancelling out when you start looking at professionals vs amateurs in early rounds. Do you have any data on the races of amateurs in competitions? | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:31 awu25 wrote: I think many people still need to take a statistics course. These matches weren't all played under the same circumstances (different maps, different players, different skill levels) so to say that the game is balanced/imbalanced based on these statistics is wrong. Exaclty. Those statistic does not mean much at all. Just take a GSL final game nestea vs. inca, and inca DT rushed nestea every single game. And all that horrible play comes into statistics saying "toss is underperforming", while it does not saying anything about game balance. | ||
|
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
tnx for stats, as one can see zerg has really had really low winrates that began around december, January and are now doing fairly well. Life is good for the swarm. Though Terrans have always been doing well. | ||
|
Olinim
4044 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:41 Alpina wrote: Exaclty. Those statistic does not mean much at all. Just take a GSL final game nestea vs. inca, and inca DT rushed nestea every single game. And all that horrible play comes into statistics saying "toss is underperforming", while it does not saying anything about game balance. Then when do any statistics matter if you can just brush it off so easily? Surely MC's wins shouldn't count for protoss, idra just roach ling all inned him every game. | ||
|
JustPlay
United States211 Posts
The zerg roach/ling all-in has been pretty much solved for a while. MC built to counter it in nearly every game. | ||
|
Blackk
South Africa226 Posts
| ||
|
Spacekyod
United States818 Posts
Yep, they were. The zerg whine was just way too loud. The argument for protoss was that we have found a strat that works great, so why deviate from it right now? If anything zerg should not be whining, and instead be trying to find new strats for taking down protoss. But at that moment all zergs wanted to do was macro, macro, macro and attempt to deathball vs deathball. Now we have the shoe on the other foot, and it's time for Protoss to come up with new strats and B.O's. Hopefully Blizzard gives us a chance to make this happen before making anymore changes to the game. | ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
| ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:41 Alpina wrote: Exaclty. Those statistic does not mean much at all. Just take a GSL final game nestea vs. inca, and inca DT rushed nestea every single game. And all that horrible play comes into statistics saying "toss is underperforming", while it does not saying anything about game balance. You need a hell of a lot more than one anecdote to establish your point, because you're essentially claiming that P players are on average much worse than Z players. This flies in the face of the default assumption of a bell curve, so it needs actual data (read: statistics) to support it. | ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:41 Yaotzin wrote: Yeah I know, I suspect he's just spreading himself thin with so many trips abroad for tournaments. Anyway it's about Protoss overall, they aren't doing well, not even the good ones. Do you have any data on the races of amateurs in competitions? No but I'm saying you can't just say the skill level thing will cancel out. Like in MLG, you have tons of open bracket amateurs who are playing against professionals. For every professional T who played an amateur Z, you won't see an equal amount of professional Z who played an amateur T. I don't expect anyone to take these factors into account since it would be too much work and the boundaries are vague | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
Yes, these statistics clearly show that overall, zerg has about the same chances to win as protoss. However, none of these statistics show if these wins come from the early game, midgame or the lategame. If we could see winpercentages per matchup overall , y-axis winpercentage, x-axis game duration, we could deduct if lategame protoss is imbalanced, or if lategame TvZ is terribly lopsided in favour of Zerg. Until then these numbers are a good commodity, but nothing conclusion can be deducted from them balance wise. | ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:48 kzn wrote: You need a hell of a lot more than one anecdote to establish your point, because you're essentially claiming that P players are on average much worse than Z players. This flies in the face of the default assumption of a bell curve, so it needs actual data (read: statistics) to support it. He's talking about using the statistics to talk about balance and using a simple example, not which races are doing better which is a different thing. It's one thing to say PvZ is 60% win rate, protoss needs to be nerfed. It's another thing to say Protoss has been doing well against zerg recently | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
Joseph123
Bulgaria1144 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:09 Mailing wrote: Not really. Korean protoss are falling apart, to the point where only Alicia, MC, Ace, Squirtle, and maybe Huk are having any form of consistent results, namely because they are actually really good players who belong in Code S >> I would suspect the rest, like inca/anypro/tester/hongun/sangho to fall out of code S soon. Ace Huk and Squirtle having consistent results? maybe u mean that they are losing every game they play? | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:48 awu25 wrote: No but I'm saying you can't just say the skill level thing will cancel out. Like in MLG, you have tons of open bracket amateurs who are playing against professionals. For every professional T who played an amateur Z, you won't see an equal amount of professional Z who played an amateur T. I don't expect anyone to take these factors into account since it would be too much work and the boundaries are vague Fair point. Though if the racial distribution of amateurs entering competitions is equal then that's moot. Need moar data :> | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:43 Olinim wrote: Then when do any statistics matter if you can just brush it off so easily? Surely MC's wins shouldn't count for protoss, idra just roach ling all inned him every game. they matter when you cant brush them off so easily. even if we could be certain that these results were of all equal value a 51% win ratio instead of 50% doesnt mean anything. these stats are super interesting but this is not going to be used as data for balance changes | ||
|
.Sic.
Korea (South)497 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... Not if protoss players are "competent" whatever the fuck that means. Also, LOL at september 2010, 42% win for zerg. I think blizzard would say that the game was atleast "cool" and "awesome" back then. | ||
|
Rannasha
Netherlands2398 Posts
| ||
|
Kon-Tiki
United States402 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:50 DannyJ wrote: I'd love to know what stats blizzard themselves study. The overall trends as opposed to exclusively pro play. Also, they look at 2v2s, 3v3s and 4v4s. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44110 Posts
Interesting. Are these the statistics all across the board? Across all servers and all leagues? | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:49 Chaosvuistje wrote: I would love to see statistics of this in relation to game duration, not just win/loss. Yes, these statistics clearly show that overall, zerg has about the same chances to win as protoss. However, none of these statistics show if these wins come from the early game, midgame or the lategame. If we could see winpercentages per matchup overall , y-axis winpercentage, x-axis game duration, we could deduct if lategame protoss is imbalanced, or if lategame TvZ is terribly lopsided in favour of Zerg. Until then these numbers are a good commodity, but nothing conclusion can be deducted from them balance wise. Don't think game length is recorded anywhere so alas. An unequal winrate at various times would not, however, mean that one race is imba at that point. For example, let's say current metagame dictates incredibly greedy early game play. Under this metagame, the large majority of their losses will be early game, with many economic wins lategame. Yet the metagame could simply be flawed - perhaps this race would actually be better off with a middling approach throughout the game, which could produce a 50% winrate at all times. That's not even getting into whether having 50% at all times is even desirable. | ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:53 Yaotzin wrote: Fair point. Though if the racial distribution of amateurs entering competitions is equal then that's moot. Need moar data :> Not just equal racial distribution though. You could have a situation where 80% of amateur Ts play professional Zs but only 40% of amateur Zs played professional Ts, which doesn't cancel out. The percentages would have to be equal | ||
|
Drae
70 Posts
Personally I like the pooled data including both foreign and Korean games. Larger sample is always better. But you could also include separated data as well to see if there is a significant difference as there is a difference in the two populations. An interesting stat to also look at would be the racial percentages in the first round of all the major tournaments. Would allow for some analysis of the percentages of races played. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:00 awu25 wrote: Not just equal racial distribution though. You could have a situation where 80% of amateur Ts play professional Zs but only 40% of amateur Zs played professional Ts, which doesn't cancel out. The percentages would have to be equal Hum, I guess you'd need equal distribution of pros as well, then it would equal out with sufficient sample size. Anyway it's mostly the trends that are interesting and they're almost certainly less affected by such things. | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:12 CursedFeanor wrote: great data! it seems no one can really complain about balance for the time being. that's great, good job Blizzard! This implies that those who complain about balance care about statistics. | ||
|
vojnik
Macedonia923 Posts
| ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
| ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:14 Yaotzin wrote: 4gate died like months ago. Got a small revival with the nexus cancel version but that's disappearing now too. And MC basically solved the roach/ling timing attack. | ||
|
sleepinabox
Canada2 Posts
| ||
|
FrogOfWar
Germany1406 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:13 Zaphid wrote: I believe Korean trends are more pronounced by whoever wins the GSL, as usual more games means better statistics. Interesting how in the last 1-2 months the zerg crying was turned on it's head, is it time for other races to start whining ? :D D'oh, I was still hoping we'd get the 2 armor 1 supply roaches back :p But seriously, I'm pretty sure all races have been accused of being imba from the very beginning. These accusations going in all directions might even be a good indicator of balance. | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6258 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:18 Day[9] wrote: Fantastic graphs! I have a really stupid request if possible lol: I'm used to Zerg = Red, Terran = Blue, Protoss = Green from years of surfing Teamliquid. Would it be possible to do some color swapouts? Regardless, I LOVE seeing data like this :D Especially interesting considering your discussion with Idra! | ||
|
Gladiator6
Sweden7024 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:09 Mailing wrote: Not really. Korean protoss are falling apart, to the point where only Alicia, MC, Ace, Squirtle, and maybe Huk are having any form of consistent results, namely because they are actually really good players who belong in Code S >> I would suspect the rest, like inca/anypro/tester/hongun/sangho to fall out of code S soon. Only Alicia and MC I would say show consistensy. Like 10 protoss players fails so badly in GSL super tournament, either they're no good or something is wrong with the race. Either fact is that only 1 protoss is left in the round of 16. | ||
|
vojnik
Macedonia923 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:19 eYeball wrote: Only Alicia and MC I would say show consistensy. Like 10 protoss players fails so badly in GSL super tournament, either they're no good or something is wrong with the race. Either fact is that only 1 protoss is left in the round of 16. and which other protosses would you say really stood up there? AnyPro? Inca? only toss i feel bad for is San but he lost in PvP | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
Even if one of or two players can make Protoss competitive at the top, something has to be done to get more middle of the road pros for variety's sake. (assuming the horrible number of tosses continues, might just be a metagame thing) | ||
|
akomatic
156 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... IdrA cried about BW TvP even when revolutions like the Flash Build and 1Rax FE were bringing it closer to parity on the professional level. The whine volume does not coorelate with reality. On the noob level I was still getting owned by D tosses while trying to copy IdrA's super-safe siege expand, so I was more than willing to soak up the pity. :D Thanks for updating the graphs! It's obviously not 100% accurate, but gives us a great general idea of the balance. | ||
|
Sayer
United States403 Posts
| ||
|
Special Endrey
Germany1929 Posts
| ||
|
Phanekim
United States777 Posts
either way with the problems with presenting data flat out like that...its still an interesting look into things. | ||
|
Grimjim
United States395 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Protoss seems to do the least QQing about their race, yet seems to be doing the worst overall. Interesting. Are these the statistics all across the board? Across all servers and all leagues? You obviously weren't observing the MLG live discussion thread then. | ||
|
L3g3nd_
New Zealand10461 Posts
TBH those 4 graphs feel about how i feel playing each match up (im toss, off race as zerg quite a lot) | ||
|
RaLakedaimon
United States1564 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:49 Chaosvuistje wrote: I would love to see statistics of this in relation to game duration, not just win/loss. Yes, these statistics clearly show that overall, zerg has about the same chances to win as protoss. However, none of these statistics show if these wins come from the early game, midgame or the lategame. That's one thing I've always wondered and I think the reason Zerg's tend to not look so strong in statistical analysis like this (even though this one of course shows there not doing bad at all) but once you show the win percentage past early to mid game I'm sure its much higher than most would assume. | ||
|
backtoback
Canada1276 Posts
| ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:32 backtoback wrote: nice graphs! Looks like ZvP is really in favor of Zerg. What does blizzard need to change in order to make it closer? Changing something would be the worst thing they could do. It needs to play out over time. | ||
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:32 backtoback wrote: nice graphs! Looks like ZvP is really in favor of Zerg. What does blizzard need to change in order to make it closer? Still a couple more things to try out to put that matchup in protoss favor a little more before asking blizzard to step in. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/eu/1/all Check out Europe for example, Zerg use to have like 26% representation in Masters/Grand Masters-- roughly around their race representation (25%)--but in the last 2-3 months they have shot up to almost equaling Protoss in Diamond/Masters and Grand Masters, less than 1% difference Craziest thing is, in Diamond they are about to become the most represented race (in Europe). At the beginning of may there use to be 60 Zergs in Europe Grand Master, now there are 70. From the looks of it, Zerg is going to become the dominant race in Europe if the trend continues for the next month or two EDIT: Pro players aside, All Zergs in general have been having a lot of success | ||
|
PeZuY
935 Posts
What I see is that Zerg had 1 huge buff (infestor) and Protoss got a huge nerf (warpage research) and since the players are still re-discovering which is the best opening and more solid for PvZ I wouldn't atleast change yet in the game. If protoss can't still figure it out in a while I guess there surely needs to be done some tweaking since Zerg still needs few buffs that probably could mess the whole PvZ balance. (Hydra speed/scouting) Just my personal opinion and I do not want start any imbalance discussion since it seems to be already in the air. ps. I hope you will update those statistics in the future ^^ | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:32 backtoback wrote: nice graphs! Looks like ZvP is really in favor of Zerg. What does blizzard need to change in order to make it closer? It would be better if they didn't change anything. The players should have to figure out how to win, not start crying to Blizzard whenever they lose. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44110 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:32 backtoback wrote: nice graphs! Looks like ZvP is really in favor of Zerg. What does blizzard need to change in order to make it closer? That's the wrong question to ask. The right question to ask would be "What other styles or strategies can Protosses explore to help them against Zergs?" As a Protoss, I'm always open to suggestions | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:57 Yaotzin wrote: Don't think game length is recorded anywhere so alas. An unequal winrate at various times would not, however, mean that one race is imba at that point. For example, let's say current metagame dictates incredibly greedy early game play. Under this metagame, the large majority of their losses will be early game, with many economic wins lategame. Yet the metagame could simply be flawed - perhaps this race would actually be better off with a middling approach throughout the game, which could produce a 50% winrate at all times. That's not even getting into whether having 50% at all times is even desirable. I'm merely asking for data, I do not want a 50% at all times during the game, hell, that wasnt even the case for broodwar to my knowledge. Lets have a hypothetical example in which protoss is imbalanced towards z at the 12 minute mark. The graph shows that around that time, protoss has an 80% winrate over zerg. This data we could then use to ask, which push is it that is difficult to handle. In such an extreme example like this, patching might be a solution. After the patch, the winrate is still in favour of protoss, but only by 60%. This is a much better ratio, and does not kill that strong push. Obviously this data isn't the holy grail of balance. But it is a much better representation of balance than a normal boolean is. | ||
|
Talic_Zealot
688 Posts
| ||
|
MuseMike
United States1339 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:30 Tuczniak wrote: Great work. Though it says almost nothing about balance. It's more about trends. If roach + ling allins works now, it doesn't mean the game is balanced or isn't. Yet protoss 2 months ago was IMBA? | ||
|
Iamyournoob
Germany595 Posts
Argh, if I understand this correctly, then I wonder what this data is really going to tell us. So as of now the overall win percentages are pretty close to eachother but going back 9 months, how many patches haver there been? I am sorry, but if I am not mistaken this data isn't helping at all in terms of learning something about the balance of the game. It would make most sense to only look at the data since the last balance patch and then use statistical methods to check if the win percentages are significantly different from 50%. But this highly aggregated is not a good indicator at all. | ||
|
MadCow911
Canada31 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... Cuz Idra just cry all the time...he is a big baby User was warned for this post | ||
|
Raid
United States398 Posts
| ||
|
Sandermatt
Switzerland1365 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:44 Iamyournoob wrote: So the win percentages displayed are calculated based on the last 9 months? Argh, if I understand this correctly, then I wonder what this data is really going to tell us. So as of now the overall win percentages are pretty close to eachother but going back 9 months, how many patches haver there been? I am sorry, but if I am not mistaken this data isn't helping at all in terms of learning something about the balance of the game. It would make most sense to only look at the data since the last balance patch and then use statistical methods to check if the win percentages are significantly different from 50%. But this highly aggregated is not a good indicator at all. As I understood it, the data goes back 9 month, but each month only regards the results during this month. This means each data point only regards the values of 1 month, while the whole graph spans a time of 9 month. | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:48 Raid wrote: Pretty balanced game imo. looks like there is no need for further changes Just because a game is seemingly balanced a year after launch doesn't mean it's going to stay balanced/is interesting. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:39 Talic_Zealot wrote: As a protoss who doesn't like using collosi I have felt for a long time that collosi are a boring and poorly designed unit. More importantly to the question of @backtoback I have felt that storm was quite underwhelming in it's performance. Units like the roach barely feel it and most of the zer gunits are so fast that they dodge it before even the 2nd tick of damage hits. It has smaller range and does practically less damage than both emp and fungal growth and splash damage is a must for protoss. A better archon and better but balanced storm would greatly improve the general feel of the game I feel not just solve some imbalance that may or may not be due to trends. Well then you should be liking the current metagame :o Speaking as a Protoss... In ZvP fast Colossus means death these days, you just can't do it without dieing to roach aggression minus PERFECT forcefields. A single Colossus or two isn't enough to swing the battle in your favor early in the game and in turn allows the Zerg to be really greedy if they want to because you cant punish them if you go fast Colossus. If you get too many Colossus then you become Infestor/Baneling-drop food, these days you stop at around 3-4 Colossus and go Templar/Stalker, you really need a TON of blink Stalkers, Colossus take up too much supply in the lategame. Fast Blink is a must it seems, Zerg have realized Lings aren't terrible against Toss and dominate the battlefield till we have 30forcefields (but usually they just start running between my bases at that stage ><) or Templars Disagree about Storm, If it did more damage then it would be too strong, it is fine as it is. The damage is amazing, but usually its not Storm that is the problem, is getting to it and having an economy to support it. If they really had to buff something for Protoss, I would rather them reduce the cost of our tech structures, mineral cost of Stalkers and maybe have sentries return 25gas on death, they are sooo expensive .__. The last two are a stretch but I can dream can't I ^^"? | ||
|
Pengu
England226 Posts
On June 08 2011 00:32 backtoback wrote: nice graphs! Looks like ZvP is really in favor of Zerg. What does blizzard need to change in order to make it closer? Short Answer nothing The game is constantly evolving and changing, it took a while but Zerg finally found solutions and ways to beat the "death ball" Now Protoss will just need to find a way to counter what Zerg is doing. Its an endless cycle of pure brilliant challenge. Blizzard will only act when something wouldn't be possible to counter. I think this is there view on the thor push with blue flame Vs P immortals the normal counter to Mech wouldn't last a second vs Strike cannons and they didn't have many other options. As anything take this data with a grain of salt, Its a guide, There are so many factors that we will never know unless the skew of the graph is extreme. MLG zergs did well ? MLG maps no close spawn and lots of supply depots to stop wall ins (mostly used vs zerg) Chances are a key factor But there is always more. Thanks for putting the data together great stuff Would love to see a ladder version or maybe a different leagues version. | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
Obviously we protoss still be OP cause we have lasers. and PRO is in our race name... common. Why does anyone play another race. Why do you think we don't whine like little drones every time we loose a game. Cause we just blow up your planet - done. no questions. "we purge" and "remain focused" on using our "power overwhelming" seriously tho these stats means whose winning pro matches not the balance of the game. If everyone was the same skill level and there were equal number of players for each race these stats would indicate balance. Terran has been doing so well because it was the most popular and "op" at release and a lot of really talented people chose stuck with T. EDIT: gosh darn it two protoss complained above me. You better report to the executor for execution | ||
|
Harmonious
179 Posts
There have been over 1700 tournament and league games added for May to TLPD, so it's time to update the win rate graph. /QUOTE] Good work man. I have one suggestion though. I think you should mention explicitly that the x-axis does not go from 0-100 but only shows the necessary part of the domain. And that this means that the differences are exaggerated (not everyone will have this in mind. Why should they really...). This is not a problem with your data or your graphs. It is a problem with how people perceive data when presented as graphs We need all the help we can get with stats  | ||
|
universalwill
United States654 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:25 FrodaN wrote: These graphs are ALWAYS great to have in the back of our minds. Very interesting indeed! Also, I believe separating Korean and International results might really skew some data as Korean Ts are notoriously good and Korean Ps are struggling hardcore. Meanwhile players like Naniwa are dominating (still), etc. etc. Nonetheless, great work op! but the best way to show the real overall race winrates is the way it has been done. when i sample the whole of the united states about politics, i will get people from rural areas and people from urban araes, and they're going to have some differing political opinions. i can't leave out the city for the sake of the country, or vice versa, because each person is just as valid as the other. sure, i can look at them separately as you suggest, but when i want to learn about the overall population, i need to look at them as a whole. starcraft is very unique in that a census of top players is not only possible, but very easy to do because all information is recorded, so combining all regions gives an excellent sense of where the real overall winrates are at. you can't even argue natural sampling error as it's a census of the population. anyway, the winrates are looking very good. it seems that we're past the point where zerg never won games, and we're just about even. anyone saying that zerg is better than protoss now, that's not necessarily true. it would appear that zerg is just at the advantageous state in the metagame. starcraft is about response. a race comes up with a powerful new strategy that the other doesn't have a clear response to yet, so they pull ahead in the winrate. the other race responds with a strategy that trumps it, and then they pull ahead in the winrate. i'm of the opinion that balanced starcraft should not follow a straight line of exactly 50%, but rather should follow a sort of sinusoidal curve. | ||
|
smacky
United States108 Posts
possible to get an edit of the graph with colorblind friendly colors red/blue/yellow works very well otherwise can someone give a hint as to what line is which race? | ||
|
valaki
Hungary2476 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:00 smacky wrote: im color blind and cannot tell the difference between red and green... possible to get an edit with colorblind This. I'm the same unfortunately. | ||
|
Kira__
Sweden2672 Posts
| ||
|
SilverJohnny
United States885 Posts
for example, WTF happened in january for TvZ lol. | ||
|
K3Nyy
United States1961 Posts
