|
On October 14 2011 01:29 Roxy wrote:
Very Interesting
It is a shame that all of the skilled players chose terran.. wish i could see some protoss innovate new strategies but alas all of the protoss players are scrubs
I guess they just pick terran because it is the hardest race to play and we all know koreans love high APM
Ya I think the most skilled players are currently Terran and that's really all this shows. However, I noticed BlackCitadel switching over to Protoss on his stream. Perhaps he will make the jump over
|
MC is a true son of Aiur.
Also, thanks for the effort OP, although the results are not unexpected.
|
Russian Federation304 Posts
how many this charts we need to blizzard fix the game??
really fix, not the shitty useless +1 immortal range or some shields to prism
|
I thought Protoss was actually the most popular race in Korea at the start of SC2? I remembered reading that the first ever GSL qualifier had more Protoss in proportion to the other races.
GSL Season 1 had 27 P, 21 T, 16 Z
So at least the argument that in the beginning, less people played Protoss compared to other races are not true.
|
On October 14 2011 01:43 bbm wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 01:35 Nouar wrote:On October 14 2011 01:24 InFi.asc wrote:On October 14 2011 01:23 Alejandrisha wrote:On October 14 2011 01:22 Fleebu wrote:
Maybe you should also look at the percentage of people in Korea who actually play Protoss... Oh so you're saying protoss is not as appealing to professional games? I think you're on to something here! on top of that this is a winning percentage. doesn't matter how many people play a race  Yes it does. Let's say there are 40% terrans, 35% zergs and 25% protoss *players*, there is a higher chance to have more top terrans than top protoss.... Hence a higher win rate percentage for terrans vs protoss since there are more good terrans than good protoss... Before being flamed, I have to add : YES I do think toss a doing worse for a reason, not ONLY more terrans etc... but it DOES play a role *as well*, mathematically speaking. I don't follow.... surely there is a higher chance to have more rubbish terrans than rubbish protoss for the same reason? If you assume that each match is against another random person from the pool (it's not, but to model that would be far too complex and a waste of time), and you assume that race and skill are independent, then how could you hope to conclude that more terran means more anything?
The point is you don't hear about the scrub players from any race; you only hear of the top few in Korea. So if there's a bigger pool to draw from, there will be more Terrans in the smaller sample.
|
On October 14 2011 01:43 Arcanne wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 01:41 InFi.asc wrote:On October 14 2011 01:40 Arcanne wrote:On October 14 2011 01:29 Roxy wrote:
Very Interesting
It is a shame that all of the skilled players chose terran.. wish i could see some protoss innovate new strategies but alas all of the protoss players are scrubs
I guess they just pick terran because it is the hardest race to play and we all know koreans love high APM Where did you acquire such great logic? Must be your education. Please don't turn this into a flame fest and please consider if someone might be using sarcasm I'm not being sarcastic. I want to know.
I really hope you're trolling...
|
On October 14 2011 01:29 Roxy wrote:
Very Interesting
It is a shame that all of the skilled players chose terran.. wish i could see some protoss innovate new strategies but alas all of the protoss players are scrubs
I guess they just pick terran because it is the hardest race to play and we all know koreans love high APM
You have it a little bit backwards... Terran = Easiest / Least Skill needed.. I'm assuming you play terran and that's why you;ve come up with this answer.
Protoss are just failing because it's just to hard for them to compete with terran, That and possibly GSL is setting up too many PvPs..
Anyways after sometime in november we shouldn't have this problem.
By that time terran will be nerfed and/or someone would have threated Dustin browder to resign..
|
On October 14 2011 01:43 bbm wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 01:35 Nouar wrote:On October 14 2011 01:24 InFi.asc wrote:On October 14 2011 01:23 Alejandrisha wrote:On October 14 2011 01:22 Fleebu wrote:
Maybe you should also look at the percentage of people in Korea who actually play Protoss... Oh so you're saying protoss is not as appealing to professional games? I think you're on to something here! on top of that this is a winning percentage. doesn't matter how many people play a race Yes it does. Let's say there are 40% terrans, 35% zergs and 25% protoss *players*, there is a higher chance to have more top terrans than top protoss.... Hence a higher win rate percentage for terrans vs protoss since there are more good terrans than good protoss... Before being flamed, I have to add : YES I do think toss a doing worse for a reason, not ONLY more terrans etc... but it DOES play a role *as well*, mathematically speaking. I don't follow.... surely there is a higher chance to have more rubbish terrans than rubbish protoss for the same reason? If you assume that each match is against another random person from the pool (it's not, but to model that would be far too complex and a waste of time), and you assume that race and skill are independent, then how could you hope to conclude that more terran means more anything?
Well I guess his point is that of the Terrans playing in the GSL, more would be highly skilled. Those extra rubbish Terrans wouldn't be getting into the GSL to play against the rubbish Protoss. However this is not the case as the race % are something like 36% T, 33% P, 31% Z. When you then look at the race % in Code S it's pretty obvious that something is wrong...
|
give it some time... protoss players have to develop... do some insane warp prism harassment
|
Canada13389 Posts
On October 14 2011 01:46 naut1c wrote:
give it some time... protoss players have to develop... do some insane warp prism harassment
If this was Reddit, I would have a face for you.
|
On October 14 2011 01:46 MMello wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 01:29 Roxy wrote:
Very Interesting
It is a shame that all of the skilled players chose terran.. wish i could see some protoss innovate new strategies but alas all of the protoss players are scrubs
I guess they just pick terran because it is the hardest race to play and we all know koreans love high APM You have it a little bit backwards... Terran = Easiest / Least Skill needed.. I'm assuming you play terran and that's why you;ve come up with this answer. Protoss are just failing because it's just to hard for them to compete with terran, That and possibly GSL is setting up too many PvPs.. Anyways after sometime in november we shouldn't have this problem. By that time terran will be nerfed and/or someone would have threated Dustin browder to resign..
