|
On May 11 2014 13:56 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. Source of that information? Based on aligulac April 2011 (list 30) 102 PvP, 140 TvT, 122 ZvZ August 2011 (list 40) 197 PvP, 310 TvT, 250 ZvZ January 2012 (list 50) 125 PvP, 131 TvT, 244 ZvZ
You can't use mirrors to determine prevalence because they're biased by winrates. Those more likely to win have a more likely chance to play each other in additional rounds. The concept of GomTvT.
|
On May 11 2014 17:16 Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 13:56 keglu wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. Source of that information? Based on aligulac April 2011 (list 30) 102 PvP, 140 TvT, 122 ZvZ August 2011 (list 40) 197 PvP, 310 TvT, 250 ZvZ January 2012 (list 50) 125 PvP, 131 TvT, 244 ZvZ You can't use mirrors to determine prevalence because they're biased by winrates. Those more likely to win have a more likely chance to play each other in additional rounds. The concept of GomTvT.
Take a look at nios.kr or sc2stats.com.
The race distribution over all is pretty even:http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/race
But terran is less represented at higher leagues. This trend includes GM and even tournaments.
The explanation is either that terran players over all are just worse or terran is harder. I think the second explanation is better.
|
On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other).
That's not true anymore, aligulac has been taking into account the early stages of tournaments for quite a while now.
|
On May 11 2014 21:52 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). That's not true anymore, aligulac has been taking into account the early stages of tournaments for quite a while now.
Can you link some documentation about this?
|
On May 11 2014 22:47 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 21:52 Nebuchad wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). That's not true anymore, aligulac has been taking into account the early stages of tournaments for quite a while now. Can you link some documentation about this?
I don't think I can, and I wouldn't say every early game for every tournament is there, in many cases only the games where the two players are already known to the database are computed. Then again, even like that, that's already a fairly large amount of early rounds games (I got 8125 results asking for "early rounds" in the search engine)
|
On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance
lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
|
On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
Terran Total (60,916 Users)
Zerg Total (60,218 Users)
Protoss Total (58,456 Users)
Random Total (19,094 Users)
Yup, checks out!
|
On May 11 2014 23:44 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. Terran Total (60,916 Users) Zerg Total (60,218 Users) Protoss Total (58,456 Users) Random Total (19,094 Users) Yup, checks out!
Is that active players? Lol, I thought starcraft was supposed to be dying :D
|
Terran Total (60,916 Users)
Zerg Total (60,218 Users)
Protoss Total (58,456 Users)
Random Total (19,094 Users)
Yup, checks out!
And one could presume thats just 1 server?
|
Terran has always been on par with Zerg and Toss in terms of overall representation in the global player pool, and underrepresented in the pro scene. Even during the GomTvT era, it was a small contingent of players dominating whereas with Lings of Liberty and Heart of Aiur, you have a new patch player every week.
I severely doubt it will happen, but DK and the design team should take a deep look at some of the fundamental flaws with SC2 and work on increasing ways that great Zerg/Toss pros can differentiate themselves from your typical GM player. I can't tell the difference in skill between the top 20 protoss players in the world, but you can sure as hell tell the difference between Maru or Innnovation and someone like Ryung, Alive, etc...
|
Honestly I'm not going to say Terran is bad(Code S).
Protoss got three brand new air units; MSC, Corsair, and the flying Tank. Plus, whatever they added to Voidray. Seems like overkill since they still have Carrier and Phoenix.
The Meta is currently pretty bad, since terran has not many option(0-15 minutes).Reaper, Mines, Drops, Expand, don't commit, Block third, don't get out teched cause they always go for HT or Robo and have a lot of naturally cloak units. 2 types of detection, a spell that shuts down nearly all early game harass and seems to last 2+ minutes(banshee, small drops).
I am expecting to win games with Ghost/BC or I'll quit this game just like WoW Dota2 and that stupid mud I used to play years ago good riddance.
|
On May 12 2014 01:02 Caas wrote:Show nested quote +Terran Total (60,916 Users)
Zerg Total (60,218 Users)
Protoss Total (58,456 Users)
Random Total (19,094 Users)
Yup, checks out! And one could presume thats just 1 server?
No that's global. http://nios.kr/
|
On May 12 2014 01:12 tskarzyn wrote:
Terran has always been on par with Zerg and Toss in terms of overall representation in the global player pool, and underrepresented in the pro scene. Even during the GomTvT era, it was a small contingent of players dominating whereas with Lings of Liberty and Heart of Aiur, you have a new patch player every week.