| ||
|
smacky
United States108 Posts
QUOTE]On June 08 2011 01:01 valaki wrote: On June 08 2011 01:00 smacky wrote: im color blind and cannot tell the difference between red and green... possible to get an edit with colorblind This. I'm the same unfortunately. alas we shall never be fighter pilots.... | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:04 SilverJohnny wrote: As expected, the stats show what every sane person knows, that the game is getting pretty damn close to being fully balanced. thanks for putting so much effort into making these stats, its very interesting to see how the metagame shifts with every patch/new strategy! for example, WTF happened in january for TvZ lol. Jan is the time every GSL terran was making 8-12 marines when sending them with 20 SCV in front of them to kill zerg It still works actually, I don't know why more terran are not doing it. The only reason it stopped working 6 months ago is because every zerg was so afraid of it that they would instantly build a blind spine crawler when their natural finished or a blind fast baneling nest. | ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:08 smacky wrote: [+ Show Spoiler + QUOTE]On June 08 2011 01:01 valaki wrote: On June 08 2011 01:00 smacky wrote: im color blind and cannot tell the difference between red and green... possible to get an edit with colorblind This. I'm the same unfortunately. alas we shall never be fighter pilots.... [/QUOTE] Color blind edition! ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Rxlaz.png) | ||
|
SilverJohnny
United States885 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:17 Mailing wrote: Jan is the time every GSL terran was making 8-12 marines when sending them with 20 SCV in front of them to kill zerg It still works actually, I don't know why more terran are not doing it. The only reason it stopped working 6 months ago is because every zerg was so afraid of it that they would instantly build a blind spine crawler when their natural finished or a blind fast baneling nest. I thought that was more of a GSL season 2/3 thing, January was MKP vs MVP finals, not as much 2rax alling I thought (except bitbybit LOL). I'm in class right now so I can't watch VODS, but from the matches I remember it wasn't quite that. Maybe i'm wrong though, all the GSLs have started to blur together. and that's just the GSL, doesn't explain all the international tournaments and such. | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
Jan 11 was patch 1.2, which was extremely minor. No zerg nerfs or buffs and terran only had a bunker/scv building change. Can't remember what happened to the metagame back then | ||
|
mols0n
Canada388 Posts
| ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On a related note, I'd really like to see the Korean stats by themselves. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
However The T and Z lines will never cross paths untill the guessing game is over. | ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:17 Mailing wrote: Jan is the time every GSL terran was making 8-12 marines when sending them with 20 SCV in front of them to kill zerg It still works actually, I don't know why more terran are not doing it. The only reason it stopped working 6 months ago is because every zerg was so afraid of it that they would instantly build a blind spine crawler when their natural finished or a blind fast baneling nest. 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? On topic: I still wonder why those graphs differ so much from the NASL stats. Is it because of the round robin or because of the sample size? | ||
|
mikyaJ
1834 Posts
The bottom line is Protoss, the top is Terran In Z v P Zerg is on top In T v Z Terran is on top In P v T Terran is on top | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
The funny thing is that most zergs don't know this! Look at losira, julyzerg and idra: they still go muta baneling ling. This composition is really 2 times easier to beat then infestor compositions. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
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. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44110 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:23 Ctuchik wrote: alas we shall never be fighter pilots.... Color blind edition! Should make all three lines black, and the key completely black to make the graph more balanced between color blind and non- color blind players :D But basically, the races are relatively balanced, although Zerg may be starting to win convincingly against Protoss at the moment. | ||
|
Tsuki.eu
Portugal1049 Posts
| ||
|
smacky
United States108 Posts
Color blind edition! [/QUOTE] honestly, thank you | ||
|
Shiros
United States11 Posts
| ||
|
JoeJin
United States77 Posts
These statistics show that the game is getting closer and closer to equilibrium between all races, sure it LOOKS like there is imbalance by just purely looking at the graphs in a half-assed manner, but look at the difference, the win-rate % is 52-48%, that's not a lot, and is exceptional due to the amount of variables that can affect the game. I'm actually glad these stats are coming the way they are, it just proves that there is becoming much more equilibrium between the races, or at least the win-rate between the races is becoming more and more balanced. | ||
|
Kira__
Sweden2672 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:33 Dente wrote: TvZ feels really hard for T, but that could be me ofcourse. Especially infestor + ling into infestor + hive (broodlord / ultra) is just crazy to hold, and I dear to say that zerg can fight terran on even bases with infestors. The funny thing is that most zergs don't know this! Look at losira, julyzerg and idra: they still go muta baneling ling. This composition is really 2 times easier to beat then infestor compositions. Yeah, go teach losira and idra how to play, they sure need it. | ||
|
robih
Austria1086 Posts
| ||
|
SwirlQ
United States148 Posts
| ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:55 Kira__ wrote: Yeah, go teach losira and idra how to play, they sure need it. I don't say that muta ling bling is bad... I said that infestor + X into hive is MUCH more difficult to play against. I also said that zergs don't know how powerful infestors are. Muta ling baneling is solid and good, infestor + ling into hive is awesome. | ||
|
OptimusYale
Korea (South)1005 Posts
| ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:37 Hristiyan wrote: 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. I dare to say, that Zerg can gather more intel more cost efficiently than terran can and there are many many situations where a macro terran is caught with his pants down, because suddenly the zerg composition changes drastically. | ||
|
latan
740 Posts
and even now in smaller maps like metal you can see that zergs learned to deal with early agrassion like 2 rax easily. | ||
|
Geisterkarle
Germany3257 Posts
| ||
|
Elasticity
3420 Posts
So Protoss OP isnt true at all | ||
|
Slakter
Sweden1947 Posts
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. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:55 Kira__ wrote: Yeah, go teach losira and idra how to play, they sure need it. MMA just totally outplayed them. outplaying someone has a much larger effect than the balance. balance only effects the game if you play a certain way, and in the case of terran it's more due to the map design. immobility suuuuucks. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On June 08 2011 02:16 Slakter wrote: 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. | ||
|
Deckkie
Netherlands1595 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:37 Hristiyan wrote: 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. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
On June 08 2011 02:01 Thrombozyt wrote: 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. | ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
| ||
|
KillerPenguin
United States516 Posts
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. | ||
|
tuho133
120 Posts
On June 08 2011 02:16 Slakter wrote: 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. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
| ||
|
CScythe
Canada810 Posts
| ||
|
KillerPenguin
United States516 Posts
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. | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
| ||
|
Bluerain
United States348 Posts
| ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
| ||
|
Boundless
Canada588 Posts
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. | ||
|
bovineblitz
United States314 Posts
| ||
|
Sakarabu
United Kingdom132 Posts
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. | ||
|
Szubie
United Kingdom294 Posts
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. | ||
|
Parodoxx
United States549 Posts
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?? | ||
|
Wesso
Netherlands1245 Posts
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. | ||
|
Seam
United States1093 Posts
On June 08 2011 02:37 KillerPenguin wrote: 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? | ||
|
Geordie
United Kingdom653 Posts
| ||
|
Raid
United States398 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:26 Mailing wrote: No idea then. Jan 11 was patch 1.2, which was extremely minor. No zerg nerfs or buffs and terran only had a bunker/scv building change. Can't remember what happened to the metagame back then I think it was because Terran pretty much solved the TvZ matchup and figured out marine tank medivac is the way to go and Zerg were still on muta ling baneling which was hardcountered by this unit comp. So after the zergs adapted they found out they have the strongest late game unit broodlords and of course infestors or banelings to accompany it. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On June 08 2011 03:48 Seam wrote: 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? lol was about to say the same thing | ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On June 08 2011 02:25 Hristiyan wrote: 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. So to determine if Zerg goes muta or infestor, I cannot use scans, if the Zergs actually use their creep spread and put their tech not next to the main base. With the map awareness of Zerg coupled with the fact that speedlings are faster than any scout you cannot tell for sure until you are hit by one, and then it's too late. Also roach aggression can be done with quite a high drone count, so scanning the nat won't always help. Zerg saying that Terran should expend 2 scans is like Terrans suggesting that Zerg should sack 4 overlords. Both is expensive and not guaranteed to net results. Later in the game, scouting gets better and better for Zerg (speed ovies plus the space requirements for Terran structures) while worse for Terran (as there is more of the map where Zerg could hide his tech). Selective whining about Zerg scouting is just this - whining. It's just popularized by a certain Zerg figurehead. | ||
|
Seam
United States1093 Posts
I really think Protoss's issues are with the current metagame, going from what we've seen in the past. Maybe it's a slight balance issue, but I highly doubt it's as bit as the graph says. | ||
|
cilinder007
Slovenia7251 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:00 Seam wrote: I really think Protoss's issues are with the current metagame, going from what we've seen in the past. Maybe it's a slight balance issue, but I highly doubt it's as bit as the graph says. less than 5% shouldnt be a balance issue | ||
|
Havefa1th
United States245 Posts
On June 08 2011 03:54 Thrombozyt wrote: So to determine if Zerg goes muta or infestor, I cannot use scans, if the Zergs actually use their creep spread and put their tech not next to the main base. With the map awareness of Zerg coupled with the fact that speedlings are faster than any scout you cannot tell for sure until you are hit by one, and then it's too late. Also roach aggression can be done with quite a high drone count, so scanning the nat won't always help. Zerg saying that Terran should expend 2 scans is like Terrans suggesting that Zerg should sack 4 overlords. Both is expensive and not guaranteed to net results. Later in the game, scouting gets better and better for Zerg (speed ovies plus the space requirements for Terran structures) while worse for Terran (as there is more of the map where Zerg could hide his tech). Selective whining about Zerg scouting is just this - whining. It's just popularized by a certain Zerg figurehead. Your math is not sound at all. 2 scans =! 4 overlords. You can't compare apples and oranges. Regardless, the point remains that Zerg CANNOT prevent a Terran from scanning. When you scan, you get information. There's nothing a Zerg can do about it except move buildings, and if you don't get information from your scan, that's YOUR fault. Zerg has to sacrifice overlords, and if you stick marines around the edge of your base, that overlord isn't guaranteed to get information. It's a hope and pray situation for Zerg. Apples and oranges, you can't compare them. Also, if you don't know what tech he's going before 10 minutes into the game, you're playing Terran wrong. Turtle less, drop more, be more aggressive. | ||
|
Seam
United States1093 Posts
I prolly should have said as big as people will make it seem. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:00 Seam wrote: I really think Protoss's issues are with the current metagame, going from what we've seen in the past. Maybe it's a slight balance issue, but I highly doubt it's as bit as the graph says. The current slump sure. The worrying part is the serious lack of even decent Protoss players. There are a bunch of up and coming Zergs plus a few heavy hitters. There are dozens of decent to awesome Terrans. There are a couple of good tosses, and a couple of up and comers. That's it. That issue is from before the ZvP metagame shift. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
I personally don't think there is a guessing game going on for any of the races and if then toss should be the one complaining and definetly not zerg. People just want to scout for free and be able to just build without having to adjust to anything the opponent is doing. As much as my games are concerned the time i get suprised by something is when i am getting proxied (talking of proxy stargate or starport). But I prefer playing a save buildorder and punish greedy eco play, rather then trying to compete in pumping workers and changing to attack mode suddenly. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:02 Havefa1th wrote: Your math is not sound at all. 2 scans =! 4 overlords. You can't compare apples and oranges. Regardless, the point remains that Zerg CANNOT prevent a Terran from scanning. When you scan, you get information. There's nothing a Zerg can do about it except move buildings, and if you don't get information from your scan, that's YOUR fault. Zerg has to sacrifice overlords, and if you stick marines around the edge of your base, that overlord isn't guaranteed to get information. It's a hope and pray situation for Zerg. Apples and oranges, you can't compare them. Also, if you don't know what tech he's going before 10 minutes into the game, you're playing Terran wrong. Turtle less, drop more, be more aggressive. Ok, Kim admits that there are scouting issues with the 3 races, but the other two races are not that much vulnerable az zerg is early game, cuz they can wall-in and force fields to protect them, and have scans and hallucinations to scout. In what rightful mind, do you know such an issue and say "well if players don't solve that till HotS, we're gonna address those issues then". Am i supposed to switch races till then, or just continue to rage when i get cheesed by terrans like hell ? Jeasus Christ, is that balance team retarded or what ..... ? | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
Zerg is never going to get the great scouting people want, because it would break them completely. You can't let a player both know everything and devote all their production to whatever they choose. | ||
|
Redox
Germany24794 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:10 Hristiyan wrote: Ok, Kim admits that there are scouting issues with the 3 races, but the other two races are not that much vulnerable az zerg is early game, cuz they can wall-in, have scans, force fields and hallucinations to scout. In what rightful mind, do you know such an issue and say "well if players don't solve that till HotS, we're gonna address those issues then". Am i supposed to switch races till then, or just continue to rage when i get cheesed by terrans like hell ? Jeasus Christ, is that balance team retarded or what ..... ? I would rather say it is doing a surprisingly good job. | ||
|
DevanT
United States71 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:10 Hristiyan wrote: Ok, Kim admits that there are scouting issues with the 3 races, but the other two races are not that much vulnerable az zerg is early game, cuz they can wall-in and force fields to protect them, and have scans and hallucinations to scout. In what rightful mind, do you know such an issue and say "well if players don't solve that till HotS, we're gonna address those issues then". Am i supposed to switch races till then, or just continue to rage when i get cheesed by terrans like hell ? Jeasus Christ, is that balance team retarded or what ..... ? build 1 spine crawler...terran "cheese" destroyed. collect free win. | ||
|
Havefa1th
United States245 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:19 DevanT wrote: build 1 spine crawler...terran "cheese" destroyed. collect free win. 6 rax makes one spine crawler look like a tooth pick on a spring. Just sayin. | ||
|
tehemperorer
United States2183 Posts
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:20 Havefa1th wrote: 6 rax makes one spine crawler look like a tooth pick on a spring. Just sayin. Please stop. 6rax allins are really easy to stop. If you scout no gas for the terran, he is either 2 raxing( in which case he would have already been there ) 1rax FE or a mass rax allin. In any case, teching to banelings after the initial bunker rush timing is over without action when you're still in the dark will keep you safe from any non-gas terran push. A spinecrawler deals well with 2rax pushes and scarying off hellions unless they go mass hellion. Infact, most terran allins can be dealt with correct control between queens, banelings, zerglings and spinecrawlers. | ||
|
MuseMike
United States1339 Posts
| ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
The other two races can wait, but not that one .... solution is needed right now! | ||
|
Frozenserpent
United States143 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:26 Chaosvuistje wrote: Please stop. 6rax allins are really easy to stop. If you scout no gas for the terran, he is either 2 raxing( in which case he would have already been there ) 1rax FE or a mass rax allin. In any case, teching to banelings after the initial bunker rush timing is over without action when you're still in the dark will keep you safe from any non-gas terran push. A spinecrawler deals well with 2rax pushes and scarying off hellions unless they go mass hellion. Infact, most terran allins can be dealt with correct control between queens, banelings, zerglings and spinecrawlers. That doesn't seem to agree with pro players say. For example, Mym Cloud says differently, that is difficult to stop an all-in terran as zerg, and that you have to all-in on defense to defend. Personally I think Cloud knows what he's talking about a lot more than you do. | ||
|
cHaNg-sTa
United States1058 Posts
On June 08 2011 03:54 Thrombozyt wrote: So to determine if Zerg goes muta or infestor, I cannot use scans, if the Zergs actually use their creep spread and put their tech not next to the main base. With the map awareness of Zerg coupled with the fact that speedlings are faster than any scout you cannot tell for sure until you are hit by one, and then it's too late. Also roach aggression can be done with quite a high drone count, so scanning the nat won't always help. Zerg saying that Terran should expend 2 scans is like Terrans suggesting that Zerg should sack 4 overlords. Both is expensive and not guaranteed to net results. Later in the game, scouting gets better and better for Zerg (speed ovies plus the space requirements for Terran structures) while worse for Terran (as there is more of the map where Zerg could hide his tech). Selective whining about Zerg scouting is just this - whining. It's just popularized by a certain Zerg figurehead. I don't even know where to begin. 2 scans = 4 overlords? Please... Can we get rid of this notion that you lose money when you scan? You only get money faster. Late game Terran has tons of orbitals. I don't even understand how you can go with the notion that Terran late game scouting is terrible when Terrans scan the shit out of the creep and kill the creep tumors constantly when they can simply save those "precious scans" by making a Raven. Plus, I don't recall people whining about late game Zerg scouting, it's the early game where it's extremely difficult to gather good intel against a good player watching the edges of his base. Zerg can't prevent scans from scouting tech. | ||
|
pHelix Equilibria
United States1134 Posts
| ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:02 Havefa1th wrote: Your math is not sound at all. 2 scans =! 4 overlords. You can't compare apples and oranges. Regardless, the point remains that Zerg CANNOT prevent a Terran from scanning. When you scan, you get information. There's nothing a Zerg can do about it except move buildings, and if you don't get information from your scan, that's YOUR fault. Zerg has to sacrifice overlords, and if you stick marines around the edge of your base, that overlord isn't guaranteed to get information. It's a hope and pray situation for Zerg. Apples and oranges, you can't compare them. Also, if you don't know what tech he's going before 10 minutes into the game, you're playing Terran wrong. Turtle less, drop more, be more aggressive. Hmm... Zerg ovverlord is hope and pray that you get the info you need but scans are not hope and pray? His tech could be ANYWHERE. I never said anything about 'before 10 minutes' - quite the opposite and I never suggested that scans equal ovis, just that the suggestion to use more scans and not being greedy is the same. But apparently you didn't read that closely. | ||
|
Anomalist0032
United States47 Posts
As toss i know getting hallucinate not only delays my robo timing, but it also burns precious precious forcefields from my sentries, but its a price worth paying to actually be able to see whats happening on the map. Tl:dr scouting is never free, but effective scouting is always worth it. | ||
|
Raid
United States398 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:26 Chaosvuistje wrote: Please stop. 6rax allins are really easy to stop. If you scout no gas for the terran, he is either 2 raxing( in which case he would have already been there ) 1rax FE or a mass rax allin. In any case, teching to banelings after the initial bunker rush timing is over without action when you're still in the dark will keep you safe from any non-gas terran push. A spinecrawler deals well with 2rax pushes and scarying off hellions unless they go mass hellion. Infact, most terran allins can be dealt with correct control between queens, banelings, zerglings and spinecrawlers. Sorry I had to get this off my chest it is incorrect to use =! because the proper way is to use !=... Sorry dude if your gonna use operators please at least use them right or its going to bug the crap out of me. You wouldn't say equals not would you? not equals sir not equals.. Going back on topic zerg should just send some lings to the front of terrans base and leave em at the expo and see how long it takes for them to expo and how many marines come out simple enough? Most maps are fairly large that depending on what comes out allows you to build 2-3 spines + several rounds of lings. They really need to get rid of close positions on maps its just stupid thats why its imbalanced. | ||
|
d.o.c
United States49 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:10 Hristiyan wrote: Ok, Kim admits that there are scouting issues with the 3 races, but the other two races are not that much vulnerable az zerg is early game, cuz they can wall-in and force fields to protect them, and have scans and hallucinations to scout. In what rightful mind, do you know such an issue and say "well if players don't solve that till HotS, we're gonna address those issues then". Am i supposed to switch races till then, or just continue to rage when i get cheesed by terrans like hell ? Jeasus Christ, is that balance team retarded or what ..... ? User was warned for this post | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
| ||
|
Sakarabu
United Kingdom132 Posts
| ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:32 Hristiyan wrote: The guy is saying that one way or another that issue will be addressed for all 3 races. However if HotS is 1 year away and so is the solution, then this race is pointless right now or a coin-flip at best. The other two races can wait, but not that one .... solution is needed right now! Nestea doesn't need a solution, and if Nestea doesn't then no one does. You just have to figure out how he does it | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:36 Anomalist0032 wrote: I like how people bring up hallucinate and scan like their free, but then saccing an ovy is atrocious in the cost value. If the most imbalanced early game scout solution - pneomatized carapace required a spawning pool and now a Lair, zerg would be as much behind resource and tech wise as the protoss would be with getting a hallucination. On top of that i would loose a supply source and 100 minerals for a slower scout, and you would loose X sentry energy for a fast one. So please don't talk about that. I'm not saying thats the proper solution, but i'm saying if that was true, the tosses and zergs would have an equal early game scouting and STILL the terrans would have by far the best one. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:45 Yaotzin wrote: Nestea doesn't need a solution, and if Nestea doesn't then no one does. You just have to figure out how he does it No, nestea wins his games with revolutionary strats, not because they are mega strong, but because they are very "new" and they just havent seen it. If neastea played a solid, standart games , he would never win a GSL. | ||
|
rysecake
United States2632 Posts
| ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:40 Sakarabu wrote: Am I reading this correctly? After these graphs Zerg is still the race whining in this thread? What is wrong with you people? Whiners will be Whiners.... That being said, these stats about pro's don't mean much. KiwiKaki could probably beat vibe in bo7, but idra would probably beat kiwi in bo7. Which race is OP from these stats? At the pro level, the race doesn't matter as much as the sheer skill (or lack there of) of the players. | ||
|
Murse
United States3 Posts
| ||
|
Voltaire
United States1485 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:35 pHelix Equilibria wrote: Wow the high times for Terrans during Nov. 2010. Now that was ridiculous. Finally working out to the fair levels. That was during the era when zergs were still struggling to stop the 2 rax rush every game. That month was MKP's rise to fame. Fun times. | ||
|
RemrafGrez
United States180 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:40 Sakarabu wrote: Am I reading this correctly? After these graphs Zerg is still the race whining in this thread? What is wrong with you people? You aren't really surprised are you? | ||
|
JustPlay
United States211 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:48 rysecake wrote: Zerg still has a disproportionately difficult time in the early game, and even top players can be killed by ridiculous all-ins because there's simply no way to tell. Zergs still complaining they suck? Hate to break it to you but zerg is fine. When people are complaining about zerg scouting or zerg getting cheesed it has everything to do with the early game. You can't use 4 overlords to scout. You can use 1-2 depending on the map due to their speed and the terran being able to score free kills if you attempt to send your second or third in to a pre-scouting position. On top of that if they have 2 marines at opposite sides of their base you will not see anything important inside if they are any good, but again this depends on the map and spawns. Close air benefits overlord scouting significantly on some maps. On shattered temple you 100% know what they are doing for the rest of the game if the terran spawns at 6 and you spawn at 9. SC2 has a lot of problems for all races, and even if the races were at 50% those problems won't magically go away. | ||
