|
On November 09 2011 01:19 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 01:17 Sphen5117 wrote:On November 09 2011 00:58 MCDayC wrote:On November 08 2011 06:32 MrCon wrote:On November 08 2011 06:30 MCDayC wrote:
I can't see the graph, my internet won't connect to it for some reason, could someone write down the stats for the 3 matchups? Thanks. TvP 53.9% TvZ 52% ZvP 56.3% Thank you very much. These stats are really not that bad at all, I don't see why everyone is complaining, especially with some of the Protoss buffs hopefully coming in the next patch. Not that bad? What matchup has Protoss in a non-getting-their-shit-pwned situation? PvP? Which situation has Terran losing? TvT? you make think that 56.3 percent is "Only 6.4 percent above even", but really, tha tmeans th eopponent is sitting at a 43.7 percent chance. 43.7 vs 56.3. That's a 12.6 percent difference. 12.6 is well over a 4th of the base 43.7. The Zerg have a winrate over 25% percent higher in ZvP than Protoss does. That's not that bad? It isn't so much that the winrates are bad for this month. In BW they fluctuated a lot, sometimes to 60/40. But the important point is that they are getting consistently worse - this is no statistical fluctuation. There is a clear trend here, and you could extrapolate this out (assuming no patches) to show how poor PvX winrates would be in the future. EDIT: marvellosity, great minds think alike 
Well I think too many people focus on the curve instead of the histogram. If you look at the curve, Terran imba but if you look at the histogram yo can see that in June and Septembre PvT is exactly 50% ...
|
Italy12246 Posts
On November 09 2011 02:16 Rombur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 01:19 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 01:17 Sphen5117 wrote:On November 09 2011 00:58 MCDayC wrote:On November 08 2011 06:32 MrCon wrote:On November 08 2011 06:30 MCDayC wrote:
I can't see the graph, my internet won't connect to it for some reason, could someone write down the stats for the 3 matchups? Thanks. TvP 53.9% TvZ 52% ZvP 56.3% Thank you very much. These stats are really not that bad at all, I don't see why everyone is complaining, especially with some of the Protoss buffs hopefully coming in the next patch. Not that bad? What matchup has Protoss in a non-getting-their-shit-pwned situation? PvP? Which situation has Terran losing? TvT? you make think that 56.3 percent is "Only 6.4 percent above even", but really, tha tmeans th eopponent is sitting at a 43.7 percent chance. 43.7 vs 56.3. That's a 12.6 percent difference. 12.6 is well over a 4th of the base 43.7. The Zerg have a winrate over 25% percent higher in ZvP than Protoss does. That's not that bad? It isn't so much that the winrates are bad for this month. In BW they fluctuated a lot, sometimes to 60/40. But the important point is that they are getting consistently worse - this is no statistical fluctuation. There is a clear trend here, and you could extrapolate this out (assuming no patches) to show how poor PvX winrates would be in the future. EDIT: marvellosity, great minds think alike Well I think too many people focus on the curve instead of the histogram. If you look at the curve, Terran imba but if you look at the histogram yo can see that in June and Septembre PvT is exactly 50% ...
And that's the best it's been in the last 6 months. Even at worst, mostly favoured for t, vs even at best, mostly unfavoured for p.
|
On November 09 2011 02:19 Teoita wrote:
And that's the best it's been in the last 6 months. Even at worst, mostly favoured for t, vs even at best, mostly unfavoured for p.
11 months actually. PvT winrates were slightly above 50% in the first month of release. Since then, it has been almost always <50%, with one month of about equality.
|
i think the reason why many people(including me) feel unsatisfied is because protoss has been the worst race since 7 months now and terran constantly the best. i wouldnt care if a race would be at 45% or 55% winrate over 1-2 months because thats kind of "normal" due to metagame development etc., but over such a long time you simply get frustrated and it´s hard not to complain about it.
i think nearly everyone would act the same way when his/her favoured race would be in this situation, just like it was with zerg in 2010.
|
Holy shit! terrans win 1% more games than Zerg? They are soooo OP omfg! I will go and ambush David Kim right now and threaten to kick him in the balls unless he buffs Zerg. This is a joke.
|
I don't get all the protoss QQ. It's one thing to want your race to do well.. but this act of total despair doesn't make sense. Protoss does fine on the ladder. If it's because you want to root for your favorite protss, I guess that's ok.
|
On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable.  There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle.
last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time.
people needs to calm down
|
On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down
I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread:
On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated!
Emphasis mine.
Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle.
|
On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle.
Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea
|
On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea
...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics.
|
On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics.
Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid
|
Italy12246 Posts
On November 09 2011 03:09 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics. Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid
It's been well over one year since release. When would you say we can draw conclusions? Two years? Three? Right before HotS is released?
|
It almost seems like Blizzard has accepted that WoL won't be perfectly balanced at the highest level. That is why they are doing such radical changes in HotS, particularly to Protoss and Nexus energy.
As a casual protoss player, that doesn't bother me that much, because at my level (mid/high masters on NA), the game feels generally balanced.
I do feel sorry for the pro Protoss players, though. They could have potentially made a lot more money if they would have just picked a different race in beta/release. It kind of makes you feel like when HotS is released you might accidentally pick the wrong race and end up paying for it until LotV :/
|
On November 09 2011 03:15 Teoita wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 03:09 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics. Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid It's been well over one year since release. When would you say we can draw conclusions? Two years? Three? Right before HotS is released?
and within only a year time frame we have some drastic fluctuation, such as ZvP dynamics, and even TvP.
Who to say it won't change to something completely different a year from now? Similar trends had happened in sc1 before
|
I think on a fundamental level, playing 8+ hours a day rewards terran and zerg players a lot more than protoss players, with terran probably being rewarded the most. There's just so much multitasking and micro and timing and all that jazz that you can improve with terran, but protoss lacks a lot of that so I think if the game stays the same the gap between protoss and terran/zerg will just continue to widen. I think that's why protoss is perfectly fine in the amateur scene (bronze to low GM), but doing so poorly at the professional level.
That is, progamer protosses aren't as rewarded for their time spent as other progamers.
|
On November 09 2011 03:25 Starshaped wrote:
I think on a fundamental level, playing 8+ hours a day rewards terran and zerg players a lot more than protoss players, with terran probably being rewarded the most. There's just so much multitasking and micro and timing and all that jazz that you can improve with terran, but protoss lacks a lot of that so I think if the game stays the same the gap between protoss and terran/zerg will just continue to widen. I think that's why protoss is perfectly fine in the amateur scene (bronze to low GM), but doing so poorly at the professional level.
That is, progamer protosses aren't as rewarded for their time spent as other progamers.
That would be consistent with HotS adding, what seems to be, a lot more difficulty/options for protoss.
|
On November 09 2011 03:25 Starshaped wrote:
I think on a fundamental level, playing 8+ hours a day rewards terran and zerg players a lot more than protoss players, with terran probably being rewarded the most. There's just so much multitasking and micro and timing and all that jazz that you can improve with terran, but protoss lacks a lot of that so I think if the game stays the same the gap between protoss and terran/zerg will just continue to widen. I think that's why protoss is perfectly fine in the amateur scene (bronze to low GM), but doing so poorly at the professional level.
That is, progamer protosses aren't as rewarded for their time spent as other progamers.
I've been saying this for a while now. Protoss has just fewer options to display their skill and that's bad for everyone. At lower levels (amateur scene as you call it), they do pretty well (even just doing 1a) while in the progamer level they do bad.
|
Lol'd @ ZvT in janv 2011 :D
|
On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle.
That someone said the argument before him in an ironic manner doesn't make the argument bad ._.
graphs from bw 2007-2011, every measurement is over a 3 month period:
http://i.imgur.com/uxz19.png
As you see P>T T>Z Z>P according to these graphs for a great majority of the time. On top of that there is several entire 3 month periods where T>Z and Z>P where over 60%. It is a myth that SC2 is totally imba meanwhile SCBW is totally balanced. Also since 4.1 TvP has started to look more and more balanced (according to graphs), meanwhile the real reason P is doing bad is ZvP (most likely because of the 3 hatch vs ffe that just was discovered into the meta game, if that is op or if P just hasn't found a counter yet, I don't know). The reason why T is doing best overall though is because they have above 50% in both TvZ and TvP.
I'm not saying this patch is bad, but those who think TvP is the most imba match up after 4.1 (basically when protoss started to be able to beat 1-1-1) are simply wrong, statistics shows that currently it's ZvP.
|
On November 09 2011 03:25 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 03:15 Teoita wrote:On November 09 2011 03:09 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics. Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid It's been well over one year since release. When would you say we can draw conclusions? Two years? Three? Right before HotS is released? and within only a year time frame we have some drastic fluctuation, such as ZvP dynamics, and even TvP. Who to say it won't change to something completely different a year from now? Similar trends had happened in sc1 before
The changes in win percentage are directly influenced by changes introduced by Blizzard. If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell you. ZvP did not suddenly change into Zerg favor for no reason; Protoss got massive nerfs and Zerg got a monstrous buff with the Infestor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
