|
On November 09 2011 21:44 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:41 ambrosiaa wrote:On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bviP1.png) Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread. Oh please. So what if Clide, the only terran in his group didnt make it through? And are you saying these stats are fake? Please stop trying to give yourself excuses just cos you're getting your ass kicked in ladder even though you're terran. People have already stated that this graphs are for tournaments at the HIGHEST LVL of play, where terran is clearly OP at the moment. If you look at the HIGHEST LVL of play you will NOTICE that terrans are not doing that well. If you see these graphs you would expect alot of terrans in the top 8 of almost every tournament. Then you take a look here: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues. Then you realise that these graphs are FISHY.
That's the International database. This latest graph is from Korea.
|
On November 09 2011 21:44 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:41 ambrosiaa wrote:On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread. Oh please. So what if Clide, the only terran in his group didnt make it through? And are you saying these stats are fake? Please stop trying to give yourself excuses just cos you're getting your ass kicked in ladder even though you're terran. People have already stated that this graphs are for tournaments at the HIGHEST LVL of play, where terran is clearly OP at the moment. If you look at the HIGHEST LVL of play you will NOTICE that terrans are not doing that well. If you see these graphs you would expect alot of terrans in the top 8 of almost every tournament. Then you take a look here: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues. Then you realise that these graphs are FISHY.
Make your own graph then if you think it's fishy. And as far as Code S go Terrans are doing pretty well given how over-represented they are.
|
On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:
Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort:
"The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!"
You forgot "the game is balanced on the ladder".
What a disaster for Terrans today though, only 50% Terrans in the Ro16. This is unacceptable.
|
GSL is terrible format to look at for winrates really.
Getting into GSL requires a large qualification thus there is already quite a bit of selection going on for getting into GSL. Up until recently the change in players has been very minimal as well. Thus the balance of players in GSL could be very lopsided because it was determined by games being played quite some time ago.
In other words there is a pretty huge selection bias when you use GSL games for winrates. The worst race from months ago is underrepresented because it could be so hard to get in months ago. That means the players that did get in are likely to be more skilled then the players from other races that are in and this influences the validity of the winrates.
Anyway the stuff is still great overall, it's good to see a fairly reliable source which is at least quite complete. That stops people from referring too much to anecdotal evidence which happens WAY too much on TL (and basically any non-scientific community).
|
I expect graphs to be better next month. 
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
On November 09 2011 22:22 darkness wrote:I expect graphs to be better next month.
I expect for pvt better graphs (even maybe protoss favored), but with the popularization of mass mutas in zvp, I don't think it will be better in pvz.
Only future will show it to us 
|
On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread.
You've become a parody of yourselves. It's really sad.
|
I really wish we would stop posting these TLPD trend threads... The sample size is very small and skewed. These posts don't really shed that much light on balance but do fuel the fire for balance whiners. If there's imbalance, I'm sure Blizzard is aware, as they have the best metrics out of any of us, and they are clearly trying to address it cautiously.
People need to calm down and play the game.
|
hrm, about 1/3 the data from the norm... interesting
|
On November 09 2011 15:49 Holophonist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 08:51 mordk wrote:On November 09 2011 07:08 Holophonist wrote:On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat and yoou will most likely have to vastly outplay your opponent to win. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that. HT. Just ht. Storm is awesome vs mutas because even if they "dodge" it, you still are hitting them at least a little and it makes them back up and have to heal... that's a big deal. At worst you're going to take like 10 - 20 hp off of all the mutas and at best you could take them down by like half or more. And, despite your bleak outlook on archons, they DESTROY mutas. It's not even close. The extremely high health, mixed with the bonus/splash dmg is just not even close. Storm/archons also happen to be the counter to the other half of the muta/ling combo as well. The bottom line is they're new and protoss players aren't too familiar with how to defend against them and when to go put pressure once you have it decently under control. Templars have this huge mobility problem against mutalisks. Which is pretty much the same problem the entire protoss army has with mutas. They aren't dangerous because of their burst damage or their HP, or their splash. They're dangerous because of their crazy mobility. Normally, a zerg player can make it so protoss can NEVER get an all out engagement for an entire game. Sure, if zerg sends his mutas head on against an Archon/Stalker/HT ball he'll get DESTROYED, but that's not the point. With a large mutalisk ball, zerg can pull a protoss players from one arm at a time, eventually ripping them off. This is not kratoss brutality, but rather a slower, more insidious but still huge amount of damage. Watch Crazymoving vs Hero. Hero showed some AMAZING templar play, and still couldn't deal with mutas at all. Crazymoving just avoided archons, dodged storms, attacked at the natural, then the third, then the main, then the pylons, all while losing a few mutas which were quickly replaced. Eventually, Hero was starved. Had crazymoving been a better player, he'd have dealt the damage, then transitioned into infestor ling play and rolled way before what he did. Crazymoving even managed to just nosedive some templars and snipe them in the face of stalkers and receive almost no damage. Archons do destroy mutas... if they can ever hit them... Storms do counter mutas, if mutas ever stop moving that is. You're putting it way too simple, like it's easy. It's tough as hell. Well I'm assuming we're talking about the best players in the world here. And I don't think cannons + HT have any more of a mobility issue than turrets + marines/thors. Simply because storm has a longer range than marines and 1 HT can storm away mutas whereas it takes a bunch of marines to fend off mutas. Not to mention blink stalkers. And like I said, casting storm on a ball of mutas is at least going to bring them into the light yellow, which is a big deal if you do it to the whole flock. And it will make them pull back which gives you more time for your stalkers to get there. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying the reason they're having trouble is cause it's new.