|
Sideburn
United States442 Posts
| ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:23 Grumblethorpe wrote: great stats! nice to see Zergs finally breaking the 50% mark in zvp More like smashing the crap out of 50%. Truly these graphs tell us one thing. Toss is OP! Maybe this will help some players understand that winning and losing trends are established by the players and not the perceived balance of the game. Zergs are playing well right now, and I don't think balance will keep that from changing. Protoss players need to adapt . Though even in BW we we're the "cool, shiny" race that never seemed to win anything. On June 08 2011 04:40 Sakarabu wrote: Am I reading this correctly? After these graphs Zerg is still the race whining in this thread? What is wrong with you people? I think those are the people who feel like they have been had, trying to defend themselves, and their own denial. Balance has sooo much less to do with skill at this point in Sc2. At least pro players are so good, and respectful to the community, that they don't whine about the balance so much, that their entire loyal following doesn't feel the need to speak out about it. Surely though, because of their skill, they have some better understanding of the balance. I guess I will just keep playing games to get better, no amount of whining will help me be a better player. | ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:25 dani` wrote: Good job. Every time a Zerg whines again after I defeat him about how "stupidly imbalanced" Protoss is I will point him to this so he can see it's all roughly equal so he can conclude he just played horribly =) or that zerg has an horrible learning curve and that everytime you're fighting someone of your level he always seems to have the easiest way around? it seems to me that some players are confusing "balanced" and "how hard is one race compared to another".... but that's just me | ||
|
jHERO
China167 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:55 JustPlay wrote: Zerg still has a disproportionately difficult time in the early game, and even top players can be killed by ridiculous all-ins because there's simply no way to tell. When people are complaining about zerg scouting or zerg getting cheesed it has everything to do with the early game. You can't use 4 overlords to scout. You can use 1-2 depending on the map due to their speed and the terran being able to score free kills if you attempt to send your second or third in to a pre-scouting position. SC2 has a lot of problems for all races, and even if the races were at 50% those problems won't magically go away. lol ridiculous argument, theres only two early game pressure from terran 1, 2 rax + bunker 2. reactored helion on small maps like xel-naga caverns, you can assume a 2 rax, the safe build would be lings first, or good overlord placement to spot bunker and pull ~4 drones to kill scv building bunker reactored helion can be easily stopped on any map, (except for taldarine (sp) ) where there is no ramp to block with queens, but otherwise 2 queens, or a couple of roaches completely shuts it down | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
And after all the trouble that other races have, like protoss having to sometimes use sentry energy and hallucinate to scout, which of course relays tech, the zergs still complains about their inability to scout. Sometimes I really wonder how people can be so ignorant. | ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:02 jHERO wrote: lol ridiculous argument, theres only two early game pressure from terran 1, 2 rax + bunker 2. reactored helion on small maps like xel-naga caverns, you can assume a 2 rax, the safe build would be lings first, or good overlord placement to spot bunker and pull ~4 drones to kill scv building bunker reactored helion can be easily stopped on any map, (except for taldarine (sp) ) where there is no ramp to block with queens, but otherwise 2 queens, or a couple of roaches completely shuts it down This just isn't true. At 6 minutes or before terran can have: 2 rax rines into expo 2 rax rines into heavy pressure with scvs 2 rax rines all in with scvs 3 rax rines all in with scvs hellion with 5 rines 2 hellions at 6 minutes, assuming hatch first zerg has: speed, (if not spanishwa build) 2-4 queens maybe a spine Personally, I find that extra queens (3 - 4 at around 6 minutes) will solve all of these rushes, but some people refuse to build extra queens for economic reasons. I think these are the people who complain about the variety of terran early pushes. Each of these pressures/all-ins from terran require a different response if you are only going 2 queens until 2nd expo | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:07 bramapanzer wrote: This just isn't true. At 6 minutes or before terran can have: 2 rax rines into expo 2 rax rines into heavy pressure with scvs 2 rax rines all in with scvs 3 rax rines all in with scvs hellion with 5 rines 2 hellions at 6 minutes, assuming hatch first zerg has: speed, (if not spanishwa build) 2-4 queens maybe a spine Personally, I find that extra queens (3 - 4 at around 6 minutes) will solve all of these rushes, but some people refuse to build extra queens for economic reasons. I think these are the people who complain about the variety of terran early pushes. Each of these pressures/all-ins from terran require a different response if you are only going 2 queens until 2nd expo So you are saying zerg cannot cheese but terran can? Shows pure ignorance. | ||
|
starcraft911
Korea (South)1263 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:11 Yaotzin wrote: Uh yes? That's the trend: Korean Protosses are doing horribly. Not sure why you're disagreeing. 4% difference and you say "doing horribly" .... should i say it? Yea... I'm going to say it... I'm not sure why you're disagreeing with the statistics. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:01 Konsume wrote: or that zerg has an horrible learning curve and that everytime you're fighting someone of your level he always seems to have the easiest way around? it seems to me that some players are confusing "balanced" and "how hard is one race compared to another".... but that's just me Yes and you are confusing how hard zerg is to play with how hard it is to play other races. Seriously stfu. I play Protoss 1v1, by choice (EN TARO ADUN TASSADAR!). That being said playing zerg at my level of play is honestly not harder. You are in denial sir. I can pretty much guarantee you that I would play better with zerg (as I feel I have a natural affinity to play them) at least at the level I'm currently at. Does it mean I will switch to get promoted, hell fucking no. I play for fun, some people are better than others at different things, and there are many things that can make you a good sc player. Zerg requires a different skill set (I would argue less skill, more tactical thinking, and positioning). Seriously, you have 1 fucking building to macro with, and can instantly tech switch if you want. Most zerg players don't use their units in every situation that they can or should because they are afraid of needlessly losing them (thats a skill issue). The ability to gain map control and build +10 drones at once, may not come naturally to all players, but its something zerg can and should do. Having some kind of RTS mind I can understand this concept, and can try and use my units to their full potential to meet this need. Seriously I'm soo fucking sick of players whining and saying cheese this or cheese that, when they just want to A move 40 roaches or Marauders into my base for an easy win. Protoss and Terran are not easier to play, get over yourself bud. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
That race has the least scouting problems. | ||
|
Maenander
Germany4926 Posts
Morrow admits in a recent interview that zerg is pretty balanced now. | ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:09 WindCalibur wrote: So you are saying zerg cannot cheese but terran can? Shows pure ignorance. I'm not saying that at all.... Did you not read my post? I even said I think the argument from a zerg point of view is bunk.... Quit trolling | ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:02 jHERO wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 08 2011 04:55 JustPlay wrote: Zerg still has a disproportionately difficult time in the early game, and even top players can be killed by ridiculous all-ins because there's simply no way to tell. When people are complaining about zerg scouting or zerg getting cheesed it has everything to do with the early game. You can't use 4 overlords to scout. You can use 1-2 depending on the map due to their speed and the terran being able to score free kills if you attempt to send your second or third in to a pre-scouting position. SC2 has a lot of problems for all races, and even if the races were at 50% those problems won't magically go away. lol ridiculous argument, theres only two early game pressure from terran 1, 2 rax + bunker 2. reactored helion on small maps like xel-naga caverns, you can assume a 2 rax, the safe build would be lings first, or good overlord placement to spot bunker and pull ~4 drones to kill scv building bunker reactored helion can be easily stopped on any map, (except for taldarine (sp) ) where there is no ramp to block with queens, but otherwise 2 queens, or a couple of roaches completely shuts it down eh what? vs terran - 2 to 6 rax pressure early game - 2 rax all-in + scv with supply trick (which is deadly on 2 player map or 4 player close position - Fast 2 reapers which is easily stoppable but you lose all your timing on queen injects AND might lose a couple drones - Hellions blue flame like 4mins in the game? (might be exagerating on this one) - Than cloacked banshees - 1-2 Vicking harass on O.V. (like we saw this week-end) - Finaly ends with 2-3 Medivac+marine+stim simultanious drop on every expos (which are comming a couple mins before mutas vs toss - 4 gates - 2 gates + voidray - 2 gates + 5 phoenix and voidrays - 3 gates + DTs - Coupled with the fact that they can fast expand safly in most maps vs a zerg.... you only need 2-3 canons But I see a trend here... its how... uneasy it is to scout a terran/protoss early game with ultra slow OVs and also how zerg has no "fast" anti-air units. Queens gets killed 1v1 vs banshee and vs voidrays and coupled with the fact that it takes 45s (or near) to make.... and that it slows your lair and that you don't need many of em to be honest = Zergs early game = urhhh! To be honest I find middle and late game to be pretty balanced.... I just hate the 1st 10 mins of all my games to the point where I almost rerolled terran but.... I man'up and I got promoted to master a couple days ago! | ||
|
Binabik
Germany686 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:14 Hristiyan wrote: Its very easy to predict a zerg cheese with terran. You just scan once his natural at the specific time and the drone saturation will tell you the truth. You have a wall-in, which you can make very hard to bust and/or can get marauders precautionary if you have doubts of benelings busts .... or just scan again if you have real doubts or send a reaper. That race has the least scouting problems. But you now that Scan-Scouting costs you as much as sending 2 Overlords? | ||
|
Darksoldierr
Hungary2012 Posts
- Coupled with the fact that they can fast expand safly in most maps vs a zerg.... you only need 2-3 canons What | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
To be honest I find middle and late game to be pretty balanced Totally agree with that. ZvT is the most balanced match-up late game in my opinion ( after the mirrors ), but early game is just a joke if the terran decides to abuse you. | ||
|
koOma
Norway462 Posts
| ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:14 bramapanzer wrote: I'm not saying that at all.... Did you not read my post? I even said I think the argument from a zerg point of view is bunk.... Quit trolling Zerg can cheese even if they go hatch first. You listed out options that assumes the zerg does not cheese. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:18 Binabik wrote: But you now that Scan-Scouting costs you as much as sending 2 Overlords? IF you lose 2 ovies thats 200 minerals and (you start with one too) 2 larvae. IF you scan thats a potential 400 minerals your not getting IF you build observers your using your robo to not make colossus or immortals There is no such thing as a free lunch. | ||
|
Binabik
Germany686 Posts
It's sad to see really strong players like Tyler losing a Colossus to Vikings because they don't have perfect army control. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:12 starcraft911 wrote: 4% difference and you say "doing horribly" .... should i say it? Yea... I'm going to say it... I'm not sure why you're disagreeing with the statistics. Learn to read. I wrote Korean Protosses. Mailing and I were both talking purely about Korean Protoss players and how well they are doing. | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:18 Binabik wrote: But you now that Scan-Scouting costs you as much as sending 2 Overlords? Scans don't cost anything ! If it costs 2 overlords, you would have to collect N minerals and then spent it on the scan! Thats why people build macro orbital commands. They cost X minerals, you use it as a part of a very strong wall-in, you produce extra SCVs from it, you can always float it to ur 3rd and you can constantly scan on the full price of the cost of the orbital command ! Stop saying that Scans cost X minerals, THEY DONT ! | ||
|
Chaosvuistje
Netherlands2581 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:32 Frozenserpent wrote: That doesn't seem to agree with pro players say. For example, Mym Cloud says differently, that is difficult to stop an all-in terran as zerg, and that you have to all-in on defense to defend. Personally I think Cloud knows what he's talking about a lot more than you do. That is your opinion. Blindly believing what pros say will make that sentiment a truth. Personally, if I can get inside a terran base and scout if they take their gas or not with my scouting drone, I can be safe against any terran all in that isnt close position metal/shattered. Be it 6rax, 2rax, 2port banshee or hellion marauder. If people aren't using a scouting drone versus a terran, then thats completely their decision to miss out on crucial scouting information in favour of a couple of minerals. Here's the thing, even if you have to counter all in to defeat the all in. You can drone up much faster than his scv's can, giving you a good midgame. Im not saying it is not difficult, but its certainly not impossible to stop most allins on balanced positions. | ||
|
PartyBiscuit
Canada4525 Posts
 October clearly reflected the major patch right? With the reaper nerf etc. | ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:21 WindCalibur wrote: Zerg can cheese even if they go hatch first. You listed out options that assumes the zerg does not cheese. You really don't read well do you... This entire quote was about SCOUTING. Are you seriously implying that zergs should always cheese to be safe from 2rax expo? A baneling bust hatch first hits at around 6:30, that is after the timeframe i mentioned in my post. Anyways, the whole point of this quote thread, before you side-tracked it, was the fact that Terrans have MANY options before 6 minutes, not just "reactored hellion or 2 rax bunker" | ||
|
Striding Strider
United Kingdom787 Posts
| ||
|
Raid
United States398 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:46 Hristiyan wrote: If the most imbalanced early game scout solution - pneomatized carapace required a spawning pool and now a Lair, zerg would be as much behind resource and tech wise as the protoss would be with getting a hallucination. On top of that i would loose a supply source and 100 minerals for a slower scout, and you would loose X sentry energy for a fast one. So please don't talk about that. I'm not saying thats the proper solution, but i'm saying if that was true, the tosses and zergs would have an equal early game scouting and STILL the terrans would have by far the best one. People at least need to know that even if terrans don't use the mule we still could have done the the supply call down spell which guarantees each scan to at least lose 100 minerals... I am just gonna say this terrans are gonna stop scanning as a use for scout because its silly. You can pretty much figure out what each player is doing by sending out a reaper or floating building.. Scans will be primarily used for exclusively TvT and detection in the future imo as terran player its easier to send a marine ahead to scout. Unless of course HOTS decides to have zerg upgrade building burrow and u gotta scan for buildings yikes. Zergs are so predictable that I pretty much never throw a scan because all my harass makes them transparent as day. The tvz matchup is pretty much solved tank marine medivac counters all early game stuff zerg can throw at you. Toss is the only race that has the edge on hiding tech like dt. stargate play and if you just open the standard good ol 2 rax expo with a missile turret and bunker your always guaranteed to be able to hold off 90% of whatever toss has to throw at you. Ah its so good to be terran XD | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:07 bramapanzer wrote: This just isn't true. At 6 minutes or before terran can have: 2 rax rines into expo 2 rax rines into heavy pressure with scvs 2 rax rines all in with scvs 3 rax rines all in with scvs hellion with 5 rines 2 hellions at 6 minutes, assuming hatch first zerg has: speed, (if not spanishwa build) 2-4 queens maybe a spine Personally, I find that extra queens (3 - 4 at around 6 minutes) will solve all of these rushes, but some people refuse to build extra queens for economic reasons. I think these are the people who complain about the variety of terran early pushes. Each of these pressures/all-ins from terran require a different response if you are only going 2 queens until 2nd expo Your Terran pressures are are all the same. Either Hellion and/or marines. More Raxes is the equivalent of Zerg dedicating more larve to early pressure units so don't put that Terran has tons of choices. Zerg can just as easily, or even more easily do early pressure with Lings,Blings,Roaches. Also if I expoed first no dip i won't have !@#$ as the 6 min mark. I some races could FE and put tons of pressure that would be pretty OP. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
But I see a trend here... its how... uneasy it is to scout a terran/protoss early game with ultra slow OVs and also how zerg has no "fast" anti-air units. You don't need an OV sac to scout a protoss. Geysers and a lack of information gives you a world of information, unless you want to see every structure and unit he has at x time, then you're fucked. Terran is a different monster though. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:28 bramapanzer wrote: You really don't read well do you... This entire quote was about SCOUTING. Are you seriously implying that zergs should always cheese to be safe from 2rax expo? A baneling bust hatch first hits at around 6:30, that is after the timeframe i mentioned in my post. Anyways, the whole point of this quote thread, before you side-tracked it, was the fact that Terrans have MANY options before 6 minutes, not just "reactored hellion or 2 rax bunker" 2 Rax expo is very stoppable. Have an ovie over the nat to spot the bunker. Pull some workers. Micro. It happens all the time. | ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:29 GinDo wrote: Your Terran pressures are are all the same. Either Hellion and/or marines. More Raxes is the equivalent of Zerg dedicating more larve to early pressure units so don't put that Terran has tons of choices. Zerg can just as easily, or even more easily do early pressure with Lings,Blings,Roaches. Also if I expoed first no dip i won't have !@#$ as the 6 min mark. I some races could FE and put tons of pressure that would be pretty OP. You obviously don't play zerg. Just because they use the same units doesn't mean they require the same response. Oh and try pressuring a terran with speedlings, plz, let me know how that goes and get back to me. | ||
|
JustPlay
United States211 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:02 jHERO wrote: I'm not sure why you'd post if you don't know what you are talking about. You can scout if it's reactor hellion or 2rax fairly easily as zerg, and you can auto lose 90% of your games against half of the variants of 2rax with the response you posted. Hellions are also really common and really difficult to deal with on Xel'Naga, because if you don't go roaches and he goes blue flame you might as well leave. lol ridiculous argument, theres only two early game pressure from terran 1, 2 rax + bunker 2. reactored helion on small maps like xel-naga caverns, you can assume a 2 rax, the safe build would be lings first, or good overlord placement to spot bunker and pull ~4 drones to kill scv building bunker reactored helion can be easily stopped on any map, (except for taldarine (sp) ) where there is no ramp to block with queens, but otherwise 2 queens, or a couple of roaches completely shuts it down The real danger vs P/T is what comes after that very, very early stage. Two port banshee will 100% kill a zerg who is not rushing toward mutalisks or massing queens. You can two port banshee after 2rax+cc or reactor hellion. 2port after failure was even done in the MLG, and every time I try to watch how a pro handles it they flat out lose unless they were doing 9 minute muta, by some miracle were allowed to scout it, or the 2 port comes next to spire timing. You can also ambiguously get blue flame, even producing a tank in between if the zerg does manage to scout or keep poking, and it is a complete nightmare on maps like xel'naga (or any good hellion map, xel'naga is just a really obvious one.) Both of those will result in a loss if you are not prepared. It's also nearly impossible to tell if he is megaraxing you or 2rax expanding if he plays it properly on most maps and spawns. Most zergs learn to deal with this by switching in to "it's probably coming" mode as soon as they are unable to confirm what is going on beyond no intial gas, but again if the terran is just playing you for a fool this will put you significantly behind. Edit: I'm not sure why people think anyone is talking about 2rax or reactor hellion when anyone is talking about difficulty scouting. Both are perfectly stoppable and scoutable. The problem is you are forced to guess the follow up, no matter who you are, and it's depressing watching professional players make the same guesses and getting them wrong. Zerg is disproportionately strong once mutas hit the field provided the terran doesn't have a solid push setup already - that's a point in the matchup where terran is hurting and zerg gets fun because you are now ahead, but prior to that point it really is stressful to play because you might have to quit from your poker loss at any given moment. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:32 bramapanzer wrote: You obviously don't play zerg. Just because they use the same units doesn't mean they require the same response. Oh and try pressuring a terran with speedlings, plz, let me know how that goes and get back to me. Well MMA lost his nat to speedlings like 5 times at MLG :D | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:32 bramapanzer wrote: You obviously don't play zerg. Just because they use the same units doesn't mean they require the same response. Oh and try pressuring a terran with speedlings, plz, let me know how that goes and get back to me. Hellions-Spines or Roaches Marines-Spines or Roaches Marines and Hellions-Spines or Roaches | ||
|
decaf
Austria1797 Posts
You heard it hear first. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:33 Yaotzin wrote: Well MMA lost his nat to speedlings like 5 times at MLG :D So true. And don't forget the Kyrix Econ bust. That gets me all the time. | ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:30 GinDo wrote: 2 Rax expo is very stoppable. Have an ovie over the nat to spot the bunker. Pull some workers. Micro. It happens all the time. Of course 2 rax expo is stoppable, I was using hyperbole as an argument. What I was trying to illustrate, is that if you think the terran is 2rax all-inning and he is actually 2rax-expoing, you will be in serous trouble in about 4 minutes | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:34 bramapanzer wrote: Of course 2 rax expo is stoppable, I was using hyperbole as an argument. What I was trying to illustrate, is that if you think the terran is 2rax all-inning and he is actually 2rax-expoing, you will be in serous trouble in about 4 minutes Yes yes if you make anything but drones you're behind yawn. Stop listening to Idra please. | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:28 bramapanzer wrote: You really don't read well do you... This entire quote was about SCOUTING. Are you seriously implying that zergs should always cheese to be safe from 2rax expo? A baneling bust hatch first hits at around 6:30, that is after the timeframe i mentioned in my post. Anyways, the whole point of this quote thread, before you side-tracked it, was the fact that Terrans have MANY options before 6 minutes, not just "reactored hellion or 2 rax bunker" Your response lists out possible tactics that terran can do before 6 minutes. Then you list out what the zerg can have without taking in consideration of what a terran have. Isn't that replying to him with a biased thought that zergs can only play a macro game while terran can do anything he wants? In addition, you pointed out a random timing on a baneling bust which is not true at all depending on how economic the baneling bust is. Roach openings are also a possibility in which you forgot to mention and they are safe without being all-in. Scouting? I read the whole chain of posts and clearly you responded to the previous poster saying that a terran can do more than just reactored hellions and 2 rax bunker rushes, while being wrong on what the zerg can do. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:07 WindCalibur wrote: Terran cannot afford to scan too early because it delays their game. Economic baneling busts are almost always unscouted and even at the top levels, pros get blind turrets. Roach busts are also impossible to scout when the lings are on the field. If the terran is investing in banshees or tech, it is most likely possible to sac an ovie to see what is going on since tech = less marines. Also, going tech like banshees makes terran play a guessing game as they are weak to roach all ins or baneling busts. And after all the trouble that other races have, like protoss having to sometimes use sentry energy and hallucinate to scout, which of course relays tech, the zergs still complains about their inability to scout. Sometimes I really wonder how people can be so ignorant. The major differences here are: Terran CAN scan. If you CAN do it, it's an option and therefore you can't complain about it not being an option. Protoss CAN go 3-gate robo. That opening is generally safe vs everything, therefore scouting is unnecessary. -Zerg can sac overlords and HOPE that the opponent isn't paying attention. -Zerg can't get a zergling past a wallin. -Zerg can't make a generalist unit that is going to be good against everything until we get an observer out. -Zerg can't compete with Terrans economy specifically unless they are a base ahead. (this is due to not only the MULE, but also the drone mechanic in the early game) -Zerg has no 4-gate-like build that forces Terran to build a decent amount of units or die without going completely all-in. (if you think transitioning out of a 4-gate is hard, try transitioning out of a bling bust) -Terran specifically has at least 4 different early-game aggressive openings that will outright kill a Zerg if not properly scouted. All of these things add up to making early game incredibly frustrating for Zerg at ALL levels. Not necessarily imba, I think Zerg is doing surprisingly well lately, but really really frustrating to say the least. There is no easy answer to it, unlike the 3-gate robo. You can't just stick to the one build until you feel more confident seeing small identifiers that will allow you to stray away from it. There is no safe build for Zerg. There is only cross your fingers and hope you guess right. Maybe if you play enough, you'll start to pick up on the indicators that you should be looking for. | ||
|
Mercury-
