|
On October 07 2011 23:19 Chewbacca. wrote:
It's pretty crazy how much a difference there is in the win % of the pro races vs the win % of master/GMaster players on ladder.
On NA/EU Masster/GMaster level P beats Z 57% of the time while here Z beats P about 57% of the time, a complete reversal.
NA/EU GMs and master had a 57% win rate in PvZ for the single day of september 13th
If you read that article it says "these are the win rate for September 13th 2011" they should not e taken as proof of anything"
|
On October 08 2011 00:52 ZorBa.G wrote:
Zerg still have light years ahead yet to even get close to working out their race. With how greedy they play atm, I don't think this will happen for a while.
Aggression do work, but because of how the race works, you need to hit specific timings to exploit weaknesses in opponents' builds. This is quite apparent in the recent ZvP scene where toss build orders do not change much and IM zergs will just end the game with a 2 or 3 base push. However in ZvT, with so many new builds being developed and the number of builds terran can deviate from their 'base' build orders, it's harder to find a weak timing to exploit. As seen in July's games, zerg's aggression comes down a lot to calculated risks. It's not like terran where you can walk up to enemy's doorstep, then retreat when you find out you can't do much damage and still try to claw back from a slightly less favorable position.
|
On October 08 2011 00:52 ZorBa.G wrote:
Terran is just the "most worked out" race atm. Us Terrans keep playing to learn new BO's, tricks ect whilst Protoss and Zerg just come on the forums to QQ how OP Terran is.............
Protoss needs to get out of the 1 A deathball mode and try other shit.
Zerg still have light years ahead yet to even get close to working out their race. With how greedy they play atm, I don't think this will happen for a while.
Honestly, how many Terran BO threads do you see in the TL forums as opposed the Protoss builds and Zerg builds?
Terrans not OP imo. Toss % Zerg just need some innovation!
As a Zerg player, I can tell you there's an insane amount of stuff which Terrans either havn't worked out yet or is only done by a few. Same goes for Protoss (and I'm sure Zerg too) , the idea that your race has figured everything out but your opponents races havn't is idiotic, there's no way to verify this principle at all.
|
On October 08 2011 01:05 Tuczniak wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 00:52 ZorBa.G wrote:
Terran is just the "most worked out" race atm. Us Terrans keep playing to learn new BO's, tricks ect whilst Protoss and Zerg just come on the forums to QQ how OP Terran is.............
Protoss needs to get out of the 1 A deathball mode and try other shit.
Zerg still have light years ahead yet to even get close to working out their race. With how greedy they play atm, I don't think this will happen for a while.
Honestly, how many Terran BO threads do you see in the TL forums as opposed the Protoss builds and Zerg builds?
Terrans not OP imo. Toss % Zerg just need some innovation!
Haha, that's something like terran equivalent to Z and P whining. It made my day, thanks ZorBa.G BTW: I'm not statistician so. Wouldn't be much more accurate, if every player had some sort of rating. And the win/loss would have weight that depends on players rating difference? Now in many tournaments meets people, especially in early rounds, who are on different skill level. That's a lot of games, which don't tell us a thing about balance. High rating games should have higher weight too.
Unfortunately, what would you base that rating on? Player's ratings would have to to change with ability, and you would have to base how good someone is on how well they are doing currently -which assumes the game is balanced now.
|
its frustrating to see these stats. My terran still is far behind my zerg and toss ... but as long as the changes seem to be directed into what happens in the games and not due to some stats like these, i am happy. Still funny that terran is so on top of zerg, but it has something to do with were the data comes from.
|
On October 07 2011 22:45 SpiZe wrote:
These charts are actually a bit missleading as they use a different scale than the others. At first I was like, "well toss is getting rolled over TvP" then I saw that it was 47% wich is actually pretty close to 50%.
It loos like they also changed previous months winrates? I am so confused.
Yeah, honestly that has been a problem since day one.The scale makes like 4-5% of imbalance seem like a huge difference and people overreact >_>
I am confused too about the changed winrates?
BTW which ones are the relevant games/tournaments? GSL this month has been pretty balanced in TvZ I am surprised by the discrepancy here...
|
On October 08 2011 01:14 SeaSwift wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 08 2011 01:05 Tuczniak wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 00:52 ZorBa.G wrote:
Terran is just the "most worked out" race atm. Us Terrans keep playing to learn new BO's, tricks ect whilst Protoss and Zerg just come on the forums to QQ how OP Terran is.............
Protoss needs to get out of the 1 A deathball mode and try other shit.
Zerg still have light years ahead yet to even get close to working out their race. With how greedy they play atm, I don't think this will happen for a while.
Honestly, how many Terran BO threads do you see in the TL forums as opposed the Protoss builds and Zerg builds?
Terrans not OP imo. Toss % Zerg just need some innovation!
