| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
coolcor
520 Posts
It doesn't help the scene if 90% of your players are cheering against 1/3 of your pros Why not they can be the evil overpowered race fans like cheering for their favourites to conquer! It'll be fun. Besides wasn't protoss strong in low level broodwar play did 90% hate bw protoss players and was this a big problem for making broodwar esports popular? | ||
|
yzzdups
United States32 Posts
On November 07 2011 05:23 coolcor wrote: Did anybody complain about the scale back when it was just a line graph and not a bar graph? I think that is what makes people feel like it is misleading because a lot of the height of the bar has been cut off even though they show the same points as the line graph. He made one with the full scale for Korea last month would you really prefer this it just wastes a bunch of space from 0-40 and 60-100 with no information making the interesting part smaller and harder to read. http://i.imgur.com/dNKqa.png Looks fine to me. | ||
|
ChaosTerran
Austria844 Posts
On November 07 2011 10:35 coolcor wrote: Why not they can be the evil overpowered race fans like cheering for their favourites to conquer! I'll be fun. Besides wasn't protoss strong in low level broodwar play did 90% hate bw protoss players and was this a big problem for making broodwar esports popular? yes, I haven't played a lot of bw, just played casually, but I know for a fact that TvP was hard as hell to play. | ||
|
StatX
Canada343 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 07 2011 09:57 aksfjh wrote: From today: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VY5qu.png) From July 17: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Cu6xw.png) Terran population is slowly declining. Not sure which SC2ranks site you're looking at, but if you think he's wrong, it's not the right one. None of that should have much effect on the stats. The graphs posted by the OP are for win-rates, so fewer players only means fewer games of that specific match up. That would have a limited/no effect of the win-rates, since the sample size is so large(over 25K games). Even if the were 10% less terrans that the other two races, that's still THOUSANDS of games. And none of those graphs show a difference of anything lose to that. Also, random is included in those stats. 1/3 of those games are terran games. Why do Terrans bring this up every month: "Look, I know the stats say we are winning every match up. That looks like an issue, but its a lie. We are doing the worst on the ladder because we have fewer players. I know that does sound logical, but think about it. We are beating fewer protoss and zergs that we did last month. That means our number of total wins are declining, so we ARE doing worse. So just ignore those stats, they don't show the true story. They are only numbers." | ||
|
Aetherial
Australia917 Posts
Fluctuating player numbers (e.g. September had 1307 games, October had 810) Fluctuating race ratios across months (Can't guarantee the same number of each race each month) | ||
|
Lewan72
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Peanutbutter717
United States240 Posts
| ||
|
Bro_Stone
United States510 Posts
On November 07 2011 11:01 Peanutbutter717 wrote: I like the jump from october 2010 to november 2010 for PvT, was that when the 1/1/1 got big or what happened there? Think KA removal? | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On November 07 2011 10:46 Plansix wrote: None of that should have much effect on the stats. The graphs posted by the OP are for win-rates, so fewer players only means fewer games of that specific match up. That would have a limited/no effect of the win-rates, since the sample size is so large(over 25K games). Even if the were 10% less terrans that the other two races, that's still THOUSANDS of games. And none of those graphs show a difference of anything lose to that. Also, random is included in those stats. 1/3 of those games are terran games. Why do Terrans bring this up every month: "Look, I know the stats say we are winning every match up. That looks like an issue, but its a lie. We are doing the worst on the ladder because we have fewer players. I know that does sound logical, but think about it. We are beating fewer protoss and zergs that we did last month. That means our number of total wins are declining, so we ARE doing worse. So just ignore those stats, they don't show the true story. They are only numbers." We're not talking about Terran ladder numbers affecting number of games played or winrates at pro level. We talk about ladder populations as an indicator of possible imbalance beyond the pro level. When you take into account a dwindling Terran population and lack of success outside of Korea, it paints a very different picture than the one most people portray on various SC2 communities. What's more, the complaints registered against Terrans generally come from non-pro players, in the plat-masters range anyways. Thus, detailed discussions often end up being tailored towards complaining about Terran strengths and possible nerfs at lower levels of play, that would affect already dwindling populations. It's not often that level-headed people enter a discussion about the TvX matchup suggesting a 5s rax buildtime nerf. Instead, it's usually along the lines of, "Marines should only have 4 range!" "MULEs should have a long cooldown!" "EMP should be a single target ability!" All these stats about lower level play are just trying to bring perspective to the numbers. That perspective is, "Outside the EXTREME top of the playerbase, Terrans have a hard time." It's more of a call to rational discussion than anything else. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
KA removal was in March 2011. That jump was mostly the metagame first developing, with stim+SCV all-ins on tiny maps. | ||
|
Bippzy
United States1466 Posts
Yeah pretty much neural parasite wasnt used so it aint much of a nerf Toss does need a little something extra, im hopin those cheaper upgrades will make toss better | ||
|
dc302
Australia576 Posts
