EPTStill has the most GM players on all and more Masters than Terran on most servers.
And some guy named NaNiwa is #1 EU and also worldwide.
Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1108
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Still has the most GM players on all and more Masters than Terran on most servers. And some guy named NaNiwa is #1 EU and also worldwide. | ||
|
SuperHofmann
Italy1741 Posts
On September 23 2014 18:53 Big J wrote: On another note according to sc2ranks.com, Protoss is now the least played race in all leagues under Master/GM on all servers! Still has the most GM players on all and more Masters than Terran on most servers. And some guy named NaNiwa is #1 EU and also worldwide. He is Lilbow | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Ah ok.  | ||
|
Bazik
Portugal104 Posts
Now if this happens all over the ladder then the reason becomes harder to attribute to understanding, since that would mean that the race as a whole does not understand the match up. This usually happens right after a big change where the players still haven't learned how to react to the changes. Having said that if enough time is given (in my opinion a few months should be enough tho some might say a lifetime isn't enough [read broodwar players  ]) the results should normalize into a near 50% win rate across the board.Now what happens in the middle of the ladder is even more surprising in that if one race becomes weaker than another the 3rd race is also affected because to keep your 50% win rate the ladder puts with players of similar overall strength (race strength + player skill). As soon has that reshuffling of the ladder happens the C race will be affected by making the player play against players with similar race strength but increased skill because those players from race A are being pulled down from of the A/B Match up while players of less skill from race B are being pulled up from the match up B/A. And all this results in 50% win rate, yet while playing one of the math ups will feel normal(C/B), C/A will feel slightly unfavored. Edit to fix some grammar and remove unnecessary text. | ||
|
LSN
Germany696 Posts
On September 23 2014 18:53 Big J wrote: On another note according to sc2ranks.com, Protoss is now the least played race in all leagues under Master/GM on all servers! Still has the most GM players on all and more Masters than Terran on most servers. And some guy named NaNiwa is #1 EU and also worldwide. All the pure casual 1-5 games per week players that I know deny playing protoss as it was considered to be the easiest race. They'd rather play zerg/terran in silver than protoss in low gold league. I am quite sure that this general race bias amongst the SC2 population is responsible for this. Note: I am not stating my opinions here but my observations. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
Like way more than I used to. I think it's getting in fashion to play Terran again. | ||
|
r691175002
249 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9jn1ilX.png) Check out that sick 104 ZvZ mirrors as well. If you have spent the last 10 pages of this thread posting aligulac winrates for 3 days of play I hope you reconsider your position on the matter. | ||
|
sibs
635 Posts
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/Ae0AMgz.jpg) This only has ro8+ games registered from premier tournaments, TvZ is 3 standard deviations off. Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/2h3xta/winrates_by_matchup_in_the_top_8_of_tournaments/ | ||
|
r691175002
249 Posts
On September 23 2014 22:35 sibs wrote: That aligulac period started 5 days ago. (PvT lol) This only has ro8+ games registered from premier tournaments, TvZ is 3 standard deviations off. Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/2h3xta/winrates_by_matchup_in_the_top_8_of_tournaments/ I hope you realize he calculated standard deviation by assuming the outcome of every game should be a perfect coinflip. That is not statistically sound, and is literally no different from making a number up. He also arbitrarily chose the ro8 cutoff in a set of tournaments that are empirically Terran favored by aligulac score. This guy is a clown who spent 2 months in statistics 101. | ||
|
RaFox17
Finland4581 Posts
On September 23 2014 22:30 r691175002 wrote: Oh look at that, wait one day and it looks like Zergs are beating everyone again. Boy that metagame shifts fast... Check out that sick 104 ZvZ mirrors as well. If you have spent the last 10 pages of this thread posting aligulac winrates for 3 days of play I hope you reconsider your position on the matter. Looks like protoss needs to be buffed against terran. Quite OP. | ||
|
ETisME
12283 Posts
On September 23 2014 22:30 r691175002 wrote: Oh look at that, wait one day and it looks like Zergs are beating everyone again. Boy that metagame shifts fast... Check out that sick 104 ZvZ mirrors as well. If you have spent the last 10 pages of this thread posting aligulac winrates for 3 days of play I hope you reconsider your position on the matter. oct 1 isn't even here yet... can't you just wait for a week more before you post some "convincing" stats? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 23 2014 22:30 r691175002 wrote: Oh look at that, wait one day and it looks like Zergs are beating everyone again. Boy that metagame shifts fast... Check out that sick 104 ZvZ mirrors as well. If you have spent the last 10 pages of this thread posting aligulac winrates for 3 days of play I hope you reconsider your position on the matter. ... Check out some of the important tournaments that contribute to those stats: http://aligulac.com/results/events/34350-SEAcraft-Weekly-/#21/ 0 PvP, 0 TvT, 17 ZvZ http://aligulac.com/results/events/34313-TeSL-2014-2015-Season-1-Qualifier/ 0 PvP, 0 TvT, 10 ZvZ http://aligulac.com/results/events/33729-ACL-2014-Online-Series-Qualifier-/#3/ 0 PvP, 0 TvT, 5 ZvZ ... Australia rocks!!! I'd especially watch out for Ian. That guy has a rivalry with AK... Oh my god. That's really important for balance! | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
