EPTSeason 3 Ladder Map Changes (Official) - Page 45
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mellon
Sweden917 Posts
| ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:15 babishh wrote: what really annoys me is that they do not consider maps made by the map makers community. They do, as evident from the decision to include Tal'Darim. It's just that we can't expect Blizzard to just put in every single community map out there, especially considering they're already having issues with balance on the first one they put in. Besides that, there aren't that many good maps to choose from besides the GSL maps and iCCup Testbug. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:19 Gamegene wrote: They do, as evident from the decision to include Tal'Darim. It's just that we can't expect Blizzard to just put in every single community map out there, especially considering they're already having issues with balance on the first one they put in. Besides that, there aren't that many good maps to choose from besides the GSL maps and iCCup Testbug. Apologize and go to the Maps Forum... If you can't find 20+ playable maps there, I guess you won't find a single one in the ladder pool. Just take the last Map of the Month (MotM #7): you will find at least 5 great maps in that thread... And you really think Tal'darim has balancing issues just because blizzard uses masterleague stats instead of Tournament stats. Besides the following quote: I am in masterleague and the standard there is pretty bad. Terrans can all-in and spread marines, Protoss can Forcefield and cheese and Zergs can ecocheese and scout. That's it for 95% of the games. + Show Spoiler + On July 26 2011 15:56 Djagulingu wrote: Well, we can use a veto on that, I guess. Speaking of vetoes, are the other maps good so that we don't have to use 5 vetoes? Let's see Tal'darim's TLPD stats: Tal'darim Altar: Korean: TvZ: 8-3 (72%) ZvP: 5-4 (55.6%) International: TvZ: 49-64 (43.4%) ZvP: 46-49 (48.4%) Tal'darim Altar LE: Korean: TvZ: 17-18 (48.6%) ZvP: 9-14 (39.1%) International: TvZ: 88-103 (46.1%) ZvP: 66-75 (46.8%) Again, what were you saying about Tal'darim? | ||
|
PET
Romania430 Posts
 For once, it's damn old. I'm bored of it. Second, it was very imbalanced... ye ye I know some of you will say "It's a map played in tournaments, it's a map bla bla bla". Face it. Everything depended on where you spawned. Matchup changed by how you are spawned. Third, you didn't had where to fight... every game seemed the same. I casted a ton of games on Metaloplis, sometimes even 4-5 games PER NIGHT in only 1 tournaments. All the games were the same. Fourth, people always take into argument "X map is still there?" "Y map sux". I have seen more awesome matches on Backwater than i saw on Metalopolis. And you really think Tal'darim has balancing issues just because blizzard uses masterleague stats instead of Tournament stats. That's what mathers. The MASTER LEAGUE stats and not the tournament stats. We will play X map on the ladder mostly and not in tournaments since tournaments usualy get their own maps anyway. | ||
A.J.
United States209 Posts
On July 26 2011 22:13 ThaSlayer wrote: Seems blizzard is trying too hard to appease bronzeys and silveys Bronzeys and silveys seem to be a large percentage of the people who play Starcraft 2. | ||
|
sh4w
United States713 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:35 PET wrote: I think I'm the only one who is happy with Metalopolis removal For once, it's damn old. I'm bored of it. Second, it was very imbalanced... ye ye I know some of you will say "It's a map played in tournaments, it's a map bla bla bla". Face it. Everything depended on where you spawned. Matchup changed by how you are spawned. Third, you didn't had where to fight... every game seemed the same. I casted a ton of games on Metaloplis, sometimes even 4-5 games PER NIGHT in only 1 tournaments. All the games were the same. Fourth, people always take into argument "X map is still there?" "Y map sux". I have seen more awesome matches on Backwater than i saw on Metalopolis. I am also happy with this. The map is not that great, I'm not sure what this backlash is about. I am much more worried about the maps coming in than going out. Would love to see a bigger version of metal. . | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:32 Big J wrote: Apologize and go to the Maps Forum... If you can't find 20+ playable maps there, I guess you won't find a single one in the ladder pool. Just take the last Map of the Month (MotM #7): you will find at least 5 great maps in that thread... And you really think Tal'darim has balancing issues just because blizzard uses masterleague stats instead of Tournament stats. Besides the following quote: I am in masterleague and the standard there is pretty bad. Terrans can all-in and spread marines, Protoss can Forcefield and cheese and Zergs can ecocheese and scout. That's it for 95% of the games. + Show Spoiler + On July 26 2011 15:56 Djagulingu wrote: Well, we can use a veto on that, I guess. Speaking of vetoes, are the other maps good so that we don't have to use 5 vetoes? Let's see Tal'darim's TLPD stats: Tal'darim Altar: Korean: TvZ: 8-3 (72%) ZvP: 5-4 (55.6%) International: TvZ: 49-64 (43.4%) ZvP: 46-49 (48.4%) Tal'darim Altar LE: Korean: TvZ: 17-18 (48.6%) ZvP: 9-14 (39.1%) International: TvZ: 88-103 (46.1%) ZvP: 66-75 (46.8%) Again, what were you saying about Tal'darim? + Show Spoiler + Just wanted to point out for the thread that while TLPD is totally awesome for what it is, you can't really get meaningful map balance statistics out of it because of the small numbers involved. Check out the binomial probability distribution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution. For a coinflip (i.e. perfectly balanced map 50%), one standard deviation = 1/sqrt(number of games). Meta 1.1 lists 296 games played. If I flip a coin 296 times one standard deviation will be about 6%. This means TLPDs 53.7% ZvT win ratio could be just as likely representing a sample that is 60% (hugely favored for Zerg) or 48% (slightly favored for Terran) with a 1/3 probability that the margin could be larger. This is why it is so important to have a humongous sample like blizzard should have (in theory) because the variance shrinks by the square root of total games (1% sigma = 10000 games!). This also has the additional effect of washing out the effect of steep skill differences that appear in tourney matchups that get reflected in TLPD. I hope this also reinforces the point that just because something 'feels' unbalanced anecdotally (I for one have awful TvZ on Metalopolis!), it really requires an unbiased large sample to determine accurately. tldr: just because a number sounds convincing, don't believe it! What were you saying about Tal'Darim? Anyways, I apologize. I phrased that wrong; it's more like there aren't enough good maps NOTABLE enough for Blizzard to actually pick them up. The community will always make incredible maps, but unless they get enough attention in tournaments they aren't even a possibility to the map devs. | ||