Great Britain804 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:01 Konsume wrote: or that zerg has an horrible learning curve and that everytime you're fighting someone of your level he always seems to have the easiest way around? it seems to me that some players are confusing "balanced" and "how hard is one race compared to another".... but that's just me Oh cut it with the Z is harder to play crap. You guys have been pulling that since beta and it's really not true anymore once you get above Platinum. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:33 GinDo wrote: Hellions-Spines or Roaches Marines-Spines or Roaches Marines and Hellions-Spines or Roaches 2 Port Banshee- Spores and Roaches. Haaahahahhahah sorry. Had to say it. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
eta: oh did you actually mean 3gate robo in pvz not pvt? If so you're more clueless than you can possibly imagine haha. | ||
|
TiBe
Mexico200 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:40 Jermstuddog wrote: ... Protoss CAN go 3-gate robo. That opening is generally safe vs everything, therefore scouting is unnecessary. 3 gate robo against zerg??? OMG You don't really play toss do you? | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:40 Jermstuddog wrote: The major differences here are: Terran CAN scan. If you CAN do it, it's an option and therefore you can't complain about it not being an option. Protoss CAN go 3-gate robo. That opening is generally safe vs everything, therefore scouting is unnecessary. -Zerg can sac overlords and HOPE that the opponent isn't paying attention. -Zerg can't get a zergling past a wallin. -Zerg can't make a generalist unit that is going to be good against everything until we get an observer out. -Zerg can't compete with Terrans economy specifically unless they are a base ahead. (this is due to not only the MULE, but also the drone mechanic in the early game) -Zerg has no 4-gate-like build that forces Terran to build a decent amount of units or die without going completely all-in. (if you think transitioning out of a 4-gate is hard, try transitioning out of a bling bust) -Terran specifically has at least 4 different early-game aggressive openings that will outright kill a Zerg if not properly scouted. All of these things add up to making early game incredibly frustrating for Zerg at ALL levels. Not necessarily imba, I think Zerg is doing surprisingly well lately, but really really frustrating to say the least. There is no easy answer to it, unlike the 3-gate robo. You can't just stick to the one build until you feel more confident seeing small identifiers that will allow you to stray away from it. There is no safe build for Zerg. There is only cross your fingers and hope you guess right. Maybe if you play enough, you'll start to pick up on the indicators that you should be looking for. You do have a point but you fail to understand several points. First, terran's scan do not reveal zerg's whole base. It is a risk just like sacing an overlord. Smart zergs these days always try to hide tech using creep spread. Second, going 3 gate robo into expansion puts you behind economically and by far is not 100% safe. It is however, the safest build a protoss can do. A good comparison in the zerg's perspective would be having to play safe by putting down static defense while putting yourself behind economically. Also note that baneling busts can win games outright also. Most baneling busts are unscouted, even at the highest levels. Though terran does seem to be more safe wit the wall in, you can argue that zergs can be equally safe just by making more queens. Though about the variety of things a terran can do, they can be scouted as easily as just seeing whether the terran has a gas or not or even how constantly he is making marines. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:44 TiBe wrote: 3 gate robo against zerg??? OMG You don't really play toss do you? The assumption was vs Terran... You know... the race that is hard to scout... Sorry if I didn't make that clear. | ||
|
somedumbgamer
United States46 Posts
| ||
|
bramapanzer
83 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:40 WindCalibur wrote: Your response lists out possible tactics that terran can do before 6 minutes. Then you list out what the zerg can have without taking in consideration of what a terran have. Isn't that replying to him with a biased thought that zergs can only play a macro game while terran can do anything he wants? In addition, you pointed out a random timing on a baneling bust which is not true at all depending on how economic the baneling bust is. Roach openings are also a possibility in which you forgot to mention and they are safe without being all-in. Scouting? I read the whole chain of posts and clearly you responded to the previous poster saying that a terran can do more than just reactored hellions and 2 rax bunker rushes, while being wrong on what the zerg can do. Random time for baneling bust? It's the fastest bust after speed and hatch first... Ok, let me list the AGGRESSIVE things zerg can do before 6 minutes, for fairness: early pool lings - really can only do 6 pool to get in before wall off, can be denied by good scv micro and leaves zerg around 10 workers behind and on the same # of bases as terran, essentially an all in 1 base roach/speedling - Hits around 6:50-730, all of terran's pressure will get there before roaches pop and will be able to scout warren and return to build defenses 1 base baneling bust - Hits around 6:30, if this does not kill workers, zerg will be again be behind about 5-10 workers and on even expansion. So as you can see, none of the zerg aggression hits before 6 minutes except the 6 pool, all can easily be scouted by lack of expo (or lack of drones at expo) during terran early game pressure. I think you all are forgetting that one of the most important reasons terran pressure is not just to get the zerg to make more units, its also to scout.... | ||
|
Havefa1th
United States245 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:13 Wrongspeedy wrote: Yes and you are confusing how hard zerg is to play with how hard it is to play other races. Seriously stfu. I play Protoss 1v1, by choice (EN TARO ADUN TASSADAR!). That being said playing zerg at my level of play is honestly not harder. You are in denial sir. I can pretty much guarantee you that I would play better with zerg (as I feel I have a natural affinity to play them) at least at the level I'm currently at. Does it mean I will switch to get promoted, hell fucking no. I play for fun, some people are better than others at different things, and there are many things that can make you a good sc player. Zerg requires a different skill set (I would argue less skill, more tactical thinking, and positioning). Seriously, you have 1 fucking building to macro with, and can instantly tech switch if you want. Most zerg players don't use their units in every situation that they can or should because they are afraid of needlessly losing them (thats a skill issue). The ability to gain map control and build +10 drones at once, may not come naturally to all players, but its something zerg can and should do. Having some kind of RTS mind I can understand this concept, and can try and use my units to their full potential to meet this need. Seriously I'm soo fucking sick of players whining and saying cheese this or cheese that, when they just want to A move 40 roaches or Marauders into my base for an easy win. Protoss and Terran are not easier to play, get over yourself bud. My face naturally fell into my palm after reading this post. When you're saying "at my level" I'm going to assume you're bronze. | ||
|
KDot2
United States1213 Posts
But they clearly need more early game scouting options against T . But don't blame the Terran race ... blame Zerg for not having enough scouting options. Blizzard please make this happen. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:49 Jermstuddog wrote: The assumption was vs Terran... You know... the race that is hard to scout... Sorry if I didn't make that clear. You know how you sigh when people say you should build roaches and more queens and some spine crawlers and a spore crawler and you'll be safe? That's 3gate robo. | ||
|
Mercury-
Great Britain804 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:52 ShooTouts wrote: Zerg CLEARLY have done very well against Terrans lately. But they clearly need more early game scouting options against T . But don't blame the Terran race ... blame Zerg for not having enough scouting options. Blizzard please make this happen. Having perfect scouting would mean Zerg could just drone whore to hell against T/P without any risk. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:51 Havefa1th wrote: My face naturally fell into my palm after reading this post. When you're saying "at my level" I'm going to assume you're bronze. Nope your just biased. I've been ranked Plat-Masters. Regardless its not important. I have no problem with balance or my race. Zerg players need to stop complaining. END OF STORY. Nice 2 line post that says nothing about you other than you are a biased zerg player. Do you have any arguments to bring to this? Maybe you would like to quote some stats from the OP? | ||
|
Havefa1th
United States245 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:22 Wrongspeedy wrote: IF you lose 2 ovies thats 200 minerals and (you start with one too) 2 larvae. IF you scan thats a potential 400 minerals your not getting IF you build observers your using your robo to not make colossus or immortals There is no such thing as a free lunch. Negative on that math. There is no specific mineral cost to scans, as they depend on the relative cost of minerals (minerals are more valuable early game), your mineral saturation and number of bases, orbital commands, how far ahead you are in the game, etc. You can't put a flat cost on mules, threads have been closed before for trying. Also, to correct the Zerg math: The scouting overlord is generally your first one, so I'll give that to you free. If you scout with 2 overlords, that's 1 free ovie and 1 that costs 100 minerals and one larva. In addition, you NEED to replace them because they give supply... so that's 200 more minerals and 2 more larva. Edit: On June 08 2011 05:56 Wrongspeedy wrote: Nope your just biased. I've been ranked Plat-Masters. Regardless its not important. I have no problem with balance or my race. Zerg players need to stop complaining. END OF STORY. Nice 2 line post that says nothing about you other than you are a biased zerg player. Do you have any arguments to bring to this? Maybe you would like to quote some stats from the OP? There ya go, something I can agree with. You CAN'T, however say that Zerg is as easy to pick up and play as Terran or Protoss because that's simply not true. Each race has different mechanics and playstyles, saying that they're equally easy to play is a fallacy. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:48 WindCalibur wrote: You do have a point but you fail to understand several points. First, terran's scan do not reveal zerg's whole base. It is a risk just like sacing an overlord. Smart zergs these days always try to hide tech using creep spread. Second, going 3 gate robo into expansion puts you behind economically and by far is not 100% safe. It is however, the safest build a protoss can do. A good comparison in the zerg's perspective would be having to play safe by putting down static defense while putting yourself behind economically. Also note that baneling busts can win games outright also. Most baneling busts are unscouted, even at the highest levels. Though terran does seem to be more safe wit the wall in, you can argue that zergs can be equally safe just by making more queens. Though about the variety of things a terran can do, they can be scouted as easily as just seeing whether the terran has a gas or not or even how constantly he is making marines. You're pointing out the minor issues. Sure a scan COULD miss something but it's going to catch 90% of the base every time. As you get better, and play better opponents who are going to hide tech buildings, you can scan in better locations that will give you enough intel anyway. I could tell a newbie to drop 2 MULEs, then scan the Zergs main. That will work all the way in to Master. 3 gate robo puts you behind economically, but it's going to get you through to the high-levels again. I could tell a newbie to open 3 gate robo every game vs Terran, and that would get him to Master np. I can't tell a newbie to baneling bust his way to Master league. There are so many minor details that need to be taken into account when you bling bust, so many reasons to not do it. Hell, he would lose 50% of his games to banshees and the other 50% to bunker rushes. Again, I'm not complaining imba, I'm complaining bad design. Hydras being a non-complete-shit unit would go a long way to making Zerg more playable. Anyway, the scouting issues that Zerg constantly complain about still persist to this day... I'm not quite sure why Terrans have let up on all-ins vs Z... you pick a random tech and have a 60% chance of winning outright or securing a lead and a 40% chance of only putting yourself slightly behind or breaking even... not bad odds in my opinion. | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:49 bramapanzer wrote: Random time for baneling bust? It's the fastest bust after speed and hatch first... Ok, let me list the AGGRESSIVE things zerg can do before 6 minutes, for fairness: early pool lings - really can only do 6 pool to get in before wall off, can be denied by good scv micro and leaves zerg around 10 workers behind and on the same # of bases as terran, essentially an all in 1 base roach/speedling - Hits around 6:50-730, all of terran's pressure will get there before roaches pop and will be able to scout warren and return to build defenses 1 base baneling bust - Hits around 6:30, if this does not kill workers, zerg will be again be behind about 5-10 workers and on even expansion. So as you can see, none of the zerg aggression hits before 6 minutes except the 6 pool, all can easily be scouted by lack of expo (or lack of drones at expo) during terran early game pressure. I think you all are forgetting that one of the most important reasons terran pressure is not just to get the zerg to make more units, its also to scout.... Now that you listed out what the zerg can do BEFORE 6 minutes, sure you can say they cannot do damage (which isn't true always), but lets extend that time to 8 minutes. All of a sudden the amount of options a zerg can have becomes much more broad. Also note that you limited the options for zerg into going hatch first. If you scout a terran base, you can also limit what the terran can do by seeing whether he has a gas or not (you can also see if he went gas before rax by seeing the amount mined or whether an orbital goes down before the factory) and often, whether he is getting 2 barracks or not. Yes, he can makarax, but that is definitely scoutable. | ||
|
crabz
227 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:54 Mercury- wrote: Having perfect scouting would mean Zerg could just drone whore to hell against T/P without any risk. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. exacly, zergs are ridoculous if they think they deserve perfect scounting information considering other races have to guess too (atleast to the same extent as zergs) and they cant get huge advantage from retarded mass droning early in game | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
Considering my actual skill level, this is way too high a win rate and I would not deserve such a win rate. Coin flips can lead to 50% win rates, but that does not show balance, it shows that we have a rock-paper-scissors match up. | ||
|
ApBuLLet
United States604 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... Imbalanced statistics do not necessarily imply gameplay imbalance... that is such a hugely wrong (and common) misconception that people have. Zerg is winning right now but that doesn't mean Zerg is OP, I mean look how many times that graph fluctuates between Zerg and Protoss being the "imbalanced" race. The change can be due to many things, maps, player skill, current trends, etc. For example, when builds like 4gate, forge FE void ray/colossus, etc. came to prominence, I'm sure Protoss performed statistically better then Zerg during those periods, but on the other hand, anti 3gate roach ling all ins are forcing Protoss player's to change their play a bit now and Zerg is taking a lead statistically. Basically, I wouldn't be so quick to call a race imbalanced simply because of some statistics. You need to consider the other factors influencing the statistics apart from the races themselves. | ||
|
Serdiuk
Belgium145 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:02 Jermstuddog wrote: You're pointing out the minor issues. Sure a scan COULD miss something but it's going to catch 90% of the base every time. As you get better, and play better opponents who are going to hide tech buildings, you can scan in better locations that will give you enough intel anyway. I could tell a newbie to drop 2 MULEs, then scan the Zergs main. That will work all the way in to Master. 3 gate robo puts you behind economically, but it's going to get you through to the high-levels again. I could tell a newbie to open 3 gate robo every game vs Terran, and that would get him to Master np. I can't tell a newbie to baneling bust his way to Master league. There are so many minor details that need to be taken into account when you bling bust, so many reasons to not do it. Hell, he would lose 50% of his games to banshees and the other 50% to bunker rushes. . A newbie who plays safe will still lose simply because he is a newbie, and a good player who plays greedy will still get to masters because he is good. And considering there's a thread somewhere on TL about a guy who 6-pooled his way to masters league as an experiment, you are quite wrong. A newbie might actually be able to pull this one off even. | ||
|
Havefa1th
United States245 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:03 crabz wrote: exacly, zergs are ridoculous if they think they deserve perfect scounting information considering other races have to guess too (atleast to the same extent as zergs) and they cant get huge advantage from retarded mass droning early in game Have you ever considered that Zerg needs as many drones as possible to stay even with Terran or Protoss? Terran and Protoss have chronoboost and Mules to benefit their economy without sacrificing worker production, meanwhile Zerg has to make enough drones and bases to stay even with those two races economically while making sure the same larva aren't better used as defending units. Meanwhile we do have to replace drones used as tech structures. While, as a Zerg player, do agree that I love my D key, I'm just saying that early game especially, it's a delicate balancing act between making sure your economy is decent late game while staying alive. | ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:02 Jermstuddog wrote: You're pointing out the minor issues. Sure a scan COULD miss something but it's going to catch 90% of the base every time. As you get better, and play better opponents who are going to hide tech buildings, you can scan in better locations that will give you enough intel anyway. I could tell a newbie to drop 2 MULEs, then scan the Zergs main. That will work all the way in to Master. 3 gate robo puts you behind economically, but it's going to get you through to the high-levels again. I could tell a newbie to open 3 gate robo every game vs Terran, and that would get him to Master np. I can't tell a newbie to baneling bust his way to Master league. There are so many minor details that need to be taken into account when you bling bust, so many reasons to not do it. Hell, he would lose 50% of his games to banshees and the other 50% to bunker rushes. Again, I'm not complaining imba, I'm complaining bad design. Hydras being a non-complete-shit unit would go a long way to making Zerg more playable. Anyway, the scouting issues that Zerg constantly complain about still persist to this day... I'm not quite sure why Terrans have let up on all-ins vs Z... you pick a random tech and have a 60% chance of winning outright or securing a lead and a 40% chance of only putting yourself slightly behind or breaking even... not bad odds in my opinion. Shouldn't you discuss this at the top top levels? Rarely do you see protoss 3 gate robo these days( though i see Tyler do it time to time). Also, baneling busts can get you into master league. So can strategies like voidray rushes and such. You can argue that voidray all-ins have a 60% of winning a game and even if you don't, can only put you behind. The reason why Terrans don't all in as often these days are because its a coinflip, where the odds of winning slowly diminishes depending on your opponent's skill rather than your own. Terrans have variety, but it does not mean that a zerg is in a huge disadvantage because of so. Experience and skill can eliminate this variety and put you at even ground. | ||
|
sicarii
United States93 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:05 Micket wrote: If myself and IdrA played 100 games and I played Terran, and I used builds ranging from 2 rax all in to 2 port banshee, and assuming IdrA doesn't over prepare for cheese every game, I would probably win 10 games, maybe more. Considering my actual skill level, this is way too high a win rate and I would not deserve such a win rate. Coin flips can lead to 50% win rates, but that does not show balance, it shows that we have a rock-paper-scissors match up. You over estimate yourself you would lose every single game | ||
|
Mithriel
Netherlands2969 Posts
Overall it seems races are decently balanced. Besides (can't believe i'm saying this) protoss is a bit week apparently. | ||
|
Serdiuk
Belgium145 Posts
PVT 13-25 PvZ 13-17 | ||
|
Mithriel
Netherlands2969 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:05 Micket wrote: If myself and IdrA played 100 games and I played Terran, and I used builds ranging from 2 rax all in to 2 port banshee, and assuming IdrA doesn't over prepare for cheese every game, I would probably win 10 games, maybe more. Considering my actual skill level, this is way too high a win rate and I would not deserve such a win rate. Coin flips can lead to 50% win rates, but that does not show balance, it shows that we have a rock-paper-scissors match up. Probably you'll get more wins + Show Spoiler + Seeing Idra's tendency to GG when he is ahead | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:11 WindCalibur wrote: Shouldn't you discuss this at the top top levels? Rarely do you see protoss 3 gate robo these days( though i see Tyler do it time to time). Also, baneling busts can get you into master league. So can strategies like voidray rushes and such. You can argue that voidray all-ins have a 60% of winning a game and even if you don't, can only put you behind. The reason why Terrans don't all in as often these days are because its a coinflip, where the odds of winning slowly diminishes depending on your opponent's skill rather than your own. Terrans have variety, but it does not mean that a zerg is in a huge disadvantage because of so. Experience and skill can eliminate this variety and put you at even ground. I'm just giving the example to point out where the complaining comes from. I don't think it has anything to do with Zerg as a whole not being viable and everything to do with Zerg being frustrating as all hell to play against a cheesy Terran. At the top levels... I can still think of 4 or 5 allins from Terran that require completely different responses and can easily secure a lead >50% of the time, so it still applies. Regardless of opponents skill, the only determining factor is lucky guesses. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:49 Jermstuddog wrote: The assumption was vs Terran... You know... the race that is hard to scout... Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Actually, Zerg is a lot harder to scout for Protoss than Terran is, because the moment speed finishes, moving out with any units carries the immediate risk of losing them all to lings. From the moment speed finishes, to the moment Hallucination finishes, you are completely blind as Protoss in PvZ. Incidentally, ever since the Warpgate nerf, this is also a timeframe where you can get hit by a variety of Roach/Ling all-ins. The safest Protoss build against Zerg, 3 gate expand, already needs blind static defense to defend some of these. So, how exactly is Zerg in a worse position in TvZ? I would say that overlord scouts have a higher success rate than hiding probes and trying to run them into the Zerg's main. I actually do agree that the way scouting works in SC2 makes for stupid guessing games, but don't try to paint this as a problem limited to Zerg. Everyone has a hard time scouting, and everyone has to sacrifice economy if they want to be safe. Now, I don't necessarily agree with the notion of making scouting easier - I'd much prefer if the pace of the game was slowed down instead, and early units were made more robust (t1 hydras, and Zerg never loses to 2port ever again). | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
Personally i think people cant say any 1 race is underpowered or overpowered, the current gsl bracket with less protoss cant be claimed to really be anything to do with how balanced it is imo. The reasoning behind that is from watching the protoss's get knocked out, most of them didnt play correctly + Show Spoiler + like huk last night for example MC | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:23 Toadvine wrote: Actually, Zerg is a lot harder to scout for Protoss than Terran is, because the moment speed finishes, moving out with any units carries the immediate risk of losing them all to lings. From the moment speed finishes, to the moment Hallucination finishes, you are completely blind as Protoss in PvZ. Incidentally, ever since the Warpgate nerf, this is also a timeframe where you can get hit by a variety of Roach/Ling all-ins. The safest Protoss build against Zerg, 3 gate expand, already needs blind static defense to defend some of these. So, how exactly is Zerg in a worse position in TvZ? I would say that overlord scouts have a higher success rate than hiding probes and trying to run them into the Zerg's main. I actually do agree that the way scouting works in SC2 makes for stupid guessing games, but don't try to paint this as a problem limited to Zerg. Everyone has a hard time scouting, and everyone has to sacrifice economy if they want to be safe. Now, I don't necessarily agree with the notion of making scouting easier - I'd much prefer if the pace of the game was slowed down instead, and early units were made more robust (t1 hydras, and Zerg never loses to 2port ever again). I watched MC expand using Stargates, Stalkers, and Sentries quite often in MLG. While the forge eventually comes with every build, it doesn't come so fast that it hurts the build as a whole... The argument still stands that Protoss can do what they're doing and be relatively safe in PvZ while Zerg has to guess and commit with the possibility of failing completely due to a bad guess in ZvT. Not the same issue. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:58 Havefa1th wrote: Negative on that math. There is no specific mineral cost to scans, as they depend on the relative cost of minerals (minerals are more valuable early game), your mineral saturation and number of bases, orbital commands, how far ahead you are in the game, etc. You can't put a flat cost on mules, threads have been closed before for trying. Also, to correct the Zerg math: The scouting overlord is generally your first one, so I'll give that to you free. If you scout with 2 overlords, that's 1 free ovie and 1 that costs 100 minerals and one larva. In addition, you NEED to replace them because they give supply... so that's 200 more minerals and 2 more larva. Edit: There ya go, something I can agree with. You CAN'T, however say that Zerg is as easy to pick up and play as Terran or Protoss because that's simply not true. Each race has different mechanics and playstyles, saying that they're equally easy to play is a fallacy. My point about the scan was mostly that its not free. And yes Toss and Terran have macro mechanics, just like larvae inject is. Which allows you to build redic amount of units and drones at the appropriate times. Yes knowing those timings is not always easy, but it doesn't mean omg zerg is harder to play. Yes I even said the mechanics are different and thats why zerg is not harder to play than others. Somethings are harder, somethings are much easier, to compare them would be like comparing apples and oranges. I know for a fact that Zergs in Plat-Low Diamond, are not particularly more skilled than their Toss and Terran counterparts. Maybe to be Masters Zergs you require something that no others do, but I seriously doubt it. We could all be much better players than we are. As a protoss the reason I would avoid 3 gate robo then expand is. The Zerg can pretty much just take a 3rd, then get a spire or infestors, and defend. I dunno, I just feel like there aren't many good 1 base timings for 3 gate robo vs zerg, which is what you are going to need to get your 2nd base up if you wasted all your resources on units and tech structures. Thats just where I want to be as a toss. Behind in bases/check, behind in tech/check, behind in workers/check. Maybe I get some immortals out and push, either way I'm down a base and I could lose my army, and its very possible my army will do no damage at all except killing zerg units, which will just be remade in time to defend. Getting 2-3 immortals off 1 base vs an expanding zerg doesn't seem safe to me. Oh and if I do attack I still have to defend against speedlings because there is no way I can win a base trade at that point. I'd much rather just get gates and units and use those to get a safe expo sooner, then tech up and get out-expanded and out tech'd. Even if I do a safe* expand with gateways units, its still on the Protoss player to do damage to the Zerg. I either have to do some 2 base all in, or do enough damage/annoying to get a 3rd up (which if you played Protoss you'd probably understand that getting a 3rd is not particularly easy). If a Protoss player just sits on 2 bases and isn't aggressive (he deserves to lose) vs a good (relative to the toss players skill) Zerg player, he will just take the map and get soooo far ahead that the toss literally has no chance of coming back. People who say its frustrating to play their race are funny. Its frustrating playing Sc2 at times because you don't always get what you want or how you want it, people need to cope with that, and realize it happens to everyone. Toss players are frustrated, Zerg players are frustrated, Terran players are frustrated. The game is hard for everyone. I'll try some 3 gate robo builds, maybe do some warp prism tricks, but I seriously doubt it will lead to a safe expo, into an even late game. Because A-the zerg counters my robo by just outproducing me and making zerglings (yeah I know OMG) which means I probably won't even get a 2nd base up, I will either kill all his units and push (probably win depending on how much he droned), or die on one base. B- He sees me tech robo and expand, and just does the same, but this time he makes the robo almost completely useless by choosing a tech that counters it. I think it also matters when the zerg expands, but if he is any good he probably does that quite early in the game, which would give him time to get his base up and running to stop any late robo pushes, and given that I expand he could probably just put a ton of pressure on me (yeah ling roach good homies) Many a time as a Protoss player I have scouted my opponent well, thought I could stop it, and still couldn't. I'd love it if every time I saw my opponents plan I won, but it doesn't work that way either. Edit: Someone said MC uses stargates and sentries to expand before forge. Am I missing something? I think he goes forge first on every map that he can wall off his natural. If he can stop lings and roaches with a forge nexus build he will, every time. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
