EPTBlizzard Blog: Balance Snapshot - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
vojnik
Macedonia923 Posts
| ||
|
Sueco
Sweden283 Posts
| ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:07 tyrless wrote: Anybody who is convinced by those most meaningless numbers is in fact ignorant and uneducated to basic statistical analysis. Which most of the whiners in this thread are, not to mention the terrible reading comprehension I'm seeing (there are actually people here bringing up the matchmaking system in their arguments). Sometimes I forget that there are just a lot of uneducated/inexperienced kids posting here. Sorry haters but Blizzard does in fact have people who are much smarter/more experienced than you who work fulltime on this. I would agree with you that statistically Code S having the race representation it does doesn't necessarily mean anything. What statistics can't tell you is how stupid looking and unfair some of the matchups look, TvP far more than TvZ/ZvP with the exception of possibly MVP v July with the ghosts. When I see mutalisks dancing around a Terran push looking for stray units, that looks fair. When I see a certain terran get utterly dominated by a Protoss in a macro game, and then decide to do a 1/1/1 allin twice in a row to try and pick up an easy win(2 seasons in a row), I realize that the statistics really are quite meaningless. It's very hard/impossible for blizzard to do this with ladder, but looking at the manner in which games are won and lost at the highest level can be quite telling. | ||
|
Brotocol
243 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:00 EnderSword wrote: That's non-sensical. Certain elements of the game require more and less skill, and there may be imbalance at different levels of play. Take a few examples... The MarineKing: A Terran and Zerg are fighting, and 10 banelings begin rolling towards 20 marines on creep. At Bronze level, 20 marines are going to die At Plat-Dia type level, some marines are likely going to die at MKP level, The 20 marines will be split into 20 groups and the banelings will do nothing. The HongUn: A Zerg and Protoss are fighting, 40 Roaches attack 30 Blink Stalkers At Bronze level, both armies basically get destroyed, the fight is simply determined by the concave. At Plat-Dia level, The Stalkers will edge it out, taking a lot of damage, blinking away some but losing many. At HongUn level all 30 stalkers will be blinked away perfectly as their shields run out, while HongUn reads a book about cashews. The DRG 6 Colossus and Gateway units march out as a deathball At Bronze level, the Protoss rolls over a horribly positioned zerg player, despite trapping his own zealots behind his Stalkers. 6 Infestors are killed with full energy because he A-moved them with the army. At Plat-Dia level, Several Colossus are NPed and FG coats the army...Zerg likely loses, but send Protoss packing back home to rebuild to fight again. At DRG level, you don't have a Deathball, you died at the 9-10 minute mark to a ling/roach faceroll supported by Infestors and ITs There's units and tactics the scale well, and those that do not. That's why it's so difficult to actually balance for everyone. What you're picking apart is my rough summary of how it "scales down." I neglected to mention some details, because I already addressed how it scales down. I refer you to my first post in this thread (p1). You're just dwelling on the expression "scales down." I used that to avoid repeating my paragraph. I'll reiterate below: I said that it's inconsistent at lower levels, but balance CAN affect lower levels, albeit not consistently. An example of this is 1-1-1. Can a platinum player lose due to balance? It's absolutely possible and definitely does happen. So lower levels are affected, although not uniformly. Hence why it should be balanced for the higher tiers, but that doesn't mean the lower tiers are completely unaffected. When people say "it doesn't affect me, I'm in gold," that's not correct. It can affect a gold or silver league player. Statements like "I'm only in Diamond, it doesn't affect me" are straight up wrong. In the very first post I made, I explained that it's not EVENLY scaled down, but it still did affect lower leagues. | ||
|
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:48 MisterFred wrote: 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. Exactly this is what i don't get... how the fuck is this supposed to show balance? Their matchmaking system deliberately evens everyone out. If they are basing balance on stats like these it's ridiculous. And don't tell me they magically remove the MMR effects and somehow get someones 'true' skill level decided. | ||
|
Zanno
United States1484 Posts
surprising, although i don't feel it should be | ||
|
Bro_Stone
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
repsac
91 Posts
fast, smart terrans are the best. | ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
If blizzard went into making 1.4 with this in mind, the changes in the patch boggle my mind lol. On September 23 2011 03:25 Bro_Stone wrote: Hmm... these stats basically mean nothing since the MMR is designed to keep players at 50-50 Did you even read any of it? Obviously not, so why are so commenting. | ||
|
tztztz
Germany314 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:19 Ownos wrote: People are just questioning the convenient effects of this black box adjustment. "Let me use this algorithm that I won't show you to conveniently demonstrate that all win rates are 50%." It all comes down to trusting their word.  i don't get why it's such a problem to trust their word. why has mistrust always have to be the default position? why has it to be "propaganda" an not just blizzard being so kind and releasing some stats? the math they're using is probably to complicated to understand for 99% of the people on this thread. | ||
|
Makura