Haha, that's something like terran equivalent to Z and P whining. It made my day, thanks ZorBa.G BTW: I'm not statistician so. Wouldn't be much more accurate, if every player had some sort of rating. And the win/loss would have weight that depends on players rating difference? Now in many tournaments meets people, especially in early rounds, who are on different skill level. That's a lot of games, which don't tell us a thing about balance. High rating games should have higher weight too. Unfortunately, what would you base that rating on? Player's ratings would have to to change with ability, and you would have to base how good someone is on how well they are doing currently -which assumes the game is balanced now. You are right. We cant separate player skill from race. But i still think that the first game of tournament between some famous player and random guy means nothing. And round8 games means more than round128 games.
|
On October 08 2011 01:08 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 00:45 Geo.Rion wrote:
how the hell is Protoss losing more since they got buffed like hell? That is flat out illogical. This just proves to me that this graph doesnt actually represent much, just an interesting piece of work, which shouldnt be given too much weight, if it would reflect balance it simply had to shift upwards for protoss in both mathcups because there's nothing else that could shift it(maps are roughly the same as 1-2 months ago)
It just comes down to not large enough sample and difference in skill of the players that play the games which are taken into consideration (like top foreigner protosses dont compete in enough foreign tourneys because they train in Korea) Buffed? Where? I seriously hope you don't consider just a 1 range buff to one single unit, or 60 shields on another a huge buff. Blink research time got raised to another 30 seconds, protoss can no longer warp on ramps. Overall it seems to me like the patch did relatively little to protoss. A huge buff would be a +10% more damage across the board, this didn't even come close. I doubt the month of October will show any real difference regarding PvT, I do think that PvZ will actually look better because a lot of people freaked out when they saw the fungal nerfs + neural parasite nerf and think the infestor is bad now, which it clearly isn't. However once zerg figure out that the infestor nerf isn't the end of the world and that they are still just as efficient then the graph will continue its downward spiral for Protoss across the board. Anyway, the graph looks really depressing for Protoss, I may be terran but sign me in on the sad zealot fan club.
immortal +1 range is a huge buff. Warprism buff was uncalled for to begin with and gives a lot of shields, Mothership got slightly better + and the f-ing infestor, dread of all protoss got 2 serious nerfs. I'm mainly talkig about ZvP because i study that mathcup the most (and played it as P as well), and dont play PvT at all, but +1 immortal range and warprism buff should be felt there as well imo.
What would you consider a good patch for protoss if not the last one? Stalker damage increased by 50% and basnhee/mutalisk removed from the game?
I've read some more comments, how can Protosses complain about the patch, i canot fathom, really, it's by far the largest push any race got since the fungal buff. Actually,it's overall bigger then that if i think more about it.
|
Don't understand why Blizzard keep letting Terran be so strong, they been overpowered since release and hardly any nerf to them.
The big win:ratio they have against zerg is logical. Double barrack and hellions opening really screw up early game, if terran can play double barrack opening properly they will have around 90-95% win with that even against the best zerg in the world.
Hellion opening prevent zerg getting a third and have no scouting information. So can't tell if the terran going double starport or getting a quick third.
|
these graphs make me laugh harder at the terrans that say their race isn't imba
|
On October 08 2011 01:21 Trumpstyle wrote:
Don't understand why Blizzard keep letting Terran be so strong, they been overpowered since release and hardly any nerf to them.
The big win:ratio they have against zerg is logical. Double barrack and hellions opening really screw up early game, if terran can play double barrack opening properly they will have around 90-95% win with that even against the best zerg in the world.
Hellion opening prevent zerg getting a third and have no scouting information. So can't tell if the terran going double starport or getting a quick third.
Really? "hardly any nerf to them." Fucking really? While it's evident that you are completely zerg biased don't post shit that just isn't true to make your case look stronger.
|
The main difference I see between the BW and Sc2 stats is that the BW stats appear to reset ever few months (all races cross back over the 50% line) In Sc2 Terran has been the leader since day1, seriously, has Terran ever dipped below 50% for more than a month in any match up over the last year?
I still believe Blizzard's stats on win rates are garbage. Especially when I see this. Blizzard keeps showing stats where ever matchup is within 5% of each other, it's obviously a distortion of what is really happening.
What I find pretty annoying is that even at the height of the "protoss imba" (around the end of last year) protoss was barely over 50%
|
On October 08 2011 01:28 Treva wrote:
Really? "hardly any nerf to them." Fucking really? While it's evident that you are completely zerg biased don't post shit that just isn't true to make your case look stronger.
Alright then. Give me 3 massive nerfs that Terran has had to their play. I can probably give 5 for Protoss if pushed eg. KA removed.
|
I would murder to see Terran fall below 50% once, or experience the hell that Zergs / Protoss are going through for a couple month.