I remember the last one of these had PvZ at like 30%, so we can already see it's improving drastically | ||
|
Ruscour
5233 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... He either all-ins or goes Roach/Hydra...he needs to get over himself, sit down and figure out the matchup | ||
|
Nerski
United States1095 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:31 1Eris1 wrote: Hmm. And from some of the recent posts on this site you'd think Protoss has a 0 winrate vs both races I remember the last one of these had PvZ at like 30%, so we can already see it's improving drastically That's because as the meta game shifts people are to quick to blame balance. Which is a really bad thing to be doing seeing as any small meta game shift that makes say X build impossible can switch win rates drastically for a time until the other races meta game catches up. Even when Zerg was UP at release before a lot of terran nerfs, toss nerfs, and zerg buffs hit the game...it still would of been fool hearty to claim zerg was UP right away. Which is why you saw the changes come at a slow pace so as not to drastically change the balance then have zerg figure some stuff out and be OP. IMO people worry to much in regards to what's happening right now, sure you'll hit bumps where your races meta game will need to catch up and you'll lose more then you are use to. But until the game is 'figured out' which probably won't come until sometime after the protoss expansion, it's always going to be the case. | ||
|
fiskensfarfar
2 Posts
Regarding the actual balance I think its pretty obvious that P is by far the easiest race to play (Not at a high competitive level!!), which makes the matchup imba in any game below grand masters and perhaps top masters. For me it seems that P just require less apm than T and Z. This is why many zerg players whine. Many Z players, myself included, often felt like losing to a lesser gamer when losing a z v p. But it rarely feels like this when losing a z v z or z v t. I had this feeling until I reached top masters. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:19 Philip2110 wrote: If you are going by that PvZ has been even closer balanced than that since February. If you read the posts by zerg in the forums you would think it wasnt that close If these graphs prove anything, it's that the amount of zerg complaining has nothing to do with game balance. | ||
|
Aruno
New Zealand748 Posts
Hopefully we could see some influences. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:26 Jermstuddog wrote: I watched MC expand using Stargates, Stalkers, and Sentries quite often in MLG. While the forge eventually comes with every build, it doesn't come so fast that it hurts the build as a whole... The argument still stands that Protoss can do what they're doing and be relatively safe in PvZ while Zerg has to guess and commit with the possibility of failing completely due to a bad guess in ZvT. Not the same issue. You can do something like Spanishiwa's build, and be safe against everything (at least that's what people claim, haven't actually tested it a whole lot). Sure, you won't be able to punish a greedy opponent, and will be behind against something like a fast third, but that's how it is for everyone. 3 Gate Expand is behind a Zerg powering drones and taking a quick third too, as is MC's 1 Gate FE into 3 Gate Stargate. Even more so if you throw down cannons blindly. Again, safety is not free, for anyone. A safe build, in any matchup, will always end up behind a greedy build, that's just common sense. The problem with SC2 is that this dynamic has too much of an effect on gameplay, because of how the macro mechanics work. If you do a safe build, and your opponent does a greedy build, then you're not a little behind, you're way behind, and can't really recover. Of course, scouting should be improved a bit, but I'd rather see more mechanics allowing for comebacks, and less super volatile macro mechanics (of which inject larvae is probably the worst offender). On June 08 2011 06:31 1Eris1 wrote: Hmm. And from some of the recent posts on this site you'd think Protoss has a 0 winrate vs both races I remember the last one of these had PvZ at like 30%, so we can already see it's improving drastically The 30% was from Korea alone, while these stats are combined from Korea and the International scene. Judging from how Protoss have been doing in the super tournament, it hasn't gotten any better. :/ | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:38 fiskensfarfar wrote: It would be nice if you could do some separation of the data, like graphs for only tours or only pros. It seems that people are missing the point that league games cannot be used to discuss balance. For example: Suppose ZvP is indeed imbalanced in favor of toss. Then overall it is harder for a Z player to harvest points compared to P players, and the Z player, at whatever level he is, will be matched against P players that are lesser gamers. So it is clear that imbalances will not show up in the winrates due to the design of the ladder matchmaking. Regarding the actual balance I think its pretty obvious that P is by far the easiest race to play (Not at a high competitive level!!), which makes the matchup imba in any game below grand masters and perhaps top masters. For me it seems that P just require less apm than T and Z. This is why many zerg players whine. Many Z players, myself included, often felt like losing to a lesser gamer when losing a z v p. But it rarely feels like this when losing a z v z or z v t. I had this feeling until I reached top masters. Apm has little to do with skill. Many zerg players have +200 apm becuase they enjoy spamming the shit out of their keyboard and mouse, when they actually have nothing to do (or they do and they don't know it, cause they too busy spamming). I'm too busy making sure my spells get cast perfectly and my units are in position, to be spamming. What about zerg makes you think they require more apm? I'd really be interested to hear this. I always thought doing more with less actions was a more efficient use of my time. So if it takes you 3 actions to normally do something that would take 1, does that make you a better player? | ||
|
akaname
United Kingdom599 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:47 Offhand wrote: If these graphs prove anything, it's that the amount of zerg complaining has nothing to do with game balance. it's strange that zerg players have a reputation for whining most. there's no reason one group should be more inclined to complain than another. if zerg really do complain most, i'd guess then that it's either: a) ways of beating zerg that FEEL unfairer to the zerg b) zerg role models adopting a more negative approach, and this trickles down c) zerg are actually broken/weaker in some significant way (e.g. deathballs literally unstoppable after a certain time OR they lack early scouting options???) it's also funny how there was no real balance whine for 3 pages, but people were already getting defensive about it before it happened... | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:31 Ruscour wrote: He either all-ins or goes Roach/Hydra...he needs to get over himself, sit down and figure out the matchup Uh... Losira either all-ins or does roach/baneling and drops IdrA either all-ins or goes roach or hydra drops Nobody has "figured out' PvZ yet. And don't even start shit about MC at MLG, letting nydus worms pop inside his main when in vision. | ||
|
akaname
United Kingdom599 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:51 Aruno wrote: I'd love for this data to be put on a timeline with the Starcraft 2 Patches. Hopefully we could see some influences. that would be amazing, though metagame shifts mean we couldn't say anything too definite about patch balance... | ||
|
Havefa1th
United States245 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:54 Mailing wrote: Uh... Losira either all-ins or does roach/baneling and drops IdrA either all-ins or goes roach or hydra drops Nobody has "figured out' PvZ yet. And don't even start shit about MC at MLG, letting nydus worms pop inside his main when in vision. I would go further and say that nobody has "figured out" ANY matchup. There are so many ways to win in each matchup, as well as different ways to react to the other player. There are standard builds, to be sure, but there hasn't been a Savior type deal of one player just completely dominating a matchup by "figuring it out". | ||
|
PraetorianX
Sweden780 Posts
| ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:53 akaname wrote: it's strange that zerg players have a reputation for whining most. there's no reason one group should be more inclined to complain than another. if zerg really do complain most, i'd guess then that it's either: a) ways of beating zerg that FEEL unfairer to the zerg b) zerg role models adopting a more negative approach, and this trickles down c) zerg are actually broken/weaker in some significant way (e.g. deathballs literally unstoppable after a certain time OR they lack early scouting options???) it's also funny how there was no real balance whine for 3 pages, but people were already getting defensive about it before it happened... I'd say there really isn't much whining going on in this thread in particular, but posting win-rates of the races is a good way to start a balance discussion (meaning that its bound to happen). Nothing wrong with people discussing the game on a website dedicated to it, as long as they don't make it personal, or generalize all the people of a specific race (I will admit I like to say zerg players are whiners, though its probably much better than it was months ago). | ||
|
akaname
United Kingdom599 Posts
On June 08 2011 07:00 Wrongspeedy wrote: I'd say there really isn't much whining going on in this thread in particular, but posting win-rates of the races is a good way to start a balance discussion (meaning that its bound to happen). Nothing wrong with people discussing the game on a website dedicated to it, as long as they don't make it personal, or generalize all the people of a specific race (I will admit I like to say zerg players are whiners, though its probably much better than it was months ago). actually, i've not read it all, but i'm really impressed by how well we're behaving in this thread considering it's about race win rates Edit: and the credit for this should go to the currently last place race, protoss... JK | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
| ||
|
fiskensfarfar
2 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:53 Wrongspeedy wrote: Apm has little to do with skill. Many zerg players have +200 apm becuase they enjoy spamming the shit out of their keyboard and mouse, when they actually have nothing to do (or they do and they don't know it, cause they too busy spamming). I'm too busy making sure my spells get cast perfectly and my units are in position, to be spamming. What about zerg makes you think they require more apm? I'd really be interested to hear this. I always thought doing more with less actions was a more efficient use of my time. So if it takes you 3 actions to normally do something that would take 1, does that make you a better player? Heh, it seems that the only thing you understood from my reply is that I am a zerg player. U completely missed my point. I think the game seems to BE balanced, at the high level! However if you take five minutes to think about the game mechanics you will probably agree that toss is the easiest race to play at the lower level. If toss is easier at a low level, then imbalances (if there are any) would not show up in the ladder win rates, as I argued. That is 'True imbalances' ie. imbalances at the high level. Therefore i would like to see graphs only with pro games. Regarding apm you are completely off ... Apm and game sense are the most important things in this game. That is EFFECTIVE apm. In case you dont know, many high level players spam amp in the beginning of the game as a sort of 'warm up'. Some dont. During the action there is no time to spam ... | ||
|
Hamster
United Kingdom156 Posts
| ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:53 akaname wrote: it's strange that zerg players have a reputation for whining most. there's no reason one group should be more inclined to complain than another. if zerg really do complain most, i'd guess then that it's either: a) ways of beating zerg that FEEL unfairer to the zerg b) zerg role models adopting a more negative approach, and this trickles down c) zerg are actually broken/weaker in some significant way (e.g. deathballs literally unstoppable after a certain time OR they lack early scouting options???) it's also funny how there was no real balance whine for 3 pages, but people were already getting defensive about it before it happened... Like any forum post about balance, it's just something to justify your losses.I don't know why it's overwhelmingly more the case for zerg, but the conversation has been like this since early-beta-roaches stopped being early-beta-roaches. | ||
|
akaname
United Kingdom599 Posts
On June 08 2011 07:17 Hamster wrote: there needs to be more protoss heroes instead of MC who is consistent although the time. this gives more variety in play styles which is how zerg evolved when they discovered korean, spanishiwa and mass baneling style.i feel protoss is the smallest to develop in tactics for the lategame after zerg has found a breakthrough way to deal with the 'deathball'. i think giving toss un-used units such as carrier a smaller cooldown will make them more viable lategame, they are hardly used cas they taking very long time. when u lost a 200 food army, replenishing takes ages that they can kill your bases before you get to build one. This opens carriers to be incoporated to change the composition of the deathball instead of always voidray collo stalker or collo stalker HT and changes to be carrier collo archon or carrier voidray or carrier voidray dt that have rarely been seen. I havent seen much koreans use carriers and they could shed some light on every PvX matchup especially PvZ. there are i think a lot of zerg heroes because zerg felt like the underdog for a long time (i'm protoss player, but usually want zergs to win). while people were saying zerg were weak, i was loving the wins of July and Losira and Nestea - somewhat more impressive when it feels against the odds... i sort of feel as well that yes, protoss hasn't had to evolve as much and thus has the smallest tactics range. Terran feel like they've got more tactics available, and zerg have had to try more tricks to get where they are now. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 07:14 fiskensfarfar wrote: Heh, it seems that the only thing you understood from my reply is that I am a zerg player. U completely missed my point. I think the game seems to BE balanced, at the high level! However if you take five minutes to think about the game mechanics you will probably agree that toss is the easiest race to play at the lower level. If toss is easier at a low level, then imbalances (if there are any) would not show up in the ladder win rates, as I argued. That is 'True imbalances' ie. imbalances at the high level. Therefore i would like to see graphs only with pro games. Regarding apm you are completely off ... Apm and game sense are the most important things in this game. That is EFFECTIVE apm. In case you dont know, many high level players spam amp in the beginning of the game as a sort of 'warm up'. Some dont. During the action there is no time to spam ... My point was that you don't need 200 apm to do everything in this game. You still haven't given reasons why protoss is easier to play. My other point is that many Zerg players who are not pros, waste many actions, effort, and thought doing things like spamming, which is unnecessary and unless you are a pro, your probably hurting yourself. Think about it buddy, if you send your zerglings across the map by clicking 15 times, then someone does the samething using 2-3 clicks, your apm will be higher, but you are much worse off. This is why you don't see a bunch of Plat-Diamond toss players with +200 apm. They don't need it, and their time is used more effectively by not wasting their energy and thought on useless clicking. 3 actions is all it takes to FF (select units, press F, select space), but if I place the FF wrong I almost def lose because of it. So how does useless spamming (+200 apm in sc2 before like 3 base and multipronged attacks is almost assuredly wasting actions). Seriously dude, you have 2 posts, please explain why zerg needs more actions to be effective. Which strategies do you mean? Have you ever had to control 5-6 phoenix, while building structures, building units from 3-4 (different) structures, and controlling a separate army? Not that easy, but I don't even think that requires 200 apm. Edit:Also, when in a zerg army are almost all your units casters that require actions to be used effectively? As a toss I frequently have 2-3-4 different casters in the same army, if I don't use them all I'm being ineffective. I have to keep my units in position, graviton shield, ff, then storm or feedback (usually feedback would come before the storms), then lift units, then blink my stalkers. Yeah dude soooo easy. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
But i guess terran is probably still the strongest on the lower level just because they can force one base play and have a +5 on mineral workers. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:32 Hristiyan wrote: The guy is saying that one way or another that issue will be addressed for all 3 races. However if HotS is 1 year away and so is the solution, then this race is pointless right now or a coin-flip at best. The other two races can wait, but not that one .... solution is needed right now! I agree, NesTea should switch to Terran or he won't win any tournaments. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On June 08 2011 07:13 Dente wrote: People really seem to forget that the only reason why terran is doing so well, are the allins. I wonder how much winrate terrans have when they don't allin... Our tier 3 dies quicker then our tier 1, which says enough imo. "The All-ins" are still producing a higher then 50% winrate though. There's only been one month where terran wasn't the highest performing race by the looks of the graph. | ||
|
Malarkey817
United States163 Posts
| ||
|
hi im new
Germany150 Posts
on the other hand protoss has nothing once the first set of lings/the first marine is out you are now blind for an eternity. and yet zergs constantly whine about how they have bad scouting early game? i don't understand i really don't get zerg complaining about their scout. and i play mostly zerg recently and don't even feel much of a need to know exactly what's going on because it's always possible to shit out tons of lings in case you get attacked (which you immidiatly know because you keep a few lings in front of their base) and vs anything crazy overseers have a 10 second morph time and you always have a couple spines that you can rearrange so who gives a shit zergs honestly don't appreciate enough how GOOD their scouting is. also if you always know exactly what's going on and react accordingly as zerg you can't lose a single game that's why most maphackers who play on a somewhat higher level are zerg. other races don't instawin when they have vision of everything. more ontopic: the graph is pretty surprising to me by the way, i thought it would be more imbalanced against protoss. then again it's a huge number of games so even just the 5% in pvz makes it a pretty big difference in games won and there is a LOT of skill difference in eu/na as well which brings it close to 50% again. personally i'd really like to see korean graphs where skill level is much more even throughout all tournament games. i hope blizzard does look at something like this when looking at overall trends in matchups and doesn't rely too much on ladder statistics. even when they probably suggest the same things it's by a much smaller margin. | ||
|
duk3
United States807 Posts
On a serious note, do you see the lower win % of Protoss as an indicator of a lack of good Protoss players, or as something else? | ||
|
ieatfries
Canada44 Posts
April- May 2011- Infestors are now a bit too strong if not borderline overpowered. The actual damage isn't the biggest problem, but the fact that us protoss can no longer move away from surrounding speedlings or ultralisks. This isn't the case with psistorm as they may be able to run away from them. I think that HT's are a good counter with the feedback, but once they get out enough infestors, a few fungals will be all they need. ZvT: Most of the same. More usage of infestors now, but its still mostly marine-tank play. PvT: Right now, I find that Protoss vs Terran is the hardest matchup for me currently. (I am a high diamond Protoss). I feel that on maps such as shakuras plateau, they can go for a 1rax expansion, put up a few bunkers, and then as toss we cannot do any damage to them without sacrificing our economy. Though you may say that we should also expand while they are, by the time you are able to scout with anything (has to be obs) it means that your robotech is already out which means that if we were to get an expansion, it would be much more delayed then the terrans which allows the terrans to have a higher economical advantage over us (mules and such) over most of the game. Based, on the chart, I see that many protoss are also having trouble with the terran race.... Any suggestions? Thanks | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On June 08 2011 07:48 Malarkey817 wrote: The ZvT chart looks like a fish. Someone on /r/starcraft had the exact same thought: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/flPzS.png) http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/htrd3/win_rates_may_update_fixed/Anyways, interesting to see Zerg players start to pull ahead in ZvP. It seems that the Infestor+Baneling style as well as perhaps the mass muta style are starting to pick apart standard Protoss play. Seeing these fluctuations in win percentages really makes me doubt any balance whine. | ||
|
ixi.genocide
United States981 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:32 Olinim wrote: How come no one said this during the "deathball" phase? The reason why no one said that during the "deathball" phase is because they are different situations. The roach/ling allin will be taken care of with a different build order, It is a trend. The "deathball" phase is more resilient, it is an endgame army that is noted as being practically unbeatable, You can't change a building placement and make sure to make roaches at time X to prevent situation Z. Now that I have said that, the Roach/ling allin will change the mu even after it is gone (unless you can just sim city it away) because it will change how greedy protoss players can be. Eventually the standard protoss play will be fairly immune to the roach/ling play and zerg will go back to macro play with the option* of the all-in. The way it will change the mu is hopefully making it so the protoss has to play safer (ie slower) and the zerg will reach a point where they can fight the "Deathball". | ||
|
GosuSheep
United States119 Posts
| ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 08:11 GosuSheep wrote: Consider Zerg has been the bottom since the beginning of time and the rise could possibly be attributed to mass ling/roach all-ins, yeah, I think zerg have plenty to complain about. Yeah the bottom. Won the first GSL. | ||
|
manicshock
Canada741 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:19 Hristiyan wrote: Totally agree with that. ZvT is the most balanced match-up late game in my opinion ( after the mirrors ), but early game is just a joke if the terran decides to abuse you. It's zerg favoured now in the mid-late game due to infestors. It was balanced till the buff and it still mostly is. Early game is very much on the terran to abuse though, and proper defense by a zerg evens the game. | ||
|
greycubed
United States615 Posts
| ||
|
mage36
415 Posts
| ||
|
Zealot Lord
Hong Kong746 Posts
| ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
But thanks to the OP for doing this research! | ||
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
To be honest though I think I can live with this level of balance. This is more even than it had been in several different time periods of brood war's history and we're barely past release. I think blizz has done a pretty damn fine job (except PvP 4-gate) | ||
|
darthfoley
United States8001 Posts
On June 08 2011 08:59 greycubed wrote: Poor Artosis. haha, golden :D | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
Thanks for the graph though. | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... Because no matter what race he plays he will cry about balance, if he was playing protoss instead of zerg right now, he would defenetly be complaining about zergs being OP vs protoss right now. The zerg complaints in the LR threads are still rampant, its kind of ridiculous looking at statistics over the past few months , its like you guys are doing better than us in the matchup why are you stil complaining STFU. From personal experience even though im only diamond, zvp was my best matchup back when all zergs tried to do was roach hydra corrupter around 3 months ago, it is now definitely my worst matchup by a long shot, i have no idea how to beat zergs, i think i need to go back to trying to kill them early because i stand absolutely no chance in the late game against zerg. | ||
