EPTBlizzard Blog: Balance Snapshot - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
QTIP.
United States2113 Posts
| ||
|
HubertFelix
France631 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:57 QTIP. wrote: I think what we are looking at here is the trickle-down effect. Metagame transfer Korean -> EU/NA takes some time. Yeah but protoss players act like they have the sames issues as korean protoss on GSL. | ||
|
Sated
England4983 Posts
| ||
|
Jesushooves
Canada553 Posts
Clearly incontrol's failure to win anything is due to balance. | ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
 | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
PvZ in Europe tough...WTF? | ||
|
Hikari
1914 Posts
I wonder if blizzard analyze the strategy employed in each victory. | ||
|
QTIP.
United States2113 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:58 HubertFelix wrote: Yeah but protoss players act like they have the sames issues as korean protoss on GSL. Same thing could be said for Zerg players when everyone but FD was winning. Pointless statement. I remember when the first game came out, Zerg's were quoting Idra in Platinum League. | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
| ||
|
1st_Panzer_Div.
United States621 Posts
I feel like these numbers are a terrible way to measure balance. If Blizzard's ladder system works; your mmr should be adjusting so that you win 50% of your games. If your race is OP, you will climb artifically higher, however you will play better opponents to keep your win ratio at 50%. If your race is UP, you will lose to opponents you shouldn't and thus move down on the ladder until you win 50% of your games. I think looking at tourney results is a better method; not just the GSL, and actually the top 2-4 players in a tourney matter less then looking at earlier rounds when you have a lot of usually close skilled players from a nice range of master to pro. (Also I have no idea how they could nerf protoss deathball 1a at lower levels without ruining balance completely in higher levels. Oh wait, they could remove the collossi and use a reaver instead) | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
Give it another 2 months. If the GSL is filled with only terrans then we can start to worry. | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
| ||
|
hotwings
42 Posts
Blizzard y u no make sense >:o | ||
|
RoboBob
United States798 Posts
Korean Zergs probably just have more games than their NA+EU counterparts so they know more timings. And Korean Protoss...well we know there isn't much talent there to begin with. | ||
|
Tofugrinder
Austria899 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:52 Shewklad wrote: Yes, the people on Sotg might want you to think that. the only real important figure is Korean Master/GM. everything else is just not representative and should not be looked at | ||
|
Tsubbi
Germany7996 Posts
basically the two variables skill and race determine the chance of winning, none of which can be measured because they influence each other blizzard has this obscure algorithm and tries to guess player skills independet of their race, but their only data is win loss ratios playing with a specific race a much easier approach and more interesting numbers to me personally are grandmaster race distribution and win/loss ratios between grandmaster players, would love to see those numbers | ||
|
Soleron
United Kingdom1324 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:58 Sated wrote: Pretty sure tournaments are the only legit values to use. The ladder tries to balance people to 50% win/loss so the numbers are irrelevant. It says "adjusted". Last time they did this they explained that this factored in skill to avoid the problem you are talking about. | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:58 Sated wrote:The ladder tries to balance people to 50% win/loss so the numbers are irrelevant. No the ladder trying to keep 50% is irrelevant, it does not do that per matchup. You can have a very high win rate in one and very low in another, to even out around 50%. | ||
|
galivet
288 Posts
I really only care about balance at the pro level since that's what determines the entertainment value of the tournament games I pay to watch. So even the Masters + GM tier is not really relevant for me. I would be looking at top-twenty GM across each region combined with actual tournament results (since not every pro bothers to ladder). | ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:58 Sated wrote: Pretty sure tournaments are the only legit values to use. The ladder tries to balance people to 50% win/loss so the numbers are irrelevant. EDIT: I'm not stupid, I know that I don't have those problems at my level because there are so many other things that come into effect at my level (like not being able to micro well, or getting supply blocked too often). However, the game shouldn't be balanced according to my level, it should be balanced according to the pro-level - that's the only way SC2 can be a legitimate e-sport! Gotta agree with this. And weighing master league wins as heavily as GM wins is like weighing a code A win as heavily as a code S win. | ||
| ||
