TLPD Winrate Charts: December - Page 14

On January 06 2012 15:39 xrapture wrote:


Just because you'll lose a lot makes it unplayable? I've played Terran since beta and I'm not going to switch now just because times are tough. My macro games vs toss probably have me at a 30% winrate, hell I've even lost to plat tosses I've tried to play in a macro game, but working your ass off trying to improve your multitasking and micro against toss should be the main goal.

Who care's if Koreans are causing Terran to get nerfed? Any game we lose is SOLEY because our micro or macro wasn't good enough. More GG = More Skill.

On January 06 2012 16:03 hummingbird23 wrote:


Repeating it doesn't make it true. Games that you lost were not solely because of your macro/micro or strategy. Those are enormous variables, yes, but it doesn't zero out the contribution of race dynamics. You're matched with someone that the system thinks is equally skilled, you're not playing against HuK.

On January 06 2012 16:03 hummingbird23 wrote:


Repeating it doesn't make it true. Games that you lost were not solely because of your macro/micro or strategy. Those are enormous variables, yes, but it doesn't zero out the contribution of race dynamics. You're matched with someone that the system thinks is equally skilled, you're not playing against HuK.

On January 06 2012 05:49 Smackzilla wrote:


Seems to contradict this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=163417

"In North America, we feel that ZvT/ZvP are balanced. Protoss seems to be favored in PvT with a 60% win percentage."

However, he goes on to say in top-tier korea, terran is favored:

"In PvT however, top-tier terrans have a 6% win rate advantage over protoss. We generally don't see a difference within 5% as a balance issue, but 6% is a little bit outside that range. As in the past, Terran may become more powerful once Korean strategies make their way to other regions. We are keeping an eye on it at the moment."

On January 06 2012 16:08 biology]major wrote:



more gg = more skill, its an attitude thing. The game balance has nothing to do with the mindset of getting better and ignoring the rest. This is why some people are in gm and beyond, while many are stuck in a hopeless shithole

On January 06 2012 16:03 hummingbird23 wrote:


Repeating it doesn't make it true. Games that you lost were not solely because of your macro/micro or strategy. Those are enormous variables, yes, but it doesn't zero out the contribution of race dynamics. You're matched with someone that the system thinks is equally skilled, you're not playing against HuK.

On January 02 2012 20:42 Kenshi235 wrote:
Can't wait for another terran nerf. TvP gets harder and harder every day for T for non GM/top masters players, but b/c Pros are getting it done we gonna get nerfed more. Additionally I get bm'ed by every P at start assuming I'm going to cheese or 111 when I don't. I guess I should join the crowd if I'm already being blamed right?

On January 06 2012 18:36 HaruRH wrote:
Nobody should compare international graphs with the korean graphs. The graph we should be spotting out for is the international graph, simply because we are not koreans and we do not play like them. A 55% win rate for protoss in korea does not reflect the winrate of protosses internationally. Korean's mindset is to kill the enemy as soon as possible, while the mindset out of korea is to be really passive. Therefore, the graph of korea cannot represent the top level of play in StarCraft2. It only represents the korean's community in all aspect.

On January 03 2012 04:05 Badfatpanda wrote:


But there's a very high chance it will be considering the previous posts >.> OK, that's valid but since I look at ELO as a measure of skill in all matchups, mirror does come into account. So considering the fact that mirror matchups will dilute whatever potential imbalance there is, the resulting calculations will be a more accurate indication of performance as a whole. Regarding imbalance, any cries of imbalance relating to these graphs is relating to a fear that eventually if trends continue imbalance would exist.

These numbers aren’t static. They shift almost constantly with the metagame as newly discovered strategies spread through the community, and that heavily influences how they’re interpreted. Also, due to the way the math works out we will almost never see ratios of 50:50; we expect a variance of +/- 5% in these results. So, if a win/loss ratio is approximately 55%:45%, this would indicate that the matchup is well balanced—we expect those numbers to fluctuate within that range to some degree. Ratios just outside of that range are still within acceptable boundaries. It is only after win/loss ratios exceed 60%:40% that there is an indication that a potential imbalance might exist. We keep a sharp eye on these variations from day to day and week to week, staying constantly alert for where the numbers are changing and what the possible causes could be. It’s fairly common, for example, for a new strategy or build order to skew the numbers in favor of a particular race for a brief period, until the metagame catches up and the counter strategies spread through the community.