|
Szubie
United Kingdom294 Posts
On June 08 2011 08:59 greycubed wrote: Poor Artosis. Rofl, so good. | ||
|
Daniel C
Hong Kong1606 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:22 Ctuchik wrote: Oh, are those the generally accepted colors? I was actually thinking quite a bit about this before settling on the ones I have now. It's incredibly easy to change though. I can also very easily bring up International and Korean numbers only, but it's not as useful as some of you may think. The sample size of the Korean games is small enough that you can't really draw any conclusions from them, and international numbers are basically unchanged if you remove Koreans. I also have a stupid request, would you consider making the red/green darker or lighter, respectively (or vice versa), to help those who are red-green colourblind? XD | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:38 fiskensfarfar wrote: It would be nice if you could do some separation of the data, like graphs for only tours or only pros. It seems that people are missing the point that league games cannot be used to discuss balance. For example: Suppose ZvP is indeed imbalanced in favor of toss. Then overall it is harder for a Z player to harvest points compared to P players, and the Z player, at whatever level he is, will be matched against P players that are lesser gamers. So it is clear that imbalances will not show up in the winrates due to the design of the ladder matchmaking. Regarding the actual balance I think its pretty obvious that P is by far the easiest race to play (Not at a high competitive level!!), which makes the matchup imba in any game below grand masters and perhaps top masters. For me it seems that P just require less apm than T and Z. This is why many zerg players whine. Many Z players, myself included, often felt like losing to a lesser gamer when losing a z v p. But it rarely feels like this when losing a z v z or z v t. I had this feeling until I reached top masters. Alot of people are under the assumption that these statistics arent just from pro tours but they are, the OP just didnt state it i dont think because he had it all explained in the one he did for last month. The statistics are from all pro tournaments taken from The TLDP including korean and north american for this one for those who didnt know. So to restate, these are only pro statistics this is not ladder statistics it is taken from The TLDP and it includes all major tournaments (plus some smaller ones i beleive) in korea and NA/EU So really this poster's whole argument is null and void, and i actually looked at the OP and he states that it is taken only from pro tours (MLG DREAMHACK etc + some smaller ones im sure) and league games (such as GSL, IPL, NASL) when he says league games he doesnt mean ladder games maybe thats why some people are confused. To me it just sounds like another zerg trying to dismiss the statistics so he can still argue that his race is underpowered lol | ||
|
Raid
United States398 Posts
On June 08 2011 09:18 Drowsy wrote: Terran wins at high rates and people complain a bit. Protoss wins at marginally higher rates than expected and there is uproar and amulet gets nerfed. What will be the community's reaction when zerg pulls ahead of terran? To be honest though I think I can live with this level of balance. This is more even than it had been in several different time periods of brood war's history and we're barely past release. I think blizz has done a pretty damn fine job (except PvP 4-gate) It was a much needed nerf. If you re-watched the games back in the day before amulet nerf you will rofl at ridiculously long the games were because terran had no way to kill protoss efficiently and protoss with mass ht can't really kill buildings because what are storms gonna do to buildings? Now with archon buff it would have definitely been imba if toss just morphed archons and roflstomped after blanketing warp in storms. All I can say is at least you can still use HT, Reaper was basically removed from the game.. | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
On June 08 2011 09:28 sluggaslamoo wrote: The PvZ imbalance can be fixed through maps, e.g Make the natural choke much smaller so fast expands are more viable. Unfortunately GSL keeps making maps with open naturals -_-. Thanks for the graph though. Agreed it would be so so so much eaiser to hold off roach ling aggression against 3 gate sentry expand if their was smaller chokes, im sure blizzard will realise this eventually. | ||
|
Zealot Lord
Hong Kong746 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:22 Ctuchik wrote: I can also very easily bring up International and Korean numbers only, but it's not as useful as some of you may think. The sample size of the Korean games is small enough that you can't really draw any conclusions from them, and international numbers are basically unchanged if you remove Koreans. Just the Korean numbers will be fine - its true that while you can't draw concrete conclusions as the sample size is a bit too small, its still interesting to see how matchups are developing/faring at the highest levels. I personally right now think (from what I've seen) TvZ is pretty darn even at GSL, and it'd be nice to see some data reinforcing that perception. | ||
|
imareaver3
United States906 Posts
On June 08 2011 09:54 cheesemaster wrote: Agreed it would be so so so much eaiser to hold off roach ling aggression against 3 gate sentry expand if their was smaller chokes, im sure blizzard will realise this eventually. Question is whether or not that would switch the balance in P's favor too much. Remember, Blizzard has access to data on every match ever played, and while they didn't nerf P very much (Recognizing that the imbalance was very slight, and wasn't even present after 1.3.0), they also consistently widened chokes even on maps with narrow ones. GSL has done the same thing. I have a feeling that this is all for a reason--perhaps the game simply isn't balanced on maps with narrow naturals. | ||
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
i also wonder how HuK is losing... i seriously saw a game he played that looked perfect to me and he still lost. | ||
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
eh how is this funny? | ||
|
sAfuRos
United States743 Posts
Artosis swapped to toss right when MC was doing really well, because he thought zerg was UP Now Toss isthe most UP and yep | ||
|
Geniuszerg
Canada454 Posts
| ||
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
On June 08 2011 10:46 sAfuRos wrote: Artosis swapped to toss right when MC was doing really well, because he thought zerg was UP Now Toss isthe most UP and yep cool thanks... lol yea Toss is UP late game by far as soon as their mass collosi get countered | ||
|
GwSC
United States1997 Posts
On June 08 2011 09:54 cheesemaster wrote: Agreed it would be so so so much eaiser to hold off roach ling aggression against 3 gate sentry expand if their was smaller chokes, im sure blizzard will realise this eventually. Lol what? It needs to be even more difficult for Zerg to have successful early aggression against Protoss because win percentages slid to 3% in Zerg's favor for one month? Ok then... | ||
|
LlamaNamedOsama
United States1900 Posts
| ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On June 08 2011 10:35 imareaver3 wrote: Question is whether or not that would switch the balance in P's favor too much. Remember, Blizzard has access to data on every match ever played, and while they didn't nerf P very much (Recognizing that the imbalance was very slight, and wasn't even present after 1.3.0), they also consistently widened chokes even on maps with narrow ones. GSL has done the same thing. I have a feeling that this is all for a reason--perhaps the game simply isn't balanced on maps with narrow naturals. Its obvious Blizzard has an issue with players creating expansions, as shown in many of their maps which made it simply impossible to fast expand or grab a 3rd. I don't know why. As for the GSL maps, that's not really true. A lot of them originally had narrow naturals, and then for some reason they were modified against the original creators will. Forge FE or low sentry count expansions, should be completely viable on every map, same as for Zerg getting an early 3rd. This will allow Protoss to go into a macro game with non-gateway builds which allows them to harass much more effectively thus keeping Zergs income down while expanding. Zerg should be more cost-efficient than Protoss given that they can amass a huge counter army almost instantly. The issue is knowing these compositions, and a lot of lower level players just seem to amass the same composition over and over and letting them get obliterated. Nestea abuses the flexibility of Zerg and will go something like Corruptor + Baneling, to counter 2 base colossus, and as soon as Protoss switches his composition, Nestea just switches "faster". Its really the same problem BW was having with PvZ, until the Bisu build came along, but really that build is only totally viable when there is a narrow natural choke and you can defend with a minimal amount cannons and zealots. 1 base Sair DT simply did not provide enough money to be a stable build that beats Zerg, and not only did the Bisu build allow for a faster natural, it also allowed for a faster 3rd. As generally the more expansions you have, the easier it is to expand again. So as long as Zerg can just get a second base and mass drone before Protoss can get their second then PvZ will continue to be a bigger and bigger problem as Zergs get smarter, until the maps change. | ||
|
tuho133
120 Posts
On June 08 2011 04:55 JustPlay wrote: Zerg still has a disproportionately difficult time in the early game, and even top players can be killed by ridiculous all-ins because there's simply no way to tell. When people are complaining about zerg scouting or zerg getting cheesed it has everything to do with the early game. You can't use 4 overlords to scout. You can use 1-2 depending on the map due to their speed and the terran being able to score free kills if you attempt to send your second or third in to a pre-scouting position. On top of that if they have 2 marines at opposite sides of their base you will not see anything important inside if they are any good, but again this depends on the map and spawns. Close air benefits overlord scouting significantly on some maps. On shattered temple you 100% know what they are doing for the rest of the game if the terran spawns at 6 and you spawn at 9. SC2 has a lot of problems for all races, and even if the races were at 50% those problems won't magically go away. I thought there's no easy to stop roaches,lings, banelings all-in from Zerg, and no way to tell? look at July. Played 4 games in like 25 mins. | ||
|
Perseverance
Japan2800 Posts
| ||
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
On June 08 2011 09:50 Raid wrote: It was a much needed nerf. If you re-watched the games back in the day before amulet nerf you will rofl at ridiculously long the games were because terran had no way to kill protoss efficiently and protoss with mass ht can't really kill buildings because what are storms gonna do to buildings? Now with archon buff it would have definitely been imba if toss just morphed archons and roflstomped after blanketing warp in storms. All I can say is at least you can still use HT, Reaper was basically removed from the game.. After reconsidering, I think you're right. A lot of the reason the matchup stats weren't skewed even with amulet in the game was because few of the tosses actually used the "squirtle" or "refugee toss" style. I think if it would have been a bigger part of the metagame pvt would have been heavily p favored. And yeah, they did over-react on reapers a little bit lol. | ||
|
Aetherial
Australia917 Posts
http://i.imgur.com/IQgLZ.jpg | ||
|
Spectorials
558 Posts
http://www.gomtv.net/2011super1/schedule/ (check out RO16) | ||
|
ejac
United States1195 Posts
On a more serious note, win rates only tell part of the story and all because a game has "perfect" balance does not mean that there are not issues with it's overall gameplay. Hypothetically if a race had to win in the first 5 minutes of the game or they would lose no matter what, could potentially be a balanced game with a 50% win rate. Obviously there is nothing that wrong with the game in sc2, but people shouldn't be taking win rates as an absolute. | ||
|
guitarizt
United States1492 Posts
| ||
|
Qntc.YuMe
United States792 Posts
Is this based off ladder or tournament performances? If its ladder, the factor of maps and close position can show imbalance. But where do you get this data? I am very curious. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 08 2011 14:17 DreamRaider wrote: statistically it looks balanced but it doesnt really account for how those wins and loses occur. Factor like cheese, early game, late game balance can ultimately change how those win/loses suppose to be. Is this based off ladder or tournament performances? If its ladder, the factor of maps and close position can show imbalance. But where do you get this data? I am very curious. He says in the OP where he gets the data. And all of those things are debatable. People don't even know what cheese is. | ||
|
dump
Japan514 Posts
A near 50% win rate in tournaments could simply mean that people are relying more on high-risk high-reward strategies; in other words, that there's more luck involved than there should be. A slightly better measure would likely be the number of top players (for example, the top grand master players) there are for each race. Even then, if for instance toss has to 4 gate nearly every game to maintain a 50% win rate (not that that's the case), I'd be hard pressed to say the game is balanced. | ||
|
KDot2
United States1213 Posts
On June 08 2011 05:54 Mercury- wrote: Having perfect scouting would mean Zerg could just drone whore to hell against T/P without any risk. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too. I'm a Terran.. thats why I said don't nerf Terran buff Zerg ... will I be upset if Zerg doesnt get a buff ? no I just don't want Terran nerfed in some way | ||
|
nvrs
Greece481 Posts
On June 08 2011 16:08 dump wrote: A near 50% win rate for everyone on the ladder simply means that matchmaking is working properly; it doesn't mean the game is balanced. A near 50% win rate in tournaments could simply mean that people are relying more on high-risk high-reward strategies; in other words, that there's more luck involved than there should be. A slightly better measure would likely be the number of top players (for example, the top grand master players) there are for each race. Even then, if for instance toss has to 4 gate nearly every game to maintain a 50% win rate (not that that's the case), I'd be hard pressed to say the game is balanced. All evidence point towards the game having a pretty good balance (these stats, GSL, etc.). There is no perfect balance in such a game anyway and it will get better over time. Imo, they have done a fantastic job and as the game evolves we are seeing more macro games and less one base play. | ||
|
callemacody
4 Posts
Protosses have such disproportional difficulties dealing with roaches and mutas. Weve seen countless expamles from GSL where the protoss even with robo and numerous cannons cannot hold a 2 base roach attack, and the minute zerg get 15+ mutas a protoss cant even defend 3 bases even with blink stalkers. The amulet nerf was an overkill imo, but atm i would say a slight buff of stalkers might be the best solution, perhaps give them equal damage bonus to light as they have to armoured, they are too bad vs mutas as they are. | ||
|
KillerPenguin
United States516 Posts
On June 08 2011 16:57 callemacody wrote: The amulet nerf was an overkill imo, but atm i would say a slight buff of stalkers might be the best solution, perhaps give them equal damage bonus to light as they have to armoured, they are too bad vs mutas as they are. Stalkers are already the most used unit the protoss have and games are better when you have more choices and not less so I'd really like to see a buff on the unit that is produced the least in the game, the carrier. If amulet was reverted I think it would make the game much more interesting to watch that game with San where he was perma warping in ht and storming bio was crazy. | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On June 08 2011 12:26 Aetherial wrote: Same graph including approximate patch dates: http://i.imgur.com/IQgLZ.jpg That just shows that patch do not influence balance lol. Look at graph where patch 1.2.0 was launched. Zergs' ZvP win rate skyrocketed but but patch didn't have a single change for zerg, and it gave good phoenix, void ray and halliucination buffs for toss. | ||
|
VoidEU
Sweden24 Posts
On June 08 2011 17:50 Alpina wrote: That just shows that patch do not influence balance lol. Look at graph where patch 1.2.0 was launched. Zergs' ZvP win rate skyrocketed but but patch didn't have a single change for zerg, and it gave good phoenix, void ray and halliucination buffs for toss. Players can no longer block off ramps with two 2x2 buildings. | ||
|
zeru
8156 Posts
| ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
On June 08 2011 10:49 Geniuszerg wrote: ugh.. i hate how you had the y-axis limited in the scope, it really puts a bias in the graph to make a point, example is the ZvT graph, it looks as though T>Z dramtically for the majority of the time I can assure you it's not to "make a point", but rather to make the charts readable. With 0-100% on the y-axis it's very hard to see the data points in any meaningful way. It's certainly something people should be aware of though. As you may notice I am very careful to not draw any conclusions from these visualizations in the OP. They are a good base for discussion, and they can definitely help us rule out certain things, but we should be very careful about inventing scenarios that "fit the data". | ||
|
callemacody
4 Posts
Perhaps cannons could be made to do air-splash or increased air range or something. Compared to turrets cannons are not good enough vs air, and if u compare the hazard of required pylons to the luxury of being able to repair turrets, its even worse. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
Also, anyone notice how Terran has been >50% the entire time? (terran still op'd, hehehe, jkjk). If anything, graphs like these merely show trends in style. The games are still fairly young, maybe 5 years from now, graphs like these will be able to actually lead us to some conclusions aside from (zergs are changing zvp matchup styles) | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
Seriously... not. The only thing you need to know as a terran is if the Zerg is doing: a) FE... so you just Bunker Harass --> Hellion --> Banshee --> MMM or Mech or Tank Marine timing push b) Pool First then Expo... wich leads into a simple timing push (choose one) c) Pool First... wich means he's going to die cause you can stop any rush with 1/2 bunkers inBase That's all the science behind terran early scouting... the zerg in other hand... have 1 overlord witch is easily killable by 1/2 marines to deny scout. But that's just fine... I actually don't complain. I know Blizzard now do games for casuals and dumb ppl... who have to play with advantage over others... and Terran is just fine for that. This race deserves to be nerfed so hard, so smart terrans can actually start playing it right and idiot terrans just drop 2 or 3 leagues under their current ones. This is the stupidest sub-community of sc2 players, with the lowest understanding of the game and APM as a whole. And yet they win the most games. Thats just ... idiotic. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
Edit: Good news though, its so easy to kick our teeth in with the timing attack that you don't need to scout! [/sarcasm] | ||
|
Hristiyan
99 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
close.. positi RUN AWAY | ||
|
spacemonkeyy
Australia477 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
| ||
|
johngalt90
United States357 Posts
| ||
|
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
On June 08 2011 18:51 Hristiyan wrote: Its just sad , how the race with the most uncreative people is on the peak of that graph. This race deserves to be nerfed so hard, so smart terrans can actually start playing it right and idiot terrans just drop 2 or 3 leagues under their current ones. This is the stupidest sub-community of sc2 players, with the lowest understanding of the game and APM as a whole. And yet they win the most games. Thats just ... idiotic. You seriously need to shut up. 10 of your 40ish posts are in this thread and they are all balance whine related. This thread is about win percentages, not how zerg has problems against terrans or how terrans are retards (idiotic statement). | ||
|
kckkryptonite
1126 Posts
On June 08 2011 18:41 wei2coolman wrote: Hmm. Just as note for future statistical graphs, it would be really really cool if you include major patch changes in. Like a line showing when certain patches came out. Would love to see this added, but my god... It looks like we're about to witness the fall of Terran and the rise of Zerg if the pattern continues. | ||
|
vOdToasT
Sweden2870 Posts
On June 08 2011 01:33 Dente wrote: TvZ feels really hard for T, but that could be me ofcourse. Especially infestor + ling into infestor + hive (broodlord / ultra) is just crazy to hold, and I dear to say that zerg can fight terran on even bases with infestors. The funny thing is that most zergs don't know this! Look at losira, julyzerg and idra: they still go muta baneling ling. This composition is really 2 times easier to beat then infestor compositions. Dude, learn to play Zerg before you say things like this.If you don't go mutalisks you can't leave your base without getting dropped, and if he decides to turtle with tanks you can't attack him either. Once you get enough mutas you can take out turrets, and therefor attack the Terran, taking out SCV's and buildings. If you go infestors and ground units, you are weaker vs medivacs and weaker vs tanks. | ||
|
Ardhimas
Indonesia75 Posts
| ||
|
DiViD
Sweden222 Posts
| ||
|
Aetherial
Australia917 Posts
| ||
|
EnOmy
Australia183 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
Philosoraptor joke aside (Sorry) I'd like to see exactly what Aetherial pointed out. For a while it seemed like (at least by the leaderboards) there were many more Terrans than P or Z and small supplemental data packs accompanying graphs make me happy. sc2ranks has this data on the race percentages in grandmasters P 34.4% (633) T 31.2% (573) Z 30.9% (568) Its a weak analogy to what is being discussed but without knowing exactly who the players used for the original graphs were I'm hesitant to go any further. | ||
|
VoidEU
Sweden24 Posts
On June 08 2011 21:06 Aetherial wrote: I wonder how many terran, protoss and zerg players are represented respectively. If there are more Terran players for example it may skew the outcome... It actually may not. Because the TvT matchup is not listed there. And everytime a T player plays another race 50% of the players are terran, No more no less. However there may be more TvZ and TvP games played than ZvP. But the precentage should still lean towards 50%. | ||
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
On June 08 2011 12:19 Drowsy wrote: After reconsidering, I think you're right. A lot of the reason the matchup stats weren't skewed even with amulet in the game was because few of the tosses actually used the "squirtle" or "refugee toss" style. I think if it would have been a bigger part of the metagame pvt would have been heavily p favored. And yeah, they did over-react on reapers a little bit lol. hells no... the amulet was so OP >.> it was like instant fungal from infestors without cool-down how is it fair to spam storm? if they bring back the amulet, toss would be so badass and by the way, the reaper was indeed very good...it was like having an air unit early in the game..it was a definite must-have (almost like mutalisks for zerg) dude if reapers were allowed super fast... 3v3s would be even more skewed...it wouldn't be marine medivac lings...it would be mass reapers... | ||
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
On June 08 2011 19:02 Hristiyan wrote: My apologies, i got cheesed 3 times in a row right now vs terrans, which totally don't deserve to be in master league and i just needed to channel it somewhere. I'm sorry, wont happen again. then why didn't you scout you <expletive removed>. | ||
|
dump
Japan514 Posts
On June 08 2011 16:39 nvrs wrote: All evidence point towards the game having a pretty good balance (these stats, GSL, etc.). There is no perfect balance in such a game anyway and it will get better over time. Imo, they have done a fantastic job and as the game evolves we are seeing more macro games and less one base play. What evidence? I don't see how these stats indicate that the game is balanced. You sort of ignored everything I said. | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
On June 08 2011 23:01 VoidEU wrote: It actually may not. Because the TvT matchup is not listed there. And everytime a T player plays another race 50% of the players are terran, No more no less. However there may be more TvZ and TvP games played than ZvP. But the precentage should still lean towards 50%. If you read his post from last month he does not include mirror matchups, for obvious reasons. I cant tell by your post if your saying that its not listed as a matchup, but still included in the overall win rate graphs or not. Just fyi it isnt. | ||
|
AndyGB4
Canada156 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + PROTOSS Ro64 [16 players] > Ro16 [1 player] = 6.25% of Protoss players made it through. 0 players eliminated in mirror matches. TERRAN Ro64 [29 players] > Ro16 [9 player] = 31.03% of Terran players made it through. 12 players eliminated in mirror matches. ZERG Ro64 [19 players] > Ro16 [6 player] = 31.57% of Zerg players made it through. 3 players eliminated in mirror matches. I guess most of this makes sense because of the larger number of Terran players in the tournament, but it's still pretty cool to see. And also, its fun to note that there will be 1 Terran player guranteed in the finals because Group A & Group B Ro8 are all Terrans lol. Anyways, thanks for the stats, it's interesting to see what the latest trends are. | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
On June 08 2011 06:31 1Eris1 wrote: Hmm. And from some of the recent posts on this site you'd think Protoss has a 0 winrate vs both races I remember the last one of these had PvZ at like 30%, so we can already see it's improving drastically 30% in favor of zerg? maybe that was on the korean one in the last one but in the NA/EU one wich was a much bigger sample size it was still in favor of zerg but only by about 5 percent or so. I dunno tournament wise PVZ has been favored for zerg for at least a month and a half if not longer, thats why it pisses me off so much when i hear zergs still complaining about PVZ (although its quite a bit less often now) Also i dont hear many protoss's complaining now that PVZ seems to be zerg favoured, sure there are a few but they usually get laughed out of the forums because most zerg players think its ridiculous that a protoss player could say that PVZ is zerg favoured. I hope these statistics bring some things to light. Although overall it seems fairly balanced P seems to be (if even just slightly) in the worst position these days. There is also only 1 protoss left in the super tournament, and 9 out of the top 16 at MLG were zerg. | ||
|
hi im new
Germany150 Posts
On June 09 2011 05:43 AndyGB4 wrote: Im interested to see these stats for Korea only, because so far in the GSL Super Tournament: + Show Spoiler + PROTOSS Ro64 [16 players] > Ro16 [1 player] = 6.25% of Protoss players made it through. 0 players eliminated in mirror matches. TERRAN Ro64 [29 players] > Ro16 [9 player] = 31.03% of Terran players made it through. 12 players eliminated in mirror matches. ZERG Ro64 [19 players] > Ro16 [6 player] = 31.57% of Zerg players made it through. 3 players eliminated in mirror matches. I guess most of this makes sense because of the larger number of Terran players in the tournament, but it's still pretty cool to see. And also, its fun to note that there will be 1 Terran player guranteed in the finals because Group A & Group B Ro8 are all Terrans lol. Anyways, thanks for the stats, it's interesting to see what the latest trends are. mc was eliminated by alicia if im not mistaken | ||
|
MonkSEA
Australia1227 Posts