Cannons + HT are definitely A LOT worse than turrets + thor/marine for dealing with mutas. Mostly because thor shots are inevitable damage, and stimmed marines are not only fast as hell, but they can shoot down mutas in mere seconds, while stalkers take like a million years to kill them. Mutas can fly away from stalkers without taking heavy losses even if stalkers blink right beneath them, while marines will shred them if they do as much as fly near them.
Also, given Thor range, you can't hide mutas behind bases effectively, as most maps don't have enough space, while protoss can't shoot mutas so far. Also, you don't mention that mutas can force storms and waste energy, and even fly in for templar snipe then fly away.
Stalker/HT is not effective against mutalisks. Phoenix is SUPPOSED to be the natural counter, but given the numbers you need it isn't. I don't think the tempest is a solution, or that it needs to be solved at all, I just think that this is and will be problematic forever, and even when they don't do too much damage, they give map control and basically contain protoss, so zerg can expand almost freely.
|
Mutas speed 3.75 -> 3.5
Remove ghost snipe
There I fixed balance
|
|
|
On November 10 2011 05:16 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 15:49 Holophonist wrote:On November 09 2011 08:51 mordk wrote:On November 09 2011 07:08 Holophonist wrote:On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat and yoou will most likely have to vastly outplay your opponent to win. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that. HT. Just ht. Storm is awesome vs mutas because even if they "dodge" it, you still are hitting them at least a little and it makes them back up and have to heal... that's a big deal. At worst you're going to take like 10 - 20 hp off of all the mutas and at best you could take them down by like half or more. And, despite your bleak outlook on archons, they DESTROY mutas. It's not even close. The extremely high health, mixed with the bonus/splash dmg is just not even close. Storm/archons also happen to be the counter to the other half of the muta/ling combo as well. The bottom line is they're new and protoss players aren't too familiar with how to defend against them and when to go put pressure once you have it decently under control. Templars have this huge mobility problem against mutalisks. Which is pretty much the same problem the entire protoss army has with mutas. They aren't dangerous because of their burst damage or their HP, or their splash. They're dangerous because of their crazy mobility. Normally, a zerg player can make it so protoss can NEVER get an all out engagement for an entire game. Sure, if zerg sends his mutas head on against an Archon/Stalker/HT ball he'll get DESTROYED, but that's not the point. With a large mutalisk ball, zerg can pull a protoss players from one arm at a time, eventually ripping them off. This is not kratoss brutality, but rather a slower, more insidious but still huge amount of damage. Watch Crazymoving vs Hero. Hero showed some AMAZING templar play, and still couldn't deal with mutas at all. Crazymoving just avoided archons, dodged storms, attacked at the natural, then the third, then the main, then the pylons, all while losing a few mutas which were quickly replaced. Eventually, Hero was starved. Had crazymoving been a better player, he'd have dealt the damage, then transitioned into infestor ling play and rolled way before what he did. Crazymoving even managed to just nosedive some templars and snipe them in the face of stalkers and receive almost no damage. Archons do destroy mutas... if they can ever hit them... Storms do counter mutas, if mutas ever stop moving that is. You're putting it way too simple, like it's easy. It's tough as hell. Well I'm assuming we're talking about the best players in the world here. And I don't think cannons + HT have any more of a mobility issue than turrets + marines/thors. Simply because storm has a longer range than marines and 1 HT can storm away mutas whereas it takes a bunch of marines to fend off mutas. Not to mention blink stalkers. And like I said, casting storm on a ball of mutas is at least going to bring them into the light yellow, which is a big deal if you do it to the whole flock. And it will make them pull back which gives you more time for your stalkers to get there. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying the reason they're having trouble is cause it's new. Cannons + HT are definitely A LOT worse than turrets + thor/marine for dealing with mutas. Mostly because thor shots are inevitable damage, and stimmed marines are not only fast as hell, but they can shoot down mutas in mere seconds, while stalkers take like a million years to kill them. Mutas can fly away from stalkers without taking heavy losses even if stalkers blink right beneath them, while marines will shred them if they do as much as fly near them. Also, given Thor range, you can't hide mutas behind bases effectively, as most maps don't have enough space, while protoss can't shoot mutas so far. Also, you don't mention that mutas can force storms and waste energy, and even fly in for templar snipe then fly away. Stalker/HT is not effective against mutalisks. Phoenix is SUPPOSED to be the natural counter, but given the numbers you need it isn't. I don't think the tempest is a solution, or that it needs to be solved at all, I just think that this is and will be problematic forever, and even when they don't do too much damage, they give map control and basically contain protoss, so zerg can expand almost freely.
