|
On September 23 2011 02:02 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2011 01:58 HubertFelix wrote: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. 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.
Well.....Zerg race will remain broken at platinum and lower forever, no matter how balanced/op they are at pro lvl.
Just because of the way droning works, you will keep playing people 2 leagues below you until you start understanding so much of the game and figure out so many timings and scouting.
So i can't see Z qq ever stopping, on lower lvl.
|
guess this just reinforces that game balance is basically irrelevant sub masters
|
Eh, numbers don't look like too big a deal, shoudl've shortened it to GM only then maybe it'd mean a little more.
Things most likely to change now that the patch is hit.
|
who gives a shit about lower leagues anyway? I am low league but balance is for progamers. Wake up Blizzard
|
sorry double post... browser freaked out. T_T
|
We should also consider these are from ladder. GOM and others uses different maps. There might be a possibility that the maps GOM uses are terrible for protoss (as hinted by the recent map changes).
|
On September 23 2011 02:03 RavenLoud wrote:I bet that 59% TvZ is cus of 2 rax.  Non-proxy 2 rax is really easy to hold off though. I'm more willing to bet that it is marine tank timing pushes or mech rterran (which is ridiculously strong if the terran know to get a raven along with their army to counter burrowed roaches.)
|
Edit: Deleted (Browser being retarded, should be fixed now sorry)
|
On September 23 2011 02:07 monx wrote:
who gives a shit about lower leagues anyway? I am low league but balance is for progamers. Wake up Blizzard
Gotta balance those 13 minute cannon rushes against the 16 minute Battlecruiser rushes though!
|
So, I guess Zerg is hard to ladder with for NA and EU players? That wouldn't be so surprising. Players like DRG or Nestea can make ZvT or ZvP look easy, but there's a huge amount of practice and game knowledge that allows them to look so invincible. The typical Masters' Zerg in NA or EU will still lose to random cheese or 2 base all-ins. Hell, Idra loses to these all the time while laddering, not to mention tournaments.
On September 23 2011 01:58 HubertFelix wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Not really. The only players who complain are either Korean or foreigners playing in Korea. The people who complain on TL (like myself) are mostly sick of watching endless TvTs in Code S, and "good" Protosses getting rolled by mediocre Zergs and Terrans in the GSL.
Nobody complains about the ladder. Well, you can reasonably complain about shit like 1/1/1, which actually does affect people playing at Masters+, but in PvZ you can still kill the Zerg with gimmicky 2 base play really easily. Even WhiteRa rolled Ret in the MLG Global Invitational with the same all-in twice. But there's no way any of the top Korean Zergs would lose to stupid crap like that.
|
On September 23 2011 01:58 HubertFelix wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Maybe cuz you hear this from the top EU/NA pros - and they probably are way better than the average Masters+GM player and are therefore closer (skillwise) to the Koreans than the low Masters players are?
|
Of course ladder balance is retarded. Seen the maps? Of course TvZ is gonna look bad with close shattered in the pool. NEEDS MORE DAYBREAK.
|
These are numbers based on Blizz ladder maps? No thanks.
|
How long of a period is this data from?
It only says September 13 but idk exactly what they mean.
Blizz just takes forever to do anything (maybe not such a bad thing if it's game balance) but it's frustrating as hell to see Protoss getting smashed left and right in GSL and Blizz still trying to make changes to completely curb stomp 4-gate in PvP (the latest patch). In the case of the patches, it just makes them look 2 months behind the pro scene.
|
Belgium9950 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:55 Brotocol wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2011 01:48 MisterFred wrote:
Terran IMBA. Just look at the Korean numbers. Now imagine eliminating Korean masters and just going with GM. The numbers would probably get worse. Professional Terran dominance isn't a fluke. The race is just better. And I'm not exactly the easiest sell on this... I play random and Terran is my worst race, but it's still clear to me.
Lower than high masters - don't make me laugh. MMR should keep everything near 50%. Everything else is metagame shift, but honestly, who cares, all those players will have about 50% win rate and the meta game will never be constant because they aren't good enough to smooth it out. Well said. I also want to point out that matchmaking makes all winrates tend toward 50%. * The only case where this does not apply is tournaments, where matchmaking is not done algorithmically. * The definition of balance means that, for 2 players of the same skill level, the game should be perfectly even. How do we isolate the skill level variable? We can't. But the closest we can do is make some assumptions: (1) There is less variability (lower std. deviation) in the highest tournaments and (2) The more up to date a given scene's metagame is, the more viable it is. Thus, we really should be looking at GSL for the closest picture of balance that we can get, as it's the closest situation in terms of reflecting equal skill levels (tapering off on the high end, and thus not as highly variable as other tournaments/scenes), and metagame advancement. PS. A common misconception of "balance for the highest levels" is that imbalance doesn't affect lower leagues. It affects any game with equal skill level players, where one has to work harder than the other to achieve the same result. The entire "balance only affects the highest leagues" is wrong. It affects high leagues consistently, but can also happen, albeit inconsistently, at lower leagues. Say, for instance, take 2 silver league players who are playing at skill levels 100 and 95, respectively (hypothetical values of course). Meaning that one is outplaying the other. And yet, the latter opponent wins. That is imbalance. Verdict: This looks like damage control, as it misrepresents these stats as "raw stats," whereas in reality, matchmaking has influenced them heavily.
Yeah, I can't believe blizzard still hasn't understood that they're not working on raw data.
|
just to add to this, these adjusted winrates could look totally balanced even if grandmaster leagues had only 1 race in it
|
Why exactly does Blizzard think that ladder winrate percentages are an indication of balance, when they have themselves designed the ladder to match players so that their winrates are roughly 50%?
I mean, if for example Terran was to be made so underpowered that someone with Master's level 'skill' can barely hold their own vs mid-level Diamond Zerg & Protoss players, ladder stats would appear largely normal anyway? Am I missing something here?
|
It is amazing how many people in this thread have failed to read the very first paragraph of the blog
|
On September 23 2011 02:05 branflakes14 wrote:Show nested quote +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: Yeah but protoss players act like they have the sames issues as korean protoss on GSL. 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.
I don't see how GM would be any better. Every time I watch GM streams they usually seem to be playing against someone obviously inferior to them in skill. Even top GM vs. low GM would still have this problem.
|
On September 23 2011 02:10 Zombie_Velociraptor wrote:
Why exactly does Blizzard think that ladder winrate percentages are an indication of balance, when they have themselves designed the ladder to match players so that their winrates are roughly 50%?
I mean, if for example Terran was to be made so underpowered that someone with Master's level 'skill' can barely hold their own vs mid-level Diamond Zerg & Protoss players, ladder stats would appear largely normal anyway? Am I missing something here?
No you got it right.
Seems like Blizz is trying to let the community know they're aware of the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