On June 09 2011 05:43 AndyGB4 wrote: Im interested to see these stats for Korea only, because so far in the GSL Super Tournament: + Show Spoiler + PROTOSS Ro64 [16 players] > Ro16 [1 player] = 6.25% of Protoss players made it through. 0 players eliminated in mirror matches. TERRAN Ro64 [29 players] > Ro16 [9 player] = 31.03% of Terran players made it through. 12 players eliminated in mirror matches. ZERG Ro64 [19 players] > Ro16 [6 player] = 31.57% of Zerg players made it through. 3 players eliminated in mirror matches. I guess most of this makes sense because of the larger number of Terran players in the tournament, but it's still pretty cool to see. And also, its fun to note that there will be 1 Terran player guranteed in the finals because Group A & Group B Ro8 are all Terrans lol. Anyways, thanks for the stats, it's interesting to see what the latest trends are. HuK vs San MC vs Alicia So that's already 2 PvP's :\ | ||
|
Wyk
314 Posts
| ||
|
caldor
Denmark41 Posts
Lets try looking at some other sources: You could start out with this site: http://sc2ranks.com/ranks/eu#ratio:0 But Zerg does not seem to be overly dominant amongst players with the highest win ratio in the grand master leagues. Of course the players with the most games played are really the ones that matter. A few in the top with few games played and a good streak, the ones with more than 1000 games are the one s that have proven they can keep up that win ratio. As for overall stats, you should remember that there are players who use bots to cheat their way to 1000 wins avatars, and Zerg Kerrigan seems to be popular... Food for thought. Not sure if it would be a good or bad thing when it comes to the win %, I guess its likely to be a bad thing. Still there are factors that makes the overall statistics rather useless. You need to look at the master leagues, and also there are much fewer players playing Zerg, so their statistics probably fluctuates much more than the other races. On top of that you have noob races like the Protoss that is easy to start out with for beginners. Check out this: http://sc2ranks.com/ranks/eu/bronze/1/all/played Shows who has the most plays in bronzer league. You find mostly random players, but also some Terran and Protoss players in the top 50. The first Zerg on the list is at rank 72, and with all of these players still in Bronze league, it should tell something about their win ratio, even though they have more than 1000 wins. I hope Blizzard will punish this. Also how annoying is it to wait 2 minutes for someone to play against, and then the other player just surrenders before the game begins? Yay, free win? I really do not care about how many wins I have. At least these are not players I face in the platinum league, or the gold league much, but is has happened that I got matched with one of these avatar bots. But good luck proving Zerg is overpowered. Lets see who gets the next nerf, because there it is not because Blizzard is failing that Zerg usually gets buffed each patch. They are trying to slowly buff Zerg little by little until the game seems balanced. Which I guess might be a good idea. I am not sure were exactly these stats come from, but if they come from the bronze league as well, they are without doubt, worthless when it comes to a discussion about balance. | ||
|
CuHz
United States354 Posts
| ||
|
Warble
137 Posts
50.5% 47.7% Looks very well balanced to me. Only protoss has any right to complain, and a very small right at that. The race-specific data shows that each matchup is within 2% of perfect balance except ZvP. So perhaps now a more interesting question arises: Which race has the highest skill ceiling? | ||
|
FordQuality
Canada17 Posts
On June 10 2011 18:58 Warble wrote: 51.4% 50.5% 47.7% Looks very well balanced to me. Only protoss has any right to complain, and a very small right at that. The race-specific data shows that each matchup is within 2% of perfect balance except ZvP. So perhaps now a more interesting question arises: Which race has the highest skill ceiling? You can't go by win ratios in a system that tries to make a 50 50 win ratio anyway, I often see people go up a league by switching from zerg and go down a league by switching 2 zerg.Lets say i switch to zerg and my win ratio goes down the system will then drop me a league level to achieve a 50% win rateing so these stats don't mean anything. | ||
|
Warble
137 Posts
On June 10 2011 19:06 FordQuality wrote: You can't got by win ratios in a system that tries to make a 50 50 win ratio anyway, I often see people go up a league by switching from zerg and go down a league by switching 2 zerg.Lets say i switch to zerg and my win ratio goes down the system will then drop me a league level to achieve a 50% win rateing so these stats don't mean anything. These are tournament results, not just ladder. Ladder tries to make win ratios 50:50. Tournaments do no such thing. Also, only top players feature in TLPD. | ||
|
FordQuality
Canada17 Posts
On June 10 2011 19:21 Warble wrote: These are tournament results, not just ladder. Ladder tries to make win ratios 50:50. Tournaments do no such thing. Also, only top players feature in TLPD. Ah ok, Guess i should of looked where the stats were taken from | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
On June 10 2011 05:25 caldor wrote: hmmmm... Lets try looking at some other sources: You could start out with this site: http://sc2ranks.com/ranks/eu#ratio:0 But Zerg does not seem to be overly dominant amongst players with the highest win ratio in the grand master leagues. Of course the players with the most games played are really the ones that matter. A few in the top with few games played and a good streak, the ones with more than 1000 games are the one s that have proven they can keep up that win ratio. As for overall stats, you should remember that there are players who use bots to cheat their way to 1000 wins avatars, and Zerg Kerrigan seems to be popular... Food for thought. Not sure if it would be a good or bad thing when it comes to the win %, I guess its likely to be a bad thing. Still there are factors that makes the overall statistics rather useless. You need to look at the master leagues, and also there are much fewer players playing Zerg, so their statistics probably fluctuates much more than the other races. On top of that you have noob races like the Protoss that is easy to start out with for beginners. Check out this: http://sc2ranks.com/ranks/eu/bronze/1/all/played Shows who has the most plays in bronzer league. You find mostly random players, but also some Terran and Protoss players in the top 50. The first Zerg on the list is at rank 72, and with all of these players still in Bronze league, it should tell something about their win ratio, even though they have more than 1000 wins. I hope Blizzard will punish this. Also how annoying is it to wait 2 minutes for someone to play against, and then the other player just surrenders before the game begins? Yay, free win? I really do not care about how many wins I have. At least these are not players I face in the platinum league, or the gold league much, but is has happened that I got matched with one of these avatar bots. But good luck proving Zerg is overpowered. Lets see who gets the next nerf, because there it is not because Blizzard is failing that Zerg usually gets buffed each patch. They are trying to slowly buff Zerg little by little until the game seems balanced. Which I guess might be a good idea. I am not sure were exactly these stats come from, but if they come from the bronze league as well, they are without doubt, worthless when it comes to a discussion about balance. If your not actually sure where these statistics come from, why dont you try to actually read the OP and find out, instead of wasting your time on a post that has nothing to do with the OP considering these statistics have nothing to do with the ladder. ( who cares about ladder statistics MMR skews them so they arent actually accurate anyways) These statistics have NOTHING to do with the ladder, it doesnt include bronze league it doesnt include masters or grandmasters league, this is a pro league/ tournament statistics, it is taken using all pro level tournament in the TLDP and does not include mirror matchups (because that would make the statistics lean towards fifty percent) Honestly if your going to make a long post like this, you should probably take the time to read the actual OP so you dont waste your time. So right now in pro level tournaments, zerg is doing better than the other races, it doesnt mean their overpowered there are shifts in the meta game all the time that can cause jumps like this, but overall i think most people would agree that terrans and protoss (especially) have been having a lot harder time vs zerg. You sound like one of those people that needs to beleive their race is Underpowered though, so carry on..... and what in the heck does this mean "Lets see who gets the next nerf, because there it is not because Blizzard is failing that Zerg usually gets buffed each patch" maybe im just slow but ive read this every which way doesnt make sense . | ||
|
cheesemaster
Canada1975 Posts
Ive only recently started posting on TL but ive been lurking in the shadows for quite a long time, and i dont remember it being so much like this back before starcraft 2 or even just 4-5 months ago. It resembles the battle.net forums alot more than it used to unfortunately. (no offense to anyone its really unavoidable and its good for the site overall if it becomes more popular) The moderation is already really strict so its not really a problem with that, and i guess you cant really ban people for making mistakes (that would be awesome, even if it means i would have been banned a few times) | ||
|
BaLoO-
France318 Posts
However, I think most people give way too much importance to korean data. If i'm not mistaken, your data come from GSL A & S + GSTL only (there may be a few other games, but hardly any). That's why we only have about 170 games a month (1553/9, ofc it's not exact). It is not enough to be statistically significant, the smaller the pool of games the bigger the importance of side factors (skill, maps or even luck) is. Anyway as much people say, both data -worldwide and in korea- doesn't show any imbalance for the moment (it could be the case if PvZ keeps this ratio for some months more). | ||
|
Severian
Australia2052 Posts
On June 10 2011 19:37 cheesemaster wrote: Im honestly astonished at the amount of people that dont read the OP and just assume its ladder statistics, why does this happen so often on TL, i mean everyone makes mistakes, but then you see someone make a post about it being ladder statistics and literally a post or 2 above them it says "these are not ladder statistics" as well as in the OP it states the same thing =/ Ive only recently started posting on TL but ive been lurking in the shadows for quite a long time, and i dont remember it being so much like this back before starcraft 2 or even just 4-5 months ago. It resembles the battle.net forums alot more than it used to unfortunately. (no offense to anyone its really unavoidable and its good for the site overall if it becomes more popular) The moderation is already really strict so its not really a problem with that, and i guess you cant really ban people for making mistakes (that would be awesome, even if it means i would have been banned a few times) On June 10 2011 20:18 BaLoO- wrote: First thanks for your work dude, really interesting (and thanks especially for the colorblind version :D). However, I think most people give way too much importance to korean data. If i'm not mistaken, your data come from GSL A & S + GSTL only (there may be a few other games, but hardly any). That's why we only have about 170 games a month (1553/9, ofc it's not exact). It is not enough to be statistically significant, the smaller the pool of games the bigger the importance of side factors (skill, maps or even luck) is. Anyway as much people say, both data -worldwide and in korea- doesn't show any imbalance for the moment (it could be the case if PvZ keeps this ratio for some months more). Holy cow lol. The data comes from Korean & International tournaments/leagues. There were 1700 games added in this month. All of this information is in the OP. | ||
|
Wesso
Netherlands1245 Posts
| ||
|
BaLoO-
France318 Posts
On June 10 2011 20:38 Severian wrote: Holy cow lol. The data comes from Korean & International tournaments/leagues. There were 1700 games added in this month. All of this information is in the OP. I'm not that proficient in english, but i definitely talked about 2 different sets of data in my post. Read more carefully please. Of course 1700 games like international data last month start to be a significant number (but still is honestly a bit too little), 170-200 games like korean data cannot prove anything in statistics. EDIT : and since i've read more than the OP, for your information here is the link for korean stats only : http://i.imgur.com/aPAo8.png | ||
|
mrando
19 Posts
| ||
|
Severian
Australia2052 Posts
On June 10 2011 20:48 BaLoO- wrote: I'm not that proficient in english, but i definitely talked about 2 different sets of data in my post. Read more carefully please. Of course 1700 games like international data last month start to be a significant number (but still is honestly a bit too little), 170-200 games like korean data cannot prove anything in statistics. EDIT : and since i've read more than the OP, for your information here is the link for korean stats only : http://i.imgur.com/aPAo8.png Sorry, I misunderstood your post. Now I look like an asshole. | ||
|
Faraday
United States553 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 101379
4849 Posts
| ||
|
Kira__
Sweden2672 Posts
| ||
|
itsjuspeter
United States668 Posts
look at the korean PvZ... discuss. | ||
|
Inex
Bulgaria443 Posts
EDIT; Lol at the Korean stats. | ||
|
xbankx
703 Posts
Of course zerg never lose because of playing bad only because of imbalance!!! | ||
|
Cartel
Canada255 Posts
On June 10 2011 21:36 itsjuspeter wrote: http://i.imgur.com/aPAo8.png look at the korean PvZ... discuss. Its obvious that Protoss is under powered right now, and anyone who denies this I gaurantee is not looking at it objectively at all. PvZ has been in favour for Z for a while. However its not pvz that interests me.. its Terran vs all other races. They are clearly the one to focus on right now in terms of finding a way to make them not as powerful. They are entering, maintaining, and winning tournaments left and right, and will continue to do so until something is done on Blizzard's end. Check all recent tournaments especially GSL final 32, 16, 8, and so on and so on. | ||
|
rpgalon
Brazil1069 Posts
EU/NA are not in the highest level yet | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
Don't nerf Terran, make Protoss and Zerg less shit instead. | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
Edit: er, yeah, what the guy above said. | ||
|
Greatness
United States450 Posts
On June 10 2011 21:42 Inex wrote: Well toss has 3 units that it rarely uses, namely the warp prism, carrier and the mothership. Zerg pretty much has a use for all its units and the same can be said about terran, except maybe the battle cruiser. Looking at tier 1, I still believe that toss is not as cost efficient as the other races in large numbers. When it comes to high-tech units, toss has an advantage, despite the lack of carriers and motherships in the army composition, but it is very hard to rebuild such a high cost army. Anyhow, the statistics don't show any sings of one race being OP or UP and I think that so far blizz are doing a great job on the balancing side. EDIT; Lol at the Korean stats. Ultralisk, overseer, hydra is either never used in terms for the ultralisk, and rarely used of the overseer and hydra. | ||
|
flodeskum
Iceland1267 Posts
On June 10 2011 20:47 Wesso wrote: Is there something like this but for BW, because that should help us compare and try and predict what will happen. I can predict what will happen. More people will start to whine about Z being OP for a while. Then T and P wil start winning again and some other race will be called op. Probably terran... then soon after P ... then Z etc. Idra and his cult will ofc still maintain that zerg are so bad that only some sort of demigod could win a masters level game with them (zergs that win by being agressive will still remain 'terrible players'). Only after this happens 500 times will people start to realize that it has less to do with game balance and more to do with the popular builds/trends at the time and we'll slowly start to see less balance whining. And then the rapture comes. | ||
|
Roggay
Switzerland6320 Posts
Concerning the stats themselves... I don't think we can learn a lot of things out of them. I'm always more interested in what really happens ingame than the raw stats. It is true that Zergs are doing good at the moment, but that doesnt mean Zerg is OP or Toss is UP, it just means that lately a lot of things have been figured out in ZvP. I'm pretty sure the same will happen with PvZ soon enough, resulting in another inversion on the stats. | ||
|
Suc
Australia1569 Posts
On June 10 2011 22:28 Greatness wrote: Ultralisk, overseer, hydra is either never used in terms for the ultralisk, and rarely used of the overseer and hydra. The overseer has been used forever. Hydras are being used more and more lately, with quite a bit of success. I agree with you on ultras not being used that much, although, that being said, ultras are used more times than warp prisms, carriers and motherships combined. | ||
|
StarbugPilo
France37 Posts
It was a hell of a task but they managed to draw a fish with the stat graph. --- Great info though, thanks. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On June 10 2011 21:47 Cartel wrote: Its obvious that Protoss is under powered right now, and anyone who denies this I gaurantee is not looking at it objectively at all. PvZ has been in favour for Z for a while. However its not pvz that interests me.. its Terran vs all other races. They are clearly the one to focus on right now in terms of finding a way to make them not as powerful. They are entering, maintaining, and winning tournaments left and right, and will continue to do so until something is done on Blizzard's end. Check all recent tournaments especially GSL final 32, 16, 8, and so on and so on. I don't think it's really obvious at all. I just think there are a limited number of strong Protoss players in Korea, particularly those who are good at multiple matchups, additionally, you get a lot of situations where one strong player may have to take out another to advance such as early in the super tournament with Alicia and MC. Also, I feel like it's more likely that players who play Protoss can sometimes wiggle their way through playing an overall better player and then get crushed in future games. I also think Protoss is slightly behind in the meta-game and need to shake things up a little bit and try out new things, we might see some pretty interesting stuff. Also, there are a fuck-ton of good Terran players in Korea so I don't think the win rates are too telling, particularly because the sample size is pretty small and if you actually look at the trends in Korea, they fluctuate an insane amount over time because of the small number of matches each month, one month Protoss is near 60%, the next Zerg is near 60%. Not very telling to me, the overall rates suggest everything is more even. | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
On June 10 2011 21:36 itsjuspeter wrote: http://i.imgur.com/aPAo8.png look at the korean PvZ... discuss. Holy crap, that looks painful. Wild how they swing back and forth.Let's look at PvZ for a minute. PvZ's main(?) design problem: early lings and roaches can be dealt with, but it takes a large investment or risk by P. Either lots of expensive sentries, expensive cannons, or a risky(?) air build. MC decided the air build was the best bet, since it can apply pressure and on the right maps can defend ling/roach rushes. But obviously it's weak if Z is quickly going hydras. And on smaller maps, mass lings is considered a counter to an air before expand opening. Protoss either need a much cheaper way to defend or they need a cheaper way to attack. What would happen if: 1. Cannon buff. Better against lings and roaches would help, but if the decision for P is 1 cannon or several... would a buff even matter if you made only 1 or 2 cannons and a heavy ling/roach attack came too soon? Only if the cannon buff was big, like nearly twice the rate of fire. That would also help the anti-air problem and the anti-drop problem Protoss have. Has potential. 2. Sentries cost 75 gas instead of 100? Sounds like a lot, but it's not even as good as the 150 to 100 gas change on ghosts, except for the fact that P builds more sentries early than T builds ghosts (at least in popular builds I see today). Could defend easier with the 3 gate sentry expand type builds while teching to something else. But would early P aggression be too good against T and Z? Not sure... I haven't seen MC's forcefield attacks win much lately so maybe it'd be OK. It would also give Protoss an option to build sentries late game, which is rare now b/c they lose their effectiveness as the game goes on. It would also make PvP easier to defend 4 gates. 3. Wait for HotS and some new unit. All I can think of is the reaver... good on defense vs units like lings/roaches and gives harassment (attack) options with a shuttle. | ||
|
Silu
Finland165 Posts
People stopped making essays about the reasons why 352 games over 8 months (44 per month) gives something or other as a result? I guess the TL SC2 forums would die? | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
| ||
|
mrando
19 Posts
| ||
|
mavsfan0041
United States306 Posts
| ||
|
Dag0N
Denmark25 Posts
| ||
|
PartyBiscuit
Canada4525 Posts
| ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
ZvP is most off atm in the favor of zerg but I think this issue will correct itself. P had the most changes in the last patch and thus they probably need longer to adjust themselves, I wouldn't be surprised if P got to being favored again in a month or 2 without a patch change at all simply because P learn to adapt better to the new metagame. I want to echo mavsfan0041 for the suggestion of adding the patch timings into the graph though. | ||
|
Striding Strider
United Kingdom787 Posts
| ||
|
Neo.NEt
United States785 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On June 11 2011 00:16 Blacklizard wrote: I love posting on TL. God forbid somebody consider design options in a thread about how winrates seem off. Fuck me. god forbid anyone who actually understands data analysis actually tells you to shut up | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
My opinion isn't that Protoss is under powered, but that the matchup swings back and forth quite a bit. Hence the first paragraph of my post, and I quote "Wild how they swing back and forth". I guess the geniuses that respond to me are statistics experts but can't comprehend written English. This is yet another reason why people can't post on balance. Why do I try? Hell, this guy sums it up: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=231113¤tpage=21 Allow me, with my limited Zerg expertise, to try: Sometimes it seems Zerg struggles with nexus cancel 4 gate. Or maybe WhiteRa's immortal pushes. I haven't seen a Zerg die to one base Protoss air pressure in a long time, though Blizzard buffed the spore recently b/c of it. I imagine Zerg don't like the trouble taking a 3rd when a quick voidray is there to deny it, but I'm not sure it's an actual problem merely part of the matchup. I don't believe the "death ball" is a problem anymore... If those are true, attacking isn't Zerg's problem pvz, so WHAT IF: 1. Spines built faster? Would allow reactionary defense against an incoming attack. But if it were much faster than it is now, would it even be possible to punish a greedy zerg? The ability to move spines is important here. 2. What if spines were 25 minerals cheaper? Would probably be fine. Might allow for a quicker macro hatch. Only major problem I'd worry about from a P point of view is about spine turtling with mutas. Maybe also Spanishiwa's build would be a little harder to deal with. ? 3. What if a nexus cancel cost more money? Just for a nexus. This is one of those extreme options since it would hurt protoss who was trying for an expand and got denied by mass ling or a hidden bio push. So if it was truly found to be a serious problem for Zerg, maybe the longer a nexus goes past 75% done the more it would cost to cancel it. 4. You knew it was coming. What if lurkers came back?! Zerg defense. Oh how I miss lurkers. | ||
|
AlphaWing
Taiwan36 Posts
If it does, then the win rate will be pulled colse to 50% And this means that the race that has a larger population, will be pulled even closer to 50% For example, if I am analyzing 100 games, and 90 of them are PvP, with only 5 PvTs, and 5 PvZs, Even if P loses all the 10 games to Z and T, the win rate for P will still be near at 50%, which in this case will be 47.4% | ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On June 12 2011 01:45 AlphaWing wrote: Does the big chart on top includes PvP TvT and ZvZ ? If it does, then the win rate will be pulled colse to 50% And this means that the race that has a larger population, will be pulled even closer to 50% For example, if I am analyzing 100 games, and 90 of them are PvP, with only 5 PvTs, and 5 PvZs, Even if P loses all the 10 games to Z and T, the win rate for P will still be near at 50%, which in this case will be 47.4% Look at the label the graph (top left) | ||
|
Tatari
United States1179 Posts
On June 12 2011 01:42 Blacklizard wrote: 4. You knew it was coming. What if lurkers came back?! Zerg defense. Oh how I miss lurkers. Lurkers were in Hive tech to begin with (in SC2). Moving them down to Lair tech might require switching around tech for Zerg. Not only that, it takes quite some time for Lurkers to get out. If you see the Nexus cancel aggression, you'll be morphing in your Lair. From there, you'll be getting out your Hydralisk Den (unless the tech was switched to Hatchery tech and Roaches were moved to Lair or some other place), and then you'll be morphing in your Hydralisks. From there, you need to change it into a Lurker Den to allow Lurkers. And from there, you have to wait until Hydralisks morph into Lurkers. By which point you're probably dead anyway. Nor would you actually be devoting any larva to make Hydras or Hydras into Lurkers because you have to deal with the aggression that the Protoss is putting on you. Just saying Lurkers won't work in that situation. | ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
| ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
| ||
|
Sockpuppet
119 Posts
| ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On June 12 2011 01:42 Blacklizard wrote: Instead of TL being a place where balance is a dirty word and no discussion is good discussion, I'd like to see some thoughtful fucking posts. Instead of somebody using an account named turdburgler to troll, what I'd love to see is some design change ideas from the Zerg perspective. My opinion isn't that Protoss is under powered, but that the matchup swings back and forth quite a bit. Hence the first paragraph of my post, and I quote "Wild how they swing back and forth". I guess the geniuses that respond to me are statistics experts but can't comprehend written English. This is yet another reason why people can't post on balance. Why do I try? Hell, this guy sums it up: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=231113¤tpage=21 Allow me, with my limited Zerg expertise, to try: Sometimes it seems Zerg struggles with nexus cancel 4 gate. Or maybe WhiteRa's immortal pushes. I haven't seen a Zerg die to one base Protoss air pressure in a long time, though Blizzard buffed the spore recently b/c of it. I imagine Zerg don't like the trouble taking a 3rd when a quick voidray is there to deny it, but I'm not sure it's an actual problem merely part of the matchup. I don't believe the "death ball" is a problem anymore... If those are true, attacking isn't Zerg's problem pvz, so WHAT IF: 1. Spines built faster? Would allow reactionary defense against an incoming attack. But if it were much faster than it is now, would it even be possible to punish a greedy zerg? The ability to move spines is important here. 2. What if spines were 25 minerals cheaper? Would probably be fine. Might allow for a quicker macro hatch. Only major problem I'd worry about from a P point of view is about spine turtling with mutas. Maybe also Spanishiwa's build would be a little harder to deal with. ? 3. What if a nexus cancel cost more money? Just for a nexus. This is one of those extreme options since it would hurt protoss who was trying for an expand and got denied by mass ling or a hidden bio push. So if it was truly found to be a serious problem for Zerg, maybe the longer a nexus goes past 75% done the more it would cost to cancel it. 4. You knew it was coming. What if lurkers came back?! Zerg defense. Oh how I miss lurkers. What the fuck does balance discussion here do? Go do this on the Battle.net forums. We're here for the game and competitive play, not for fucking shitting on top players and trivializing their success by talking about how the game made them win and how their race is too strong, particularly when there's no reason to think that there is an issue. Defending isn't Zerg's problem in PvZ so WHAT IF "WE MAKE A SHOW ABOUT NOTHING and call it Seinfeld". Improving static defense may be something that Blizzard looks to tweak across the board, same goes for scouting, but right now, these discussions are just people spewing random shit that doesn't mean anything. Do this all you want on the Blizzard forums, what's the reason for doing it here other than getting it off your chest? | ||