On September 23 2014 22:43 r691175002 wrote: a set of tournaments that are empirically Terran favored by aligulac score. What does that mean? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
It means that the stats obviously show that Terran is winning those tournaments and therefore we should assume that it is OK for Terran to win those tournaments. Meanwhile in the GSL Terran by empirical measure been stomped for a long time, so 2 Terrans in the Ro4 means a massive imbalance :D | ||
|
sibs
635 Posts
On September 23 2014 22:43 r691175002 wrote: I hope you realize he calculated standard deviation by assuming the outcome of every game should be a perfect coinflip. That is not statistically sound, and is literally no different from making a number up. He also arbitrarily chose the ro8 cutoff in a set of tournaments that are empirically Terran favored by aligulac score. This guy is a clown who spent 2 months in statistics 101. If you assume equal skill and equal race strength shouldn't that be your hypothesis? Ofc terran will be favored by aligulac score, the top 5 terrans are ranked higher than the top zerg. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
Would people play differently? Would we keep trying new strategies to improve the way the game is played? Would we stop accepting that one race "should" lose to a certain composition and figure out new ways of playing against it? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 24 2014 06:26 DinoMight wrote: I wonder what everyone's take on the game would be if we had no access to statistics and were simply told by blizzard that "the game is balanced based on their analysis." Would people play differently? Would we keep trying new strategies to improve the way the game is played? Would we stop accepting that one race "should" lose to a certain composition and figure out new ways of playing against it? I dont see how my strategy choice is connected with statistics about winrates. When refining my play I do it purely based on replay analysis and proplays. And yeah, since Im not at the very top of the ladder, it's pretty straightforward to identify ways to play better. Also I'm hardly trying "new" strategies these days. There's not a lot you can do differently that hasn't been around - in terms of macro play and everything else is disgusting to begin with. Though you can alaways refine something old. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On September 24 2014 06:41 Big J wrote: I dont see how my strategy choice is connected with statistics about winrates. When refining my play I do it purely based on replay analysis and proplays. And yeah, since Im not at the very top of the ladder, it's pretty straightforward to identify ways to play better. Also I'm hardly trying "new" strategies these days. There's not a lot you can do differently that hasn't been around - in terms of macro play and everything else is disgusting to begin with. Though you can alaways refine something old. in terms of macro play and everything else is disgusting to begin with No it is not | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On September 24 2014 06:41 Big J wrote: I dont see how my strategy choice is connected with statistics about winrates. When refining my play I do it purely based on replay analysis and proplays. And yeah, since Im not at the very top of the ladder, it's pretty straightforward to identify ways to play better. Also I'm hardly trying "new" strategies these days. There's not a lot you can do differently that hasn't been around - in terms of macro play and everything else is disgusting to begin with. Though you can alaways refine something old. Well, for example if people were told that "other Zergs" don't have an issue with these Widow Mines for instance and the game looked "balanced..." wouldn't you try harder to split your lings and improve your gameplay rather than resorting to cheese or just balance whining? Sure, we're all told that Templar openings are bad and they can't work "because Widow Mines" and then shown statistics of how T>P in the last few tourneys..... but I've seen MC and PartinG do it, and I do it all the time on ladder. | ||
|
jojos11
Korea (North)314 Posts
On September 24 2014 07:40 DinoMight wrote: Well, for example if people were told that "other Zergs" don't have an issue with these Widow Mines for instance and the game looked "balanced..." wouldn't you try harder to split your lings and improve your gameplay rather than resorting to cheese or just balance whining? Sure, we're all told that Templar openings are bad and they can't work "because Widow Mines" and then shown statistics of how T>P in the last few tourneys..... but I've seen MC and PartinG do it, and I do it all the time on ladder. just because MC and PartinG did it doesnt mean its viable.its like saying mech are viable in TvP because bbyong did it a few times. | ||
| ||