I severely doubt it will happen, but DK and the design team should take a deep look at some of the fundamental flaws with SC2 and work on increasing ways that great Zerg/Toss pros can differentiate themselves from your typical GM player. I can't tell the difference in skill between the top 20 protoss players in the world, but you can sure as hell tell the difference between Maru or Innnovation and someone like Ryung, Alive, etc...
Simply not true, there were several seasons of code S where terrans had the majority of players. It was not just a small contingent, it was a new terran player having success every season. Certainly there were players that stood out, but Terran in general was simply over-represented for a long period of time.
|
On May 12 2014 01:12 tskarzyn wrote:
Terran has always been on par with Zerg and Toss in terms of overall representation in the global player pool, and underrepresented in the pro scene. Even during the GomTvT era, it was a small contingent of players dominating whereas with Lings of Liberty and Heart of Aiur, you have a new patch player every week.
Uhuh.
SC2 balance discussions are case studies on the influence of religious mysticism. The fact Alive ever won anything is a crime against humanity.
|
On May 12 2014 00:22 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 23:44 Chaggi wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. Terran Total (60,916 Users) Zerg Total (60,218 Users) Protoss Total (58,456 Users) Random Total (19,094 Users) Yup, checks out! Is that active players? Lol, I thought starcraft was supposed to be dying :D
It's lower than it used to be but yeah, 200,000 people have played at least one 1v1 ladder game this season.
|
Northern Ireland26416 Posts
On May 12 2014 03:11 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 01:12 tskarzyn wrote:
Terran has always been on par with Zerg and Toss in terms of overall representation in the global player pool, and underrepresented in the pro scene. Even during the GomTvT era, it was a small contingent of players dominating whereas with Lings of Liberty and Heart of Aiur, you have a new patch player every week.
Uhuh. SC2 balance discussions are case studies on the influence of religious mysticism. The fact Alive ever won anything is a crime against humanity.
Alive was such a baller at his peak 
|
On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy.
As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game.
Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me.
|
On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss.
I love how somewhere along the way that became our fault.
|
On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me.
If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER
|
On May 12 2014 07:10 HuHEN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2014 04:45 SirPinky wrote:On May 11 2014 23:25 tskarzyn wrote:On May 11 2014 06:42 eusoc wrote:On May 08 2014 09:48 Kitaen wrote:On May 07 2014 01:16 Hider wrote:On May 06 2014 23:25 Orek wrote:On May 06 2014 22:41 Ghanburighan wrote:On May 06 2014 21:19 Heavenlee wrote:Lol this mutineer guy. According to aligulac, based on major and premier tournaments, PvT was 47.82% and TvZ 44.22%. So even favored in TvP. Not exactly 33% winrate like your magical math seems to indicate. That's statistics for you. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ I concur with the general criticism of how he argues, but if you distance yourself sufficiently, there's a point to what he's saying. Also from the Aligulac stats you can see that there are at least twice as many ZvZ and PvP games than TvT games in tournaments. This means that the T population has been pushed down (this doesn't mean that the actual number of players is different, it just says that they do not reach later stages of tournaments to compete against each other). A theoretical consequence of this is that the winrates that you quote come about when the very best terrans (arbitrarily and for illustration, let's call them the top 10 of the world), compete against the very best P and Z, and also mediocre P and Z (once again only for illustration, let's double the population due to Aligulac stats, and say top 20 P and Z). This means that ideally, the winrate ought to be higher for T. The problem is, we do not know what the equal T meets equal P/Z winrate is because there's no way to measure the skill of a player. All we can say is that T populations are worryingly low, and the current winrates suggest that no repopulation will occur. OK. Now I get it. He just needed a good translator like you. By the way, is there a way to know how many mirror match-ups are played per month in Aligulac? I can find them in lists, but those are per 14 days. As for non-mirror match-ups, Terran related match-up has been the least played one since freaking February 2012, which is even before the notorious queen patch. That is, TvZ + PvT < TvZ + ZvP and ZvP + PvT for the last 20 months. Same stats for mirror isn't available in Aligulac as far as I know, but it must be similar. Low number of Terran games is quite alarming for sure. Edit: I meant February 2012, not September Regardless though, there is a problem with the way he argues. He asks other people to do the math (without having done it himself), and for some reason he claims that the answer to (the math he hasn't done) is 33/67. Without having done the math myself, I am quite convinced that it is