United States317 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:00 EnderSword wrote: That's non-sensical. Certain elements of the game require more and less skill, and there may be imbalance at different levels of play. Take a few examples... The MarineKing: A Terran and Zerg are fighting, and 10 banelings begin rolling towards 20 marines on creep. At Bronze level, 20 marines are going to die At Plat-Dia type level, some marines are likely going to die at MKP level, The 20 marines will be split into 20 groups and the banelings will do nothing. The HongUn: A Zerg and Protoss are fighting, 40 Roaches attack 30 Blink Stalkers At Bronze level, both armies basically get destroyed, the fight is simply determined by the concave. At Plat-Dia level, The Stalkers will edge it out, taking a lot of damage, blinking away some but losing many. At HongUn level all 30 stalkers will be blinked away perfectly as their shields run out, while HongUn reads a book about cashews. The DRG 6 Colossus and Gateway units march out as a deathball At Bronze level, the Protoss rolls over a horribly positioned zerg player, despite trapping his own zealots behind his Stalkers. 6 Infestors are killed with full energy because he A-moved them with the army. At Plat-Dia level, Several Colossus are NPed and FG coats the army...Zerg likely loses, but send Protoss packing back home to rebuild to fight again. At DRG level, you don't have a Deathball, you died at the 9-10 minute mark to a ling/roach faceroll supported by Infestors and ITs There's units and tactics the scale well, and those that do not. That's why it's so difficult to actually balance for everyone. XD Well spoken And to actually address the issue: I think this, while doesnt conclusively say anything about balance, kills arguments that many were making claiming inverse statistics | ||
|
ComplexConf
Ireland161 Posts
Everyone in this community is always going on about balance issues and Blizzard throws a bone to us, showing us the statistics that they have gathered and then most of the people here go off on how this is a PR stunt and how MMR screws with the statistics basically nullifying them of giving any resemblance of importance and meaning whatsoever.. I feel that people are really really trollish nowadays... Also if MMR actually works and I for one feel it does somewhat then being matchmaked against someone on your skill level is a better way of gathering statistics then letting someone play vs whatever MMR and mass losing and winning. Cus basically I could play 20 times vs someone with more skill then me, lose everytime vs his race and then call out IMBA ? Last point I will make is that the Blizzard post actually mentions "we can generate reasonably accurate figures to compare how successful each race really is versus the others." NOTE RESONABLY... also... "The end result is the information that we use (in combination with many other resources)"...NOTE IN COMBINATION WITH MANY OTHER RES... there are a lot more but I'll end with this one: "Still, while they may be interesting, it’s important to emphasize that these numbers aren't the last word in our balance analysis. It’s easy to make too much of them, and there’s a lot more that goes into balance analysis. It's best to consider stats like these as a point of interest and one step along the path to fine tuning balance, rather than the final destination." | ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
On September 23 2011 01:54 aristarchus wrote: Wow, the gap in P performance between NA/EU and KR is insane. Either KR has much worse protoss players and much better zerg players or... something is fishy. My guess is that mostly it's just that there is an imbalance, but only at the very, very top of the skill spectrum. But who knows. Could just be the top players in each place (which is a pretty small set) happened to pick different races disproportionately often. There's really no way to know from the data. Anyone who thinks Blizzard has an easy job to do in balancing the game is very wrong. The thing is that its pointless to balance the game based on anything other than the highest level of play. It doesnt even make sense to balance a game based on terrible play... If it is balanced at the highest level then you work on the aspects where you are weak and improve. There is no point in "balancing for every skill level" especially when there is a system that ranks you based on skill and puts you up against players of the same skill. I literally do not get Blizzards logic. If protoss is getting smashed at the highest level of play then there is obviously a problem and their results based on players who play bad matters zero whatsoever. | ||
|
ComplexConf
Ireland161 Posts
| ||
|
Bro_Stone
United States510 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:25 ZaaaaaM wrote: PvZ 57%, I guess that was 40% before 1.4 and 99% after 1.4, but because its been only 2 days it goes up to 57%? If blizzard went into making 1.4 with this in mind, the changes in the patch boggle my mind lol. Did you even read any of it? Obviously not, so why are so commenting. Yes, your reply to my comment is SO helpful... trololol? lol... | ||
|
Huragius
Lithuania1506 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:08 ShootingStars wrote: Korea results ONLY matter. Look at TvP Korea... haha unbalanced there X_X With all the respect to the koreans protoss (compared to korean Terrans)- they suck shit. Honestly, you have to be very ignorant not to admit that. Most of the GSL games from Protoss looks really sad compared to Terrans/Zergs. And If Korea results are the only ones who matter, then the problem isn't protoss. It's their players.b | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
Of course there is an absurd BS like 1-1-1, and I am sure Blizzard is aware of that. (per their own words, they track every data available on a daily basis) But if you look at the GSL code S, what you see is: 1. Massive cheese fest in group stage 2. Lots of build order wins/loses in later rounds The pinacle example of #2 is the finals. The GSL finals, the way GomTV has setup (usually a week after the semis), more often than not award the one who has better prepared for the opponent. Players will come up with specific and optimized builds per map and try to outdo the opponents, with the added ingredient called "mind games". This is why you often see one-sided matches as the deeper the rounds go. There are definitely balance implications that can be gleaned from GSL, especially in earlier rounds/group stages. But you really can't say the GSL is the end-all of the balance barometer. | ||
|
miyuki
Finland47 Posts
| ||
|
happyness
United States2400 Posts
So even though it's balanced it's just an awful MU that both P and Z hate | ||
|
QTIP.
United States2113 Posts
On September 23 2011 03:33 Huragius wrote: With all the respect to the koreans protoss (compared to korean Terrans)- they suck shit. Honestly, you have to be very ignorant not to admit that. Most of the GSL games from Protoss looks really sad compared to Terrans/Zergs. And If Korea results are the only ones who matter, then the problem isn't protoss. It's their players.b And how would you go about reliably proving that? If there is an inherent imbalance in the Protoss race can we agree that their play would also tend to "suck shit" as you so elegantly put it? | ||
| ||