As weird as it sounds, the more PvP's that happen in the GSL the better protoss "looks." Most statistics will take data on the top 4, top 8s of the GSL. If there are PvP's in the ro16 and ro8, it GUARANTEES that a protoss will advance. If those 2 protosses played 2 nonprotosses, there would be a chance that neither would advance.
On October 14 2011 01:46 naut1c wrote:
give it some time... protoss players have to develop... do some insane warp prism harassment
attention GSL protosses! Heed this warning and maybe the graph will look better and you will win more championships
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Second graph seems ambiguous to me. Does a higher % correlate to the first or the second race in the matchup in the legend?
|
On October 14 2011 01:48 mbr2321 wrote:
Second graph seems ambiguous to me. Does a higher % correlate to the first or the second race in the matchup in the legend?
I win for TvZ is a win for the T and a loss for the Z, so the first.
|
What these really show is how terribad protoss is doing. Yet again.
|
On October 14 2011 01:46 Logros wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2011 01:43 bbm wrote:On October 14 2011 01:35 Nouar wrote:On October 14 2011 01:24 InFi.asc wrote:On October 14 2011 01:23 Alejandrisha wrote:On October 14 2011 01:22 Fleebu wrote:
Maybe you should also look at the percentage of people in Korea who actually play Protoss... Oh so you're saying protoss is not as appealing to professional games? I think you're on to something here! on top of that this is a winning percentage. doesn't matter how many people play a race Yes it does. Let's say there are 40% terrans, 35% zergs and 25% protoss *players*, there is a higher chance to have more top terrans than top protoss.... Hence a higher win rate percentage for terrans vs protoss since there are more good terrans than good protoss... Before being flamed, I have to add : YES I do think toss a doing worse for a reason, not ONLY more terrans etc... but it DOES play a role *as well*, mathematically speaking. I don't follow.... surely there is a higher chance to have more rubbish terrans than rubbish protoss for the same reason? If you assume that each match is against another random person from the pool (it's not, but to model that would be far too complex and a waste of time), and you assume that race and skill are independent, then how could you hope to conclude that more terran means more anything? Well I guess his point is that of the Terrans playing in the GSL, more would be highly skilled. Those extra rubbish Terrans wouldn't be getting into the GSL to play against the rubbish Protoss. However this is not the case as the race % are something like 36% T, 33% P, 31% Z. When you then look at the race % in Code S it's pretty obvious that something is wrong...
This is all irrelevant. If there are more top terrans then there will be more Ts in the GSL and more T champions. Fine... if there is a tourney with 28 Ts and 4 Ps and the winrate is 50% that's balanced. But the winrate is not 50%.
EDIT: In fact, I would claim that in a GSL-like system the ONLY thing a winrate below 50% demonstrates is that protoss performance is declining. Even if the game is inherently imbalanced but at a fixed rate of imbalance the winrate should stabilize at 50% and there will just be weaker players of the stronger race in the tournament.
|
This is the effect of nerfing the "imba" race and buffing the "weak" race in one patch.
It is silly how people don't see it talking about PvZ for example. It's like incontrol said: "protoss was constantly nerfed while zerg was buffed"- it was in some SOTG episode.
Plus it must be sad for competitive toss players, when all Blizz is trying to do is make PvP playable.
My conclusion is:
A. They don't listen to players.
B. They listen to the wrong players.*
C. They don't listen to the pro players.
* I remember when they said they nerfed Zealot build time because people in silver had trouble countering it. On the other hand comment about 6 pool: "we want to keep the player on his toes since the beginning of the game"
I don't want to bash on silver players, but I'm not grand master myself and in my opinion the game should be balanced for the PROs only, because for me the whole idea is to get good not to make game easy as f*ck.
If you are better than your opponent then you win, if you are better than your opponent and you lose then:
A. You are EG.IdrA
B. There is imbalance.
|
This shows that it has quite clearly not been only two months as many claim. Protoss has been behind the other two races since May. That means, assuming October remains the same (and all indications are that it will), It will actually have been six months.
|
|
|
If you're going to use percentage you should not cut the graph at the top. I have no vested interest in certain races' win rates but these types of graphs that people make in TL.net bother me because the posters all seem to have ulterior/sensational motives - because that's what manipulated graphs normally do.
There are cases where practical reasons (e.g. legibility) might be a hurdle for accurate graphs, but this isn't such a case.
|
On October 14 2011 02:03 usethis2 wrote:
If you're going to use percentage you should not cut the graph at the top. I have no vested interest in certain races' win rates but these types of graphs that people make in TL.net bother me because the posters all seem to have ulterior/sensational motives - because that's what manipulated graphs normally do.
There are cases where practical reasons (e.g. legibility) might be a hurdle for accurate graphs, but this isn't such a case.
well you can blame open office for that. I didn't change anything
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