From the balance team, source: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/3551858/StarCraft_II_Balance_Snapshot_-9_22_2011#blog

So disregarding April, the game has been in a state of overall balance. And even the April turn only reinforces the point of the article I provided. Directly after the amulet removal toss were in a depression, 1 month later with no balance patch the MU magically was buffed up 14%.

So I feel ELO up to this point is determined more from player skill than it exists from a state of imbalance in the game overall.

On January 06 2012 18:41 hyperknight wrote:
TvP is heavily favored for the protoss as the game goes longer. Hence we will see lot of terrans going 1/1/1 or all-in vs toss players. Mid and late game heavily favour toss armies. T_T

On January 06 2012 19:24 erazerr wrote:


I don't think that late game protoss(when terran has ghosts) (or especially Mid-game) is overpowered against T. I think the reason why terrans decide to all in is simply because its easier to execute than a macro game against toss, because of the way protoss techs(charge/blink/tier3aoe/upgrade advantages).

On January 06 2012 10:13 double620 wrote:
My opinion about PvT.

In the past months, terrans did not have to play macro games against toss. They simply do not have to. For example, in gsl group nomination, puzzle said marineking on ladder never played marco games against him and mkp respond that because he does not think he has to. As a result, toss losing a lot of pvt and terran had many easy wins. Even one of the best pvt er in sc2 at all time, oGsMc lost a lot of pvts because he can not defend in the early game.
And because of 111, almost all the early toss cheese or timing did not work, simply because toss players had to prepared for 111 agresstion in the early and therefore, no 4 gate, no dt, no 6 gate. Toss needed a robo in the early game.
Therefore, the only way for toss to win is macro game.

A few months past, terran got nerf because the winrate in pvt looked too good for terran. In gsl, terran got even more nerf with some new introduced maps. So terrans are forced to play macro games. For example, puma is known to play 111. But in DH final, he used 111 in only one game and failed. He won nasl season2 with no 111 at all.
Terrans again needed to play macro games. But in general they found it hard and that makes sense. Because a lots of terrans they do not play macro games seriously in pvt for months and they are playing against toss players who only had a chance to win with macro games. Of course, in macro game, toss should be doing better.
If you can beat diamond toss with 111 before and now that did not work any more and you find yourself always lose to diamond toss in a macro game. That is not because of game inbalance, it is because you do not have the skill.

As a toss player, I agree at the moment pvt late game looks favored to toss. But I believe that can change anytime. For terran, there is one good thing which is in gsl codes there are so many good terran players there and they are showing new things all the time. For example, when Jiajji showed his mech play against puzzle, puzzle was in trouble and he had no answer to that.

After all, if there is one race should be nerf, it is terran. There is no reason to nerf a race losing more games than other races.

On January 06 2012 18:50 secretary bird wrote:


The korean graph represents the highest level of play,the international one doesnt because most of the players are pretty bad. The international tournament winrates dont represent most of us because we dont play in tournaments and its meaningless because its for the most part progamers against random masters players, top koreans against foreigners and rarely players of somewhat equal skill against each other.

On January 06 2012 19:49 AndAgain wrote:
My theory on why there aren't that many terrans at masters is that it's the least intuitive race to play strategically. Masters is the point where you need to have a little understanding of how timings work. Terran generally doesn't make units in bursts, so it's not clear how one takes advantage of timings.

Conversely, there are so many zergs around this level because they can make the most units in a small window of time. Protoss is in between.

On January 06 2012 19:49 AndAgain wrote:
My theory on why there aren't that many terrans at masters is that it's the least intuitive race to play strategically. Masters is the point where you need to have a little understanding of how timings work. Terran generally doesn't make units in bursts, so it's not clear how one takes advantage of timings.

Conversely, there are so many zergs around this level because they can make the most units in a small window of time. Protoss is in between.

On January 06 2012 17:51 hummingbird23 wrote:


The attitude is about realizing that you control 90% of the game. It's, as you said, a mindset for improving, not a model of how games are actually decided. "The only reason you didn't win was because you didn't have better macro/micro/strategy." is untrue, but it makes a good meme.