|
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
| ||
|
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
Dabbled around with the maps... they look interesting, at least, so that'll be fun for awhile. Not to fussed about metal going out either, there's nothing wrong with 'core' maps getting rotated out so long as something replaces it. Happened all the time in BW. | ||
|
EmilA
Denmark4618 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:46 Zorkmid wrote: I think that close spawns on shattered temple are WAY worse than metalopolis. Yeah, but removing close positions would probably fuck T's winrates over even harder. If Metalopolis is imbalanced in non-close, I couldn't see how Shattered would be any different. | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
| ||
|
FireFish
Denmark228 Posts
| ||
|
soso.501
32 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:32 Big J wrote: And you really think Tal'darim has balancing issues just because blizzard uses masterleague stats instead of Tournament stats. Since the map pool is for ladder and not a tournament, in a way it makes sense for them to use ladder stats instead of tournament stats. Similarly, I wouldn't expect the GSL to take ladder stats into consideration at all when making map choices for their league. Not that I necessarily agree with blizz that Tal'darim is imbalanced. | ||
|
ondik
Czech Republic2908 Posts
On the other hand, used to Blizz policy I somehow expected worse things to happen, like getting rid of taldarim+shakuras, having slag pits and DQ stay, etc. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:42 Gamegene wrote: + Show Spoiler + Just wanted to point out for the thread that while TLPD is totally awesome for what it is, you can't really get meaningful map balance statistics out of it because of the small numbers involved. Check out the binomial probability distribution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution. For a coinflip (i.e. perfectly balanced map 50%), one standard deviation = 1/sqrt(number of games). Meta 1.1 lists 296 games played. If I flip a coin 296 times one standard deviation will be about 6%. This means TLPDs 53.7% ZvT win ratio could be just as likely representing a sample that is 60% (hugely favored for Zerg) or 48% (slightly favored for Terran) with a 1/3 probability that the margin could be larger. This is why it is so important to have a humongous sample like blizzard should have (in theory) because the variance shrinks by the square root of total games (1% sigma = 10000 games!). This also has the additional effect of washing out the effect of steep skill differences that appear in tourney matchups that get reflected in TLPD. I hope this also reinforces the point that just because something 'feels' unbalanced anecdotally (I for one have awful TvZ on Metalopolis!), it really requires an unbiased large sample to determine accurately. tldr: just because a number sounds convincing, don't believe it! What were you saying about Tal'Darim? Anyways, I apologize. I phrased that wrong; it's more like there aren't enough good maps NOTABLE enough for Blizzard to actually pick them up. The community will always make incredible maps, but unless they get enough attention in tournaments they aren't even a possibility to the map devs. yeah I know that kind of stuff pretty well... numbers are my profession. I just don't care about noobleague stats, so I rather use a small sample of high level players, than a sample of infinit games (which according to the rule of big numbers would mean that we are working with the exact limit) being played on master level. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:51 soso.501 wrote: Since the map pool is for ladder and not a tournament, in a way it makes sense for them to use ladder stats instead of tournament stats. Similarly, I wouldn't expect the GSL to take ladder stats into consideration at all when making map choices for their league. Not that I necessarily agree with blizz that Tal'darim is imbalanced. Then they should make a map pool for every league... I just doesn't make sense to take masterlevel players, when only 10percent of the top500 players (that's not an exact number, just a very poor estimate) are there. | ||
|
Zorkmid
4410 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:49 EmilA wrote: Yeah, but removing close positions would probably fuck T's winrates over even harder. If Metalopolis is imbalanced in non-close, I couldn't see how Shattered would be any different. I don't think that making a map like 80-20 in one spawn position and 30-70 in another is a good way to balance......Should aim for 50 in all positions. Shouldnt we? | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:52 Big J wrote: yeah I know that kind of stuff pretty well... numbers are my profession. I just don't care about noobleague stats, so I rather use a small sample of high level players, than a sample of infinit games (which according to the rule of big numbers would mean that we are working with the exact limit) being played on master level. and Tal’darim Altar, has a heavy (60%+) bias toward zerg at the highest levels of play. | ||
|
Checkered
Australia14 Posts
On July 27 2011 00:49 DooMDash wrote: Take close positions out of those maps and all of a sudden a Zerg nerf incoming hah. If your statement proved true then that would be the smart way to balance the game. The way you can play zerg cross positions is very different from close. Your macro options are way different, blizzard should balance not just by winrate but by actual game balance. If you're trying to make zerg playstyle be balanced in close and far positions then balancing would get a lot more difficult, and it's certainly imba atmo. | ||
|
BigJuiceBox
United Kingdom36 Posts
| ||
| ||