nowhere that low. I think terran win/rates are more likely to be reduced by 5 percentage point or something like that, but too some extent it also depends on the assumptions you make before you adjust the win/rates. as stated before, the biggest lie of mr kim and all aligulac statistics is the simple fact that ladder and tournament systems will always balance out at a near 50-50 win rate. it is supposed to work that way. that does not mean that there is no imbalance. the 60-70 terrans that are not GM anymore still have a 50-50 win rate, but not in the highest league, now they compete in masters and code A/B. if you would let all previous GM's play each other in a 5000 player pool there surely would be a 60-40 win ratio across the board for pvt and zvt. it's not that suddenly all protoss and zergs have figured out the game so much better than their terran pendants, neither was it the other way round when hellbats were OP or throughout 2011 when terrans dominated. one word on the topic itsself. terran is doing poorly because it's way to easy to defend vs early aggression (with MSC, queens, etc). that alone would maybe not be biggest deal but paired with the fact that you are vulnerable to a plethora of timings and all ins yourself makes the whole metagame not only seem unbalanced but frustrating aswell. and with frustration comes bad play. and i can assure you that you need to play absolutely flawless to hold all ins as a terran. zerg is a little bit more forgiving and protoss requires the least of "on the edge" play. (note that it's not easy for any race, but if you had to rank it, i'd do it in that order) I disagree. You assume that there are equal numbers of players for each race and terran is pushed to the bottom while zerg and protoss get higher. This has never been true. Even in early WoL Terran has been the race used the least either because it's more frustrating(never met a terran player admitting the opponent played better) or more boring. I actually think that the pool of top players that aligulac takes is representative of the overall population. If there are less Terrans overall aligulac winrates are representative of the balance lololol, you do realize that there are currently more Terran players in the overall player pool than any other race? It really is amusing to see people trying to convince themselves that the Sun revolves around the Earth despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. I can't believe there are still people out there trying to hide behind overall statistics to cushion and/or vindicate their belief in abusing their race with a low skill cap (i.e. MSC; proxy oracle; proxy DT; 1-or- 2 base blink all-in; proxy v-ray all-in; 2-base immortal all-in; 2-base colo all-in; or there is the good ol' "feign" aggression into double forge while your Terran opponent makes 4 useless bunkers. As for Zerg: Roach/bane all-in; bane bust; 3-base roach 1-1 all-in. All these tactics are extremely easy to excute. As someone mentioned before I have trouble seeing the skill difference between some Code S Protoss versus a random GM Protoss. Terran is a dying race; they die very easily to any number of these all-ins, which most Gold or Platinum levels can execute. There is little ability to punish races like Protoss when all they have to do is click a button on their Nexus and their base is defended for 60 seconds. This is supposed to be a strategy game - I don't see something like that involving any sort of strategy. As for statistics, you need to look at the higher skill levels. Most people that pick up this game say "gee, I'm going to try the "human" race because I identify closely to them." You'll see this mentality at the lower levels until people realize how difficult they are to play, with little early aggression options and a terrible late game. Looking at my server (NA) GM the other day, there were 3 Terran in the first 45 players. I couldn't help but laugh out loud when I saw that. And total 43 compared to approximately 80 P and 80 Z. But I'm sure you're going to throw out another statistic why this occurs, right? I'm sure you are one of those people that there could be zero Terran players left and somehow validate why there is nothing wrong with the race. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sick of playing Z and P all day long and watching Protoss right click on a building to defend and Zergs walking away from their computers after they plant SH in front of my base until i have enough Raven energy to move out. It doesn't sound like there is much strategy involved to me. If you've played sc2 since it came out, you will know that EVERY race has experienced this kind of imbalance for periods of time. To just dwell on the fact that your race is weak RIGHT NOW is to totally sell yourself short and lose sight of what YOU CAN do to improve. I have played toss since sc2 came out and trust me, its been the other way around about as much as its been how it is now, but my race being the weakest has NEVER stopped me from being able to win. It can be frustrating, but it doesn't change the fact, I need to improve MY play, and that's all there is, NEVER has balance been the only thing holding me back from improvement. ABSOLUTELY NEVER
And so you don't need to improve the balance still ? Because you had a rought time for 3 month in WoL, terran should suffer the same for nearly 2 years ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