On November 07 2011 11:44 Bippzy wrote: Yeah pretty much neural parasite wasnt used so it aint much of a nerf Toss does need a little something extra, im hopin those cheaper upgrades will make toss better It's also cause after everyone watches Nestea, they learn how to make drones. | ||
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
On November 07 2011 09:25 thane wrote: All that these graphs do is make me depressed because I cant beat protoss to save my life :S its ok, pro play is drastically different from ladder play. Some units just don't cut it without the proper APM to execute them I can't beat protoss to save my life either. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 07 2011 11:07 aksfjh wrote: We're not talking about Terran ladder numbers affecting number of games played or winrates at pro level. We talk about ladder populations as an indicator of possible imbalance beyond the pro level. When you take into account a dwindling Terran population and lack of success outside of Korea, it paints a very different picture than the one most people portray on various SC2 communities. What's more, the complaints registered against Terrans generally come from non-pro players, in the plat-masters range anyways. Thus, detailed discussions often end up being tailored towards complaining about Terran strengths and possible nerfs at lower levels of play, that would affect already dwindling populations. It's not often that level-headed people enter a discussion about the TvX matchup suggesting a 5s rax buildtime nerf. Instead, it's usually along the lines of, "Marines should only have 4 range!" "MULEs should have a long cooldown!" "EMP should be a single target ability!" All these stats about lower level play are just trying to bring perspective to the numbers. That perspective is, "Outside the EXTREME top of the playerbase, Terrans have a hard time." It's more of a call to rational discussion than anything else. I am very confused by your points. The data you are referencing in the "dwindling Terran population" show that terran is either A: is greater than the other two races, B: has close to equal numbers, being only off by 2-4%. Even at the highest level, GM, the numbers are close when there is only 200 of them per server. There is no dwindling population, the numbers are just not 33% terran, 33% protoss, 33% zerg, 1% random. Even at GM the numbers wouldn't be like that because it is only referencing 200 people, which is a small sample size. I have NEVER seen any evidence that terrans are having a rough time on the ladder. I understand the frustration of playing a race and having everyone say it is overpowered. Its not like it is not a challenge to play SC2. It diminishes your wins, which you felt were hard to come by. If you are having problems with a match up, it doesn't help to hear that everyone else is winning it. There was a time earlier this year when everyone thought Protoss was unstoppable and then they got nerf and stuff got buffed. Personally, I never felt any of the unstoppable in my play, but I dealt with it and moved on. But I did get tired of seeing the posts about removing force-field from the game. | ||
|
skatbone
United States1005 Posts
On November 07 2011 10:08 doko100 wrote: You can hate on pro terrans all you want, but this hate towards master- terrans has to stop, it's irrational since terran already is underrepresented in Masters League (and in the lower leagues down to silver) and have the least average points. protoss player or even zerg players at that level of play have absolutely no right to complain about terran. pro imbalance doesn't affect them at all. We are the one's struggling at master, they are not. Show me some hate that isn't irrational. The use of reason to justify hate leads to some pretty disgusting situations. Hitler did a great job rationalizing hate; European colonial powers rationalized dehumanization of indigenous populations--I'd argue that is hate as well. My point: you're barking up the wrong tree in telling someone else that their feelings on balance aren't justified. As an earlier poster suggested, while we have statistics/facts, we are biased by the races we play. And many people in this thread are being selective about which stats they are highlighting. Still others are inventing things or reading into facts in exaggerated ways. Welcome to argumentation about something we care about. Only your rhetoric textbooks can expertly separate logos from pathos. Now I'm all for mitigating general rage in SCII as a gesture toward better community. But toss aren't inventing rage and hate toward Terrans. A lot of toss feel legitimately ripped off by this game right now. You are welcome to throw facts at us and tell us our hate is not rational. From that privileged position, you can dismiss about the 99% of the material that passes for argument on TeamLiquid or on the Internet for that matter. tl;dr Please refrain from telling people they have no right to complain. While I don't want "hate" either (I have never professed a hate of Terrans), I read you as asking toss players to drop their frustrations about their struggles because Terran struggle more. Why? Why is this a conversation about who deserves the right to feel frustrated? Obviously, a lot of us, across races, are frustrated with this game right now. | ||
|
vonterribad
Australia50 Posts
| ||
|
Kuja
United States1759 Posts
| ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 07 2011 12:50 Kuja wrote: Seems about right, all i run into in my masters ladder is Zerg, but thankfully my PvZ is great. Despite what the graph might lead you to believe, i almost never run into terrans. Masters is the top 2% of players. It is possible that there are few terrans near your MMR since the player size is so small. There could, and likely are, the same number of terrans but none of them are at the exact point in the skill set you are. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
OSC
WardiTV Weekly
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JW38u.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JNPY6.png)