|
Coutcha
Canada519 Posts
| ||
|
Crappy
France224 Posts
On June 12 2011 02:51 Coutcha wrote: Its almost Balanced better destroy that with HotS soon :DDD Do you forgot what "Soon"™ mean ? | ||
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
| ||
|
beat farm
United States478 Posts
| ||
|
Hoodlum
United States350 Posts
| ||
|
Deathlabel
United States50 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:18 Day[9] wrote: Fantastic graphs! I have a really stupid request if possible lol: I'm used to Zerg = Red, Terran = Blue, Protoss = Green from years of surfing Teamliquid. Would it be possible to do some color swapouts? Regardless, I LOVE seeing data like this :D If you don't do what Day[9] says you are silly =] | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
On June 12 2011 02:45 Mordiford wrote: What the fuck does balance discussion here do? Go do this on the Battle.net forums. We're here for the game and competitive play, not for fucking shitting on top players and trivializing their success by talking about how the game made them win and how their race is too strong, particularly when there's no reason to think that there is an issue. Defending isn't Zerg's problem in PvZ so WHAT IF "WE MAKE A SHOW ABOUT NOTHING and call it Seinfeld". Improving static defense may be something that Blizzard looks to tweak across the board, same goes for scouting, but right now, these discussions are just people spewing random shit that doesn't mean anything. Do this all you want on the Blizzard forums, what's the reason for doing it here other than getting it off your chest? I don't know, what the fuck COULD balance discussion here do? Oh, maybe solve "impossible imbalanced unit comps" and predict game changing trends at the highest level months before it is shown in tournaments. See my post here predicting baneling drops and infestors to counter the protoss "death ball". How many other people have predicted balanced changes in upcoming patches? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189923¤tpage=39 So kindly kiss my ass and gtfo of this thread if you don't want to contribute. | ||
|
splinter9
Canada172 Posts
| ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On June 12 2011 03:53 Blacklizard wrote: I don't know, what the fuck COULD balance discussion here do? Oh, maybe solve "impossible imbalanced unit comps" and predict game changing trends at the highest level months before it is shown in tournaments. See my post here predicting baneling drops and infestors to counter the protoss "death ball". How many other people have predicted balanced changes in upcoming patches? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=189923¤tpage=39 So kindly kiss my ass and gtfo of this thread if you don't want to contribute. Contribute to what? Incessant balance whining? Okay, I'll GTFO that with pleasure, have fun with it though. What you linked me to was a detailed discussion about strategic counters to issues being brought up, I have no issue with that, in fact, I'll encourage the hell out of that, nor do I have any issue with a specific thread to discuss imbalance but it shouldn't be in every other god damn thread. Discussing balance doesn't lead to identifying trends, that's strategy. Saying, "X is too strong/game-breaking/bullshit" is talking about imbalance, looking at win rates and going, "This should be changed because it's clearly an issue in the matchup" is balance whining. If you want to suggest random shit like "25 minerals less on spine crawler", that would be much more productive on the Blizzard forums. | ||
|
Husky
United States3362 Posts
| ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
Anyways, I have always thought that the game was kinda balanced(I don't think any game will be always 100% balanced unless everything is equal) but I am glad to see this data. Thanks OP. Edit: Just to clarify I meant that the range of the data may make look stuff seem bigger on a graph. Anyways, you guys should not get so mad about this, it may not be that meaningful but as it is it its interesting. | ||
|
ETisME
12351 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... why is it in flavor of zerg? | ||
|
mcfrog
14 Posts
It doesn't tell you how many zerg/protoss/terran players were in each tournament to start with, the racial match ups in the tournament, the quality of players in the tournaments, why player x won/loss each match, and the route player x had to being the champion. A good player who just has a bad day can lose to a worse player. A 2-0 series can mean both games were extremely close or extremely one sided. You can make it to the semi final just going against one match up. All the zergs could have fought against each other instead of other races eliminating themselves. The graph is just too simplistic to make any sort of comments on the current balance of the game. | ||
|
Perplex
United States1693 Posts
Have you played the matchup at a diamond or above level? If not your opinion doesn't matter. | ||
|
ledgerhs
United States34 Posts
On June 10 2011 21:42 Inex wrote: Well toss has 3 units that it rarely uses, namely the warp prism, carrier and the mothership. There are some problems with those units that make them strategically bad. A good example is that if you go DTs against Z, you force detection around his bases, that then deny your Observers any information about the Z who's overdroning or doing tech switches. It's suicide strategically, until very late in the endgame, where all the drones and tech is already out. Warp Prism might look like it's a tool for drop play. But in reality, it's not. It's a movable proxy pylon and something that lets you micro manage immortals and templar in and out of roach/lings way. The fault isn't necessarily in the Warp Prism itself, but the units you'd "drop" with it. P doesn't have a stimmed rine/rauder pack to drop that does insanely sick damage in a short time window, or Cracklings/Hydras. Why drops are so sick for terran is that you can drop somewhere, leave your dropship somewhere safer from queens and micro manage towards that safe location with ranged units while doing tons and tons of damage, and then retreat with little losses. What would you drop as P? DTs have the problem described in the first paragraph. Zealots need Charge, and you're most likely gonna sac em and hope they deal enough damage to drones before dying, meaning at least few drone kills per zealot. Most of the time it won't happen though. Stalkers are too costy for too little DPS, and need Blink to retreat with. Also, the metagame problems. Z contains P with mutas in the early midgame till lategame, typically. Even if not, they go for either Infestors or Corruptors to deal with deathballs, and all those tech paths utterly nullify the usefulness of a drop play prism. And atop of all that, there's Queens, spores, spines, speed of Z units on creep, and so forth. Carrier also has a ton of problems like this. The responses to carrier could be Corruptors rather than Hydras, in which case the Z is then also prepped nicely against Colossus tech and suddenly Protoss play is narrowed down to Gateways, Templar and Immortals. If the opposing Zerg goes for Hydras, your Interceptor build time is too slow to make them effective as a unit in your core composition, and makes them more of a hit/run type of unit. But it's also too slow at retreating for that, so you might even need a Mothership to supplement it. Also Colossus already does what Carrier does, but better, and builds faster and cheaper. So they don't really seem to have a good role. Defensive mothership is amazing. Defensive Vortex buys time against counterattacks, Recall saves a ton of money in the form of saved units and allows you to do hit and run tactics. But P cant regenerate armor, just the shields regenerate, so if you save a colossus at 10 hp with recall, it's only a half of colossus in the next battle, and still eats into supply count as if it was a full one. Also since people use Corruptors to specifically snipe down colossi, those are typically the first units to drop, while your GW buffer still stands. So it's not all that straightforward. If they gave MShip an ability to regenerate armor, I guess we'd see it more. It's absurd to think that pros who sit down and play this game for tens of hours in a day don't experiment on these extensively. These units just have strategical problems that make them bad investment in most of the games, and if people win games going these ways, the game typically was either already won or lost before the tech, or the opposing player didn't respond correctly and lost due to his own mistakes. Also PvZ is already very Z favoured in terms of economy. At what point do you decide that you can sacrifice 33% to 50% of your probe production speed for 160 seconds to get a defensive measure that might be useful? I haven't really found that window just yet. | ||
|
ATUkno
United States17 Posts
| ||
|
lindn
Sweden833 Posts
On June 14 2011 11:33 Perplex wrote: Have you played the matchup at a diamond or above level? If not your opinion doesn't matter. i have and it's not in the zergs favor. it's pretty finely balanced as off now. | ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
On June 14 2011 11:33 Perplex wrote: Have you played the matchup at a diamond or above level? If not your opinion doesn't matter. 1350master here... ZvP sucks for me... I lose 70% of em! seems I never have the right units... and when I do... DTs rape anyways | ||
|
mikyaJ
1834 Posts
Firstly it's 52.8% in favor of Zerg, it's pretty strange that you missed that seeing as what thread you're in, and secondly, yay more people who read the first page only. You realize there's been 22 pages between that comment and your response. Don't worry about Korean Protoss guys, Sage, Puzzle, and Genius will spearhead new Protoss resurgence in Korea. You'll see. Also lol flavor | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On topic: we have a saying, which I don't know if translates well to English, but it's "to make a camel out of a mosquito". As someone stated, given the amount of data, any imbalance found is of the order of 2 standard deviationts. Put in layman's term: the lines in the graphs should be actually so thick that you won't see any difference between them and thus you'd think that the game is perfectly balanced. And yes, I think that that's actually what Blizzard should consider when "balancing" the game. SC2 is amazingly balanced and it has been so for quite a long time already. Any attempt to make it "more balanced" is purely futile, as they are just fighting against fluctuations. I am all for making changes that fix something that is purely annoying (mainly in the early game) - that means that the patch is based on the actual gameplay. But there is just no reason to "balance" anything based simply on overall results. | ||
|
Serpico
4285 Posts
On June 14 2011 11:33 Perplex wrote: Have you played the matchup at a diamond or above level? If not your opinion doesn't matter. oh boy here comes the pretentious garbage. The fact pro matches are so far away from being standardized along with the constant variations in maps makes it hard to get too much out of these graphs. | ||
|
Not_That
287 Posts
| ||
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
| ||
|
tuestresfat
2555 Posts
| ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:09 Mailing wrote: Not really. Korean protoss are falling apart, to the point where only Alicia, MC, Ace, Squirtle, and maybe Huk are having any form of consistent results, namely because they are actually really good players who belong in Code S >> I would suspect the rest, like inca/anypro/tester/hongun/sangho to fall out of code S soon. you guys always mention Ace and Squirtle... what have they ever done.... ever? Is squirtle even in code A? these guys did okay in some euro tournament 8 months ago and theyre being used in the same sentence as MC. Ace is a maybe but squirtle is a definitely no when it comes to any sort of impact or indicator of how strong the race is right now. GSTL performance doesn't mean a damned thing either (see DongRaeGue chilling comfortably in Code B) | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On July 08 2011 17:22 tuestresfat wrote: holy shit what happened in january o.o terrans and toss made zerg their bitch idRa was pouting instead of trying and the idRaites followed suit | ||
|
Rannasha
Netherlands2398 Posts
On July 08 2011 17:22 tuestresfat wrote: holy shit what happened in january o.o terrans and toss made zerg their bitch It was the highpoint of 2-rax+SCV allins in TvZ. Not sure what was up in PvZ at that time. | ||
|
ElusoryX
Singapore2047 Posts
| ||
|
Sandermatt
Switzerland1365 Posts
| ||
|
Philosophy
186 Posts
Seriously, give them a break, if you look at the win rates of the past months you know why they complained. MC even says he wont lose any zerg if he actually tries. Threads like this make me embarrassed to be protoss. | ||
|
JoeJin
United States77 Posts
Also, I continue to actually like the way the graph is indicating that there is a much better equilibrium between the 3 races. I want to see if the June graph or data would indicate that it is getting even closer. :3 It seems to say that there is a much larger movement towards the grand view of balance, of course there are few things that need tweaking but not so much at a level that anything major needs to be changed. I know that there can't be a complete equilibrium of 50% across the board, but one can dream can't he? | ||
|
MonkSEA
Australia1227 Posts
On July 08 2011 17:25 Jayrod wrote: you guys always mention Ace and Squirtle... what have they ever done.... ever? Is squirtle even in code A? these guys did okay in some euro tournament 8 months ago and theyre being used in the same sentence as MC. Ace is a maybe but squirtle is a definitely no when it comes to any sort of impact or indicator of how strong the race is right now. GSTL performance doesn't mean a damned thing either (see DongRaeGue chilling comfortably in Code B) Uhh.. If you look that post was made 1 month ago. And 1 month ago Squirtle was a big name because of NASL k? And if I use NesTea and some random zerg in the same sentence it's not ok? lol k. Nice logic, all players have their strengths and weaknesses. And wtf, the graph is based off of games played, not specific games so GSTL performance does mean something because they were.. played! look at that. Anyways, I'm interested to see what the protoss win rate is like now, I feel like it's going to be closer to Terran and Zerg falling a little more. | ||
|
Eruk
Sweden2 Posts
| ||
|
Flingoko
Denmark68 Posts
| ||
|
Mephiztopheles1
1124 Posts
On July 08 2011 17:33 Rannasha wrote: It was the highpoint of 2-rax+SCV allins in TvZ. Not sure what was up in PvZ at that time. 6gate +2 and mass blink stalkers were also starting to see a lot of play. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On July 08 2011 17:57 MonkSEA wrote: Uhh.. If you look that post was made 1 month ago. And 1 month ago Squirtle was a big name because of NASL k? And if I use NesTea and some random zerg in the same sentence it's not ok? lol k. Nice logic, all players have their strengths and weaknesses. And wtf, the graph is based off of games played, not specific games so GSTL performance does mean something because they were.. played! look at that. Anyways, I'm interested to see what the protoss win rate is like now, I feel like it's going to be closer to Terran and Zerg falling a little more. Also while DRG is in code B he did last night beat Nada who is one of the favorites to win code S this season. | ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
http://twitter.com/#!/SC2Statistics/status/89257362933825536 | ||
|
rasmuslorentzen
Denmark19 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aZDCO.png) It's about as balanced as it can get o.O amazing | ||
|
Asymmetric
Scotland1309 Posts
On July 08 2011 21:21 Ctuchik wrote: June update is out! http://twitter.com/#!/SC2Statistics/status/89257362933825536 Pretty damn close to 50:50 across the board there. | ||
|
Zealot Lord
Hong Kong746 Posts
On July 08 2011 21:21 Ctuchik wrote: June update is out! http://twitter.com/#!/SC2Statistics/status/89257362933825536 Good stuff! Is the Korea one going to come out soon as well? | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
|
Logros
Netherlands9913 Posts
| ||
|
StarCraft64
United States354 Posts
Any chance you'd be able to add some vertical markers for the patches that had balance changes? | ||
|
aderum
Sweden1459 Posts
| ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
There has been something like 7-10 new tournaments... | ||
|
Tiazi
Netherlands761 Posts
| ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
| ||
|
EliteReplay
Dominican Republic913 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:43 Ctuchik wrote: Doesn't seem like I can edit the title. Should I make a new post with the June stats? u can just pm an admin. | ||
|
StarCraft64
United States354 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:43 Ctuchik wrote: Doesn't seem like I can edit the title. Should I make a new post with the June stats? If you're going to keep updating this monthly for a while, then I think you should definitely make a new thread for each. It will help isolate the discussions on the new statistics when they come out. It would be similar to Jinro's SC2 General Discussion Thread edit: And I would format the OP the same as well. | ||
|
Ctuchik
Sweden91 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:48 StarCraft64 wrote: If you're going to keep updating this monthly for a while, then I think you should definitely make a new thread for each. It will help isolate the discussions on the new statistics when they come out. It would be similar to Jinro's SC2 General Discussion Thread. Yeah that makes sense. | ||
|
Tinuss
Netherlands9 Posts
I also like how ZvP keeps going up and down every other 2 months or so ^^, look quite balanced aswell, i bet blizz just peaks every now and again aswell! thanks! | ||
|
Xadar
497 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:24 aurum510 wrote: How can IdrA cry about ZvP... It's the most imbalanced matchup and it's in favor of Zerg... You need to look at gameplay to measure balance not at results. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:53 Xadar wrote: You need to look at gameplay to measure balance not at results. Not that I agree with the quoted stuff, but this is wrong too. Results are the most objective way of measuring balance - "look at the gameplay" is inevitably heavily biased. | ||
|
Harmonious
179 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:11 Lynkilen wrote: Looks like ZvP could use some slight innovation from P's, surprisingly even considering all the balance QQ It could be seen as surprising, but the QQ is only valid, if at all, when viewed in the context of the current knowledge of the game. But the current knowledge of the game is not complete and probably won't be for a few years. It is extremely hard to say if the game is fundamentally imbalanced. The change in game play on the pro level has changed significantly over the last few tournaments. For the better in terms of entertainment in my opinion. If I can make a prediction I think the raven will become more popular in TVT mech versus biomech. Mostly because biomech ends up as tank/maurader due to helions. Should be fun, and I will play around with it tonight think. Not that I think I have any chance of revolutionizing the game | ||
|
Harmonious
179 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:55 Yaotzin wrote: Not that I agree with the quoted stuff, but this is wrong too. Results are the most objective way of measuring balance - "look at the gameplay" is inevitably heavily biased. I agree with you completely, results are what matter and are the only objective way to measure this. I think the difficulty right now is seeing past the frequent roflstomps that happen one way or the other. Until stronger standards of play emerge I don't think that will improve Dark Templars for example win way too often at the moment, not because they are too strong, but Terrans seem to never save scans for even a few seconds at the critical timings. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:00 Logros wrote: I think it's mainly due to the european and american terrans being crap compared to the korean ones. Eh, even KR Terrans haven't been doing well in GSL July and other tournaments. The only exceptions involve the super tournament (where April/May trends were perpetuated) and MMA winning MLG. In fact, due to GSL's format, most changes in winrate are likely to follow and lag behind foreign trends. With major events every week or 2 in the foreign scene, it's fairly volatile, but very indicative of meta game trends. When a pro has to play 40 games over 2-3 days, ideas and tactics are thrown relentlessly against one another for everybody to disect. It allows players to steal and adapt builds at an incredible rate. GSL being so drawn out lags behind because players have so long to abuse their prized strategies, while experimentation happens in depth, instead of breadth. Opinion: We're going to see a relative nosedive in Terran results in GSL where it will go well below 50%. Basically a backlash effect to Terran being overpopulated in GSL (and KR in general). Shifts in TvX metagame will catch up and P and Z will rapidly replace mediocre Ts from Code A and into S. By the end of the year, T will be the minority in GSL without any major metagame shifts or patch intervention. | ||
|
SafeAsCheese
United States4924 Posts
On July 08 2011 22:55 Yaotzin wrote: Not that I agree with the quoted stuff, but this is wrong too. Results are the most objective way of measuring balance - "look at the gameplay" is inevitably heavily biased. Results are skewed by mass sometimes. What imbalances a GSL player faces will not be the same as what a MLG pool player faces, for example. If protoss found a build that was really hard to do, so that only 10 of the top protoss could pull it off but it had a 90% win rate, there would be problems, even though it could not effect the overall win rate. | ||
|
GreEny K
Germany7312 Posts
On June 07 2011 23:18 Day[9] wrote: Fantastic graphs! I have a really stupid request if possible lol: I'm used to Zerg = Red, Terran = Blue, Protoss = Green from years of surfing Teamliquid. Would it be possible to do some color swapouts? Regardless, I LOVE seeing data like this :D Totally agree, it just seems natural that way. | ||
|
Harmonious
179 Posts
On July 08 2011 23:20 SafeAsCheese wrote: What imbalances a GSL player faces will not be the same as what a MLG pool player faces, for example. That might be true, but personally I don't think we can really consider balance in that way. But right now I'd say things are too close to conclude that anything is imbalanced. | ||
|
NeWeNiyaLord
Norway2474 Posts
On July 08 2011 23:11 Harmonious wrote: I agree with you completely, results are what matter and are the only objective way to measure this. I think the difficulty right now is seeing past the frequent roflstomps that happen one way or the other. Until stronger standards of play emerge I don't think that will improve Dark Templars for example win way too often at the moment, not because they are too strong, but Terrans seem to never save scans for even a few seconds at the critical timings. Well at EU server's it seemes like P is doing very bad, just couse of the new MorroW style PvZ. I just think IdrA needs some coaching from MorroW ^^, | ||
|
Pwere
Canada1556 Posts
On July 08 2011 23:17 aksfjh wrote: I don't know what you base your opinion upon, but I would be very surprised if you were proven right. The korean ladder is being completely dominated by terrans at the master/GM level, and with all their early game options, they can never fall that low in winrates. Moreover, MC said that PvT is problematic at the moment. Zergs have been saying that now that T has figured that ghosts are actually the answer to everything, T is favored in ZvT as well.Eh, even KR Terrans haven't been doing well in GSL July and other tournaments. The only exceptions involve the super tournament (where April/May trends were perpetuated) and MMA winning MLG. In fact, due to GSL's format, most changes in winrate are likely to follow and lag behind foreign trends. With major events every week or 2 in the foreign scene, it's fairly volatile, but very indicative of meta game trends. When a pro has to play 40 games over 2-3 days, ideas and tactics are thrown relentlessly against one another for everybody to disect. It allows players to steal and adapt builds at an incredible rate. GSL being so drawn out lags behind because players have so long to abuse their prized strategies, while experimentation happens in depth, instead of breadth. Opinion: We're going to see a relative nosedive in Terran results in GSL where it will go well below 50%. Basically a backlash effect to Terran being overpopulated in GSL (and KR in general). Shifts in TvX metagame will catch up and P and Z will rapidly replace mediocre Ts from Code A and into S. By the end of the year, T will be the minority in GSL without any major metagame shifts or patch intervention. Finally, T is still the most popular race (i'd say the ratio is about 5-4-3 T/P/Z), so claiming that the most popular race would somehow become the least represented would show tremendous imbalance. June WAS their low. | ||
|
Trizz
Netherlands1318 Posts
I played 16 games and 13 of them were ZvZ. It's pissing me off.. | ||
|
Harmonious
179 Posts
On July 08 2011 23:04 Harmonious wrote: If I can make a prediction I think the raven will become more popular in TVT mech versus biomech. Mostly because biomech ends up as tank/maurader due to helions. Watch IMYoda v ZenexByun in the GSTL for an example of this. | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
On July 08 2011 23:20 SafeAsCheese wrote: Results are skewed by mass sometimes. What imbalances a GSL player faces will not be the same as what a MLG pool player faces, for example. If protoss found a build that was really hard to do, so that only 10 of the top protoss could pull it off but it had a 90% win rate, there would be problems, even though it could not effect the overall win rate. God, people are so impossible. *Shows Korean results* "Nah sample size too low" *Shows Korean + International results* "Nah skewed by mass" Not aiming solely at you but its so frustrating that whenever this kind of stuff gets posted people will try as hard as hell to discredit them(not that there is nothing wrong with checking sources and methodology) but I just feel that people just want to see someone that agrees with their perception >_> But you are right, the balance at different skill levels should be accounted for, I am just frustrated because the OP had already separated the GSL and the int scene stats and people told him they were not valid because the sample size was too low >_> | ||
|
ampson
United States2355 Posts
| ||
|
tzenes
Canada64 Posts
| ||
|
covetousrat
2109 Posts
| ||
|
Adventurekid
Sweden505 Posts
| ||
|
pmp10
3285 Posts
On August 06 2012 17:08 covetousrat wrote: Where are the charts for July? None out yet. There not that indicative anyway. Last I seen Korean winrates were equal and so was international PvZ. On the other hand international TvZ was almost 60% in zergs favor. | ||
|
Yello
Germany7411 Posts
On August 06 2012 17:08 covetousrat wrote: Where are the charts for July? Why the hell do you ask this in the May 2011 thread? You are more then a year off. | ||
|
covetousrat
2109 Posts
On August 06 2012 18:35 Yello wrote: Why the hell do you ask this in the May 2011 thread? You are more then a year off. Lol cant find the thread for june 2012 | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Online Event
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
SOOP
sOs vs Percival
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
