| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Darclite
United States1021 Posts
Also, regarding the scale of the graph, it's not like he didn't label the y-axis or include every number. You can read the graph very specifically. On October 26 2011 13:00 doko100 wrote: It's even statistically proven that outside of GSL protoss is the strongest race. It is? | ||
|
ChaosTerran
Austria844 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:25 SeaSwift wrote: I wouldn't bother replying to him. His post history says everything you need to know, ranging from "protoss players are just being retards as usual" (here) to "protoss players...... /facepalm" (here). He clearly either wants attention or is just heavily biased and doesn't want his race to look biased. Not to mention that what he wrote most recently is just plain wrong - if you flip a coin 1000 times and it lands on it's head 1000/1000 of those times, there is a (1/2)^1000 chance of that happening. Sure, it is chance, but they possibility is so small it is far more likely to be weighted. This is why statistics are used. Well I'm sorry, but recently every protoss player is just whining. In every single thread no matter if it's LR or whatever protoss players cry, it's even worse than Zerg in '10. Yes I'm getting quite annoyed by protoss players recently and so do a lot of other people in this community, you spread so much hate, you flame us on the ladder and complain all the time about everything. Sometimes I wish blizzard would just remove protoss from the game so that we can get rid of you balance whiners. On October 26 2011 13:00 doko100 wrote: It's even statistically proven that outside of GSL protoss is the strongest race. It is? Yes it is, ladder statistics show that Protoss is the most successful race on the ladder. Not saying Protoss is the strongest race, but it always depends on how you look at things, these numbers here are extremely misleading because they ignore individual skill. | ||
|
m0ck
4194 Posts
| ||
|
GhostFall
United States830 Posts
Thats why they switch sides after every game. | ||
|
phyren
United States1067 Posts
Over large numbers, one does expect the numbers to converge to the probabilities. What I mean by this is that when flipping a coin, every single flip has an equal probability of being heads or tails. Similarly, a series of a hundred flips has an equal probability of being 100 tails or 50 tails followed by 50 heads. However, the probability of getting 50 total tails and 50 total heads will be very high due to the sheer number of orderings in which one can get 50 tails and 50 heads as compared to the exactly one ordering in which one can get 100 tails. In fact, this trend grows extremely quickly. The difference between the chance of getting 49 tails and 51 heads vs 50 each (allowing any order) may not be so huge. However, the difference between 49000 and 51000 vs 50000 each is much more noticeable, even though it results in the same percentage. People complaining that the graphs y axis scale is misrepresenting the data, or saying that 46% vs 54% is basically balanced are taking too naive of a view. As always, stats need to be taken with a grain of salt, and they don't conclusively prove imbalance, but the trend lines especially are very strong indicators that other players have been gradually adapting to deal with the possible threats protoss bring to the table. edit: I'm a dragoon! | ||
|
Woizit
801 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:20 iky43210 wrote: but remember last months' outcry about how terran is so much ahead of zerg, and now after updates of few hundred games winrates between T and Z for sept is actually extremely close? They're basically arguing a few percentage differences that falls within the standard deviation. You will be surprised at how few people can perceive graphs and scales. Business do the same thing all the time to trick their consumers, and it works also 5% higher is really nothing. Do you know in Chess white have a 55% winrates to black's 45%? I don't think many people would argue that game is imbalance Chess is imbalanced. People theorize about a perfect game being a draw, but you'll always see people believing the white player holds the advantage in a game (due to the first move). You'll see whenever a player gets around to playing white in a series, he's expected to take the initiative and go for the win due to that advantage. In contrast, a draw as black is not considered too bad. Obviously the statistics backing it up brings also furthers the psychology involved in winning or losing as white. | ||
|
Deckkie
Netherlands1595 Posts
I will not be saying anything about x is balanced or not balanced, thats for Blizzard to decide. What I do find very noteworthy is that the matchups a constantly fluctuating. I dare say that this isnt all because of blance changing. It shows the meta game, it shows that what we consider good or to good at this point might not be the same in the future. To me it shows that there is still so much to figure out. Although I never followed Broodwar, I will use it as " proof" that a game takes years to develop, and we are only getting started. | ||
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:31 GhostFall wrote: Chess is actually like 52% to white 48% to black. Thats why they switch sides after every game. actually its "usually scoring between 52 and 56 percent" 52 is the low park. I'd say this game is actually extremely close to balance when mirror games like chess can't even achieve 50%. Trying to reach perfect balance of 50% is laughable and artificial, but can probably be done by tweaking just the maps alone | ||
|
Logros
Netherlands9913 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:36 iky43210 wrote: actually its "usually scoring between 52 and 56 percent" 52 is the low park. I'd say this game is actually extremely close to balance when mirror games like chess can't even achieve 50%. Trying to reach perfect balance of 50% is laughable and artificial, but can probably be done by tweaking just the maps alone In chess you switch sides every game though. If you'd force half of the players to play white and half black I'm sure there'd be some complaints. This is also solely due to the fact that one player starts a turn first and SC is not turn-based so you can't really compare SC with chess in this regard. | ||
|
(Max 20 chars)
149 Posts
On November 07 2011 04:22 Nemireck wrote: I don't understand why Protoss is so low. I lose to toss all the time  This is only from tournaments and think about P winning 4 games per 100 more vT or 6 vZ (in these tournaments) and it would be perfectly 50-50 graph. It's not really far from perfect balance. edit: Oh it seems I didn't recognise all the pages. | ||
|
Deleted User 183001