Terran are spoiled.
|
Need HOTS for some serious game redesign. The main problem is at my level just meh diamond, everything seems pretty even though from playing random a bit id say terran>toss>zerg in terms of hardest to play and if terran gets nerfed more to keep the highest level balanced i just feel at my level things will start getting rediculous.
|
On October 07 2011 22:43 tomatriedes wrote:
ZvT being worse than PvT? Totally didn't expect that. The rest of the world is so much different from Korea.
Well it includes foreign pvt as well, which foreign protoss are doing well in. But from the data I saw the average in korea was like ~40%.
|
On October 08 2011 01:35 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 01:28 Treva wrote:
Really? "hardly any nerf to them." Fucking really? While it's evident that you are completely zerg biased don't post shit that just isn't true to make your case look stronger. Alright then. Give me 3 massive nerfs that Terran has had to their play. I can probably give 5 for Protoss if pushed eg. KA removed.
I'm not arguing about Protoss. I never said any race has never been nerfed because I'm not an idiot. I was making a response to something that was wrong which was someone saying terran has hardly been nerfed at all. Which if you have played this game at all you know is not true. Plus I can already tell by the attitude of your post that me posting any nerfs at all will just be responded with something along the likes of how they aren't major nerfs so I'm not going to waste my time.
|
I don't really get it. Seriously what games are being taken into account here?
According to this:
http://www.sc2charts.net/en/edb?zone=7
1.4 ZvT is roughly at 50%, P is suffering but its not as bad as people make it seem.
1.3
http://www.sc2charts.net/en/edb?zone=4
Is pretty similar with all races being at roughly 50%(yeah some are doing worse, some are doing better but lets be honest we have at least take into account current strategies)
According to Gom in the current GSL(but oh well to be honest they are less games here so data may seem more extreme)
http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?searchType=3&race=Z&vsrace=T&season=2011&leaguetype=20&leagueid=24377&gamever=0&mapid=0
ZvT is currently at 52%
PvT is at 33.3%
PvZ at 39%
In GSTL(which if we want to assume that korean Skill level is the highest skill level)
PvZ is at 50%
PvT is at 51%
ZvT is at 55%
I seriously don't understand which extra games are included in your stats to make it seem that ZvT is so high in favour of Terran when all those other statistics show that its evenish.
And oh well thanks to the person who posted the BW stats. We can't really say too much about Balance when strategies are constantly evolving. And even if we take this stats as the ture ones why does it means that T is OP? In the ilovoov era IIRC ZvT hit 30% favouring T but strategies evolved and the MU was fixed.
I am getting kinda tired with all the race whine tbqh. But I really want to know what makes the OP win% seem kinda different from the ones I posted?
|
On October 08 2011 01:42 windsupernova wrote:I don't really get it. Seriously what games are being taken into account here? According to this: http://www.sc2charts.net/en/edb?zone=71.4 ZvT is roughly at 50%, P is suffering but its not as bad as people make it seem. 1.3 http://www.sc2charts.net/en/edb?zone=4Is pretty similar with all races being at roughly 50%(yeah some are doing worse, some are doing better but lets be honest we have at least take into account current strategies) According to Gom in the current GSL(but oh well to be honest they are less games here so data may seem more extreme) http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?searchType=3&race=Z&vsrace=T&season=2011&leaguetype=20&leagueid=24377&gamever=0&mapid=0ZvT is currently at 52% PvT is at 33.3% PvZ at 39% In GSTL(which if we want to assume that korean Skill level is the highest skill level) PvZ is at 50% PvT is at 51% ZvT is at 55% I seriously don't understand which extra games are included in your stats to make it seem that ZvT is so high in favour of Terran when all those other statistics show that its evenish. And oh well thanks to the person who posted the BW stats. We can't really say too much about Balance when strategies are constantly evolving. And even if we take this stats as the ture ones why does it means that T is OP? In the ilovoov era IIRC ZvT hit 30% favouring T but strategies evolved and the MU was fixed. I am getting kinda tired with all the race whine tbqh. But I really want to know what makes the OP win% seem kinda different from the ones I posted?
They're TLPD stats. So, it includes GSL, but also NASL, IPL, MLG, and other foreign tournaments. Unlike SC2charts, it doesn't include ladder games.
|
-_- at people that think win rates from pro level games have any bearing to their low level games on ladder.
Honestly if you think X race is OP, make a blog post and take a screen shot of your current league / rank and detail how much you play. Then roll that race and play it for however much time and see if you can get GM or at least high masters. At the end of your journey you can say whether you in fact think that you got carried by the race being OP or whether you still think it's easy.
That would be the closest to an objective way of "proving" that a certain race you think is easy is in fact easy. Somehow I doubt we'd ever see anyone going from x league to GM based on changing race, and even at GM compared to pro level there's a huge difference.
Why do we never see this happen? Because most people that reroll end up going "it's not as easy as I thought". Which is what happens when you take away one sided biased viewpoints.
To be clear, I'm not saying there's no imbalance at pro level, feel free to complain about that. I'm talking about people who take that and use it as an excuse as to why they lose their games on ladder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