I was talking more about the mobility of each. you don't think blink stalkers and HT are more mobile than marine thor? I know what you mean about the superior dps of marines compared to stalkers but the stalkers have a lot going for them as well... they don't have stim themselves to death, they have blink and they can be warped in. Basically the point I'm trying to get across is, in theory, protoss should have everything it needs to deal with mutas, once protoss players get used to dealing with them.
But in the interest of accuracy, flying away from marines feels about the same as flying away from blink stalkers. And yes, you can make templars waste energy, but again, same with baiting a stim from a bunch of marines. And it's even worth noting that having to spot the mutas and storm them is a lot more difficult than just keeping a thor in your base that will auto attack. Again, I'm not saying protoss players don't have trouble with mutas, I'm saying they just have to get used to dealing with them and they don't need any buff/muta nerf to do so.
|
Blizzard already anticipated that mass muta will be the new norm in ZvP weeks/months before the rest of the world, hence the tempest =))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
|
On November 10 2011 07:06 Coal wrote:
Blizzard already anticipated that mass muta will be the new norm in ZvP weeks/months before the rest of the world, hence the tempest =))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
but this is idiotic.
the tempest clearly shows that blizzard knows muta play is very hard for toss to deal with but they don't want to fix it until what, 2013?
|
Thanks for color blind version, I spent like 5 minutes aquinting at the first one then gave up, then I saw the colorblind zerson. :D
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
On November 10 2011 06:59 Holophonist wrote:
I was talking more about the mobility of each. you don't think blink stalkers and HT are more mobile than marine thor?
Not really a question of mobility, a thor can defend alone a base with some turrets beofre the number of mutas becomes too big, and you can very easily split marines in small groups because they have a too high dps to take the risk to kill them if you don't have enough mutas, and even if the zerg kills them, it gies the time to the terran reinforcements to come defend. You could think protoss can do the same, but terrans don't give a shit if they lose marines, they can do a lot of them in a very short time for not a lot of money. Stalkers are far more expensive and you can't lose them and if you lose to much of them mutas can kill your entire army.
Storms can be "easy" to doge if you have a good muta control, because when you see the ht moving to storm, you have time to retreat most of your mutas and kill it with 2 mutas.
|
On November 09 2011 21:44 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:41 ambrosiaa wrote:On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread. Oh please. So what if Clide, the only terran in his group didnt make it through? And are you saying these stats are fake? Please stop trying to give yourself excuses just cos you're getting your ass kicked in ladder even though you're terran. People have already stated that this graphs are for tournaments at the HIGHEST LVL of play, where terran is clearly OP at the moment. If you look at the HIGHEST LVL of play you will NOTICE that terrans are not doing that well. If you see these graphs you would expect alot of terrans in the top 8 of almost every tournament. Then you take a look here: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues. Then you realise that these graphs are FISHY.
EU Go4SC2 Cup # 137 isn't the highest level of play.
|
On November 10 2011 07:48 AndAgain wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:44 Snowbear wrote:On November 09 2011 21:41 ambrosiaa wrote:On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread. Oh please. So what if Clide, the only terran in his group didnt make it through? And are you saying these stats are fake? Please stop trying to give yourself excuses just cos you're getting your ass kicked in ladder even though you're terran. People have already stated that this graphs are for tournaments at the HIGHEST LVL of play, where terran is clearly OP at the moment. If you look at the HIGHEST LVL of play you will NOTICE that terrans are not doing that well. If you see these graphs you would expect alot of terrans in the top 8 of almost every tournament. Then you take a look here: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues. Then you realise that these graphs are FISHY. EU Go4SC2 Cup # 137 isn't the highest level of play.
Exactly, any league where Protoss wins stuff isn't the highest league. It goes against the narrative that Protoss needs buffs and Terran needs nerfs.
|
Hehe standard deviation and binomial distributions... I hate statistics..
I feel bad for toss, jeez they are really getting the short end of the stick now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