2939 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:36 iky43210 wrote: actually its "usually scoring between 52 and 56 percent" 52 is the low park. I'd say this game is actually extremely close to balance when mirror games like chess can't even achieve 50%. Trying to reach perfect balance of 50% is laughable and artificial, but can probably be done by tweaking just the maps alone The argument that chess isn't balanced so it's fine that Starcraft isn't balance (and badly balanced, especially in Korea) is completely irrelevant and absurd. I guess some people will go to any lengths in their desperation to try and make a point. | ||
|
flowSthead
1065 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:31 doko100 wrote: Well I'm sorry, but recently every protoss player is just whining. In every single thread no matter if it's LR or whatever protoss players cry, it's even worse than Zerg in '10. Yes I'm getting quite annoyed by protoss players recently and so do a lot of other people in this community, you spread so much hate, you flame us on the ladder and complain all the time about everything. Sometimes I wish blizzard would just remove protoss from the game so that we can get rid of you balance whiners. Dude, that goes both ways. Maybe Protoss payers are sick and tired of being told they are just worse than their Terran/Zerg counterparts. I'm not in favor of balance whining either, but you do not just reply to balance whining. You are also replying poorly to legitimate balance ideas/complaints. It's one thing to decry the flamers and trolls, and another thing to decry the entire Protoss race. Just look at what you wrote and think about your own bias for a second. | ||
|
Zombie_Velociraptor
274 Posts
| ||
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:43 JudicatorHammurabi wrote: The argument that chess isn't balanced so it's fine that Starcraft isn't balance (and badly balanced, especially in Korea) is completely irrelevant and absurd. I guess some people will go to any lengths in their desperation to try and make a point. So even if Chess can't achieve balance without gimmicky moves such as switching side, what made you think Starcraft can? Switch race after every game? It doesn't matter whether chess is balance or not, I'm arguing on at what point should we considered what is balance. It shows a point that even a mirror game cannot be balance by a simple thing such as "first move". In that case, Starcraft is impossible to achieve perfect balance. It is just not going to happen with dynamic range of different units and player skills. Meta changes, playerskill varies, and all sort of factor will influence the winrates. You just can't address every little changes in winrates due to meta shifts (well, you could by constantly changing the terrain), but that would be silly. | ||
|
flowSthead
1065 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:45 Zombie_Velociraptor wrote: Thing is, most people wouldn't mention 'imbalance' at all had these percentages switched around from month to month, going from every race fluctuating between 40-60% winrates in whatever matchups - it's the fact that the Protoss race has in fact been consistently the least winning race, and Terran has been consistently the most winning race, in all matchups, every month since the game was first released. You can't blame that on metagame shifts or random statistical fluctuations. Technically, Protoss has had winnings months against Terran and Zerg. Zerg has never had a winning month against Terran, so that match up would seem to be the worst. Currently, it is worse for Protoss, but let's not pretend that Zerg has had an easy time of it. | ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:47 iky43210 wrote: It doesn't matter whether chess is balance or not, I'm arguing on at what point should we considered what is balance. I know Chess isn't the perfect analogy because of switching side, but it shows a point that even a mirror game cannot be balance by a simple of "first move". In that case, starcraft is impossible to achieve perefect balance. It is just not going to happen with dynamic range of different units and player skills. Chess is completely fucking irrelevant to Starcraft. The only reason chess is "imbalanced" with winrates is because one player has to go first. I know wikipedia isn't amazing but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_chess Because there is no first turn move in Starcraft, the whole chess discussion is useless, and just the last effort for Terrans to try and disprove all the evidence laid in front of them: at the highest level of play, your race is pretty overpowered and has been for months. | ||
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:52 SeaSwift wrote: Chess is completely fucking irrelevant to Starcraft. The only reason chess is "imbalanced" with winrates is because one player has to go first. I know wikipedia isn't amazing but: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-move_advantage_in_chess Because there is no first turn move in Starcraft, the whole chess discussion is useless, and just the last effort for Terrans to try and disprove all the evidence laid in front of them: at the highest level of play, your race is pretty overpowered and has been for months. you're missing the point. Chess is relevant to this discussion because Starcraft definitely has more variables and factors than a simple "first move". | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46498 Posts
Metagame/ natural variation, or something I can QQ about in the future as a Protoss player? Everything's only a few percentage points away ^^ | ||
|
gillon
Sweden1578 Posts
On November 07 2011 04:24 HaXXspetten wrote: Try Muta/Ling, it's impossible T.T Anyway, I wonder just how long Blizz will have to keep nerfing Terran before they ever drop below 50% lol  Looks just as stupid every month... ow well, BW took a long time before it became balanced as well, so... whatcha gonna do Except, it doesn't look stupid: TvZ 52% for T, TvP 54% for T. Sounds really fucking reasonable to me. You people need to actually look at the numbers rather than how tall/short he stretched them out on the graphs. | ||
|
Aim Here
Scotland672 Posts
On November 07 2011 06:20 iky43210 wrote: also 5% higher is really nothing. Do you know in Chess white have a 55% winrates to black's 45%? I don't think many people would argue that game is imbalance Umm, chess obviously is somewhat imbalanced in favour of white. White has the first move and has a positional advantage because of that (that's chess-specific, note; it's possible to have a combinatorical game where the second player to move would have the advantage). Chess is also an entirely deterministic game. If chess ever gets 'solved', then that percentage could instantly change to 100 (though more likely, it'll go to a draw). The imbalance is not a problem in chess, because there aren't chess players who only play black, or who only play white, and serious tournaments usually have a series of matches with the players alternating colours | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Patches Events
The PondCast
INu's Battles
Percival vs SHIN
Zoun vs herO
OSC
Replay Cast
OSC
BSL: Ladder Tournament
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Patches Events
BSL Open Qualifier
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
