|
On January 03 2012 02:37 Badfatpanda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 02:04 laharl23 wrote:On January 03 2012 01:49 Badfatpanda wrote:On January 03 2012 00:56 laharl23 wrote:On January 03 2012 00:51 ZenithM wrote:On January 02 2012 23:39 Badfatpanda wrote:On January 02 2012 23:00 ZenithM wrote:On January 02 2012 22:47 Badfatpanda wrote:On January 02 2012 20:15 ToastieNL wrote:
TvP is likely changing because
A- people learned to aim with smaller EMP
B- Skymehci s being developped and P needs to adapt
C- The core problem of the matchup (Colossi strong gateway weak) hasn't been attacked
D- Terran goes 2 engi bay faster than 2 forges for P
What? these are from professional matches. Skymech hasn't been seen being used other than here and there in a random bo3 since beta against protoss. People aren't learning to aim with EMP any more than 3 months ago, they've just been getting more ghosts. The core problem of the matchup is warpgate remax and zealots ability to tank damage for Protoss AOE units so well. And Terran getting ebays earlier than Protoss STILL end up with Protoss hitting 3/3 first because of chronoboost. Come on man. So, if there are only problems coming from Protoss OPness, how do you explain the even winrate? Better, Terran is actually ahead. My only problem with Terran is the strength of their one base play because of minerals oversaturation with mules. This is really problematic, design wise. Why would they be allowed to have 25% more income on one base than Protoss or Zerg (you saturate with roughly 16-20 SCV and a MULE mines like 4 SCVs so it's literally 20-25% more mining)? It's gigantic and emphasizes all-in play, because of the momentum you gain over the over races. The rest I'm ready to acknowledge everything you want, from "chargelots a-move boohoohoo OP, I must stutter step and it's hard  " to "mech is so bad, why can't I go mech even though Protoss can't go stargate either :'(". But I'd like the one base terran imbalance (in my humble opinion) to be dealt with, first. Then, nerf Protoss to the ground if you want. I DIDN'T SAY THERE WERE ONLY PROBLEMS. Please ffs just read what I was responding to. He wrote why TvP was changing from P favored to T favored, I said that his reasons didn't hold up. I don't believe in these win rates I think the majority of the system data is inflated due to the nature that TLPD accumulates it's data, the skill difference will be quite large. And in addition look at what Protoss has to offer in Korea among the top tier of players. What have they done recently and what have their Terran equivalents won? It's not due to imbalance it's due to a difference in player skill that has never really been examined and cannot be quantified into little graphs that come up every month. Oh look, it's the usual "Terran players are just better". every time i see that post i just laugh, "guys terran win rates are just high cause u know terrans are just the best players duah" Prove me wrong hot shot? Besides are you really crying over 52-48 LOL. Please enlighten me as to how my assessment was wrong though really. where was i whining about imbalance? I'm just saying its stupid to say that the only reason terran wins is because they're players are just better. if anyone is crying imbalance its you. Its impossible to prove whether a certain race of players are better and its just plain stupid to even bring that up when talking about balance. I'm not crying imbalance, ffs I play random, the only racial affiliation I have comes up when people completely misjudge a matchup. But here's as much proof as I can put forward. We're using these TLPD graphs to gather arguments from. Specifically the Korean W/R graph, as international has little to do with anything as the skill disparity is larger. So, by assuming these to have value, so does the Korean TLPD database. Now we can bring the TLPD ELO into the argument seeing as it is derived from the same games that the graphs are drawn from. Let's examine the amount of Terran players above 2100 ELO by the TLPD's system. We come up with 15, now this is solely Koreans and the majority of gameplay stems from the GSL, I believe 100% of the data stems from offline events as well, so lag and such isn't a factor. Take a look at how many Protoss cross the 2100 mark. 6 Take a look at the win ratios of top Korean Terrans. The large majority are well above 50% as a whole and weak in 1 variable matchup. Now examine the winrates of those Protoss above the 2100 ELO rating, they generally have MUCH lower avg winrates, yet again their weak matchup fluctuates. As to the reason I chose 2100 as a reference point, many of the players below 2100 have fallen inactive, and the players above 2100 rating for all races are easily recognizable as very prolific and having great runs in the GSL Code A/S. What I would like to know, and I would hypothesize it being true, is if this trend continues to follow a similar ratio throughout the entire index, only accounting for players still active as of December where these statistics were gathered from. Now go ahead, strawman this again, I know you will.
The statistics for the winrate graphs have to come from somewhere. You know, players. If the top ELO was dominated by Terran that can explain why Terran subsequently dominates match-up statistics for the most part, but you're still at the same cross roads trying to elaborate why.
Not very credible to pre-emptively lay down a response will be a strawman.
|
On January 03 2012 02:50 K3Nyy wrote:
I feel bad for TvZ. T_T
It's never been Zerg favored since the beginning.
But Terrans not OP, they're more skilled.
See: this thread.
|
It's hilarious how Terran can have such a consistent winrate despite being nerfed to the ground lol. I foresee more nerfs coming to Terrans in the future and adjustments to the Bunker of course 
|
Marine: -5 HP
Think about it.
|
On January 02 2012 20:42 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2012 20:39 DaveVAH wrote:
Why is in this graph the overall international win rate is showing terran at 50 something percent for novmber? while it was at 49 when the november graph was released last month. also why is pvt 52% to 48% in this version for november while last month it was reading 45% T to 55% P?? are these the same graphs done by the same person or different? has the numbers been changed? Thanks again, Ctuchik. Is your name by any chance taken from the Belgariad by Eddings?
Great book
|
On January 03 2012 03:12 Jermstuddog wrote:
Marine: -5 HP
Think about it.
to vulnurable in the lategame... it's already questionably close to being not useful once colossi and storms are out.
also i think zealots and zerglings early could be too good.
im with bliz on this. really nerfing the marine affects too much in the game. yet i think some very small things could be aplied for statistical reasons (stuff like that might be enough to get zvt to 50% without influencing the metagame) like +0.02 cooldown on firerate.
|
Update: So apparently the November post that was showing such a vast winrate for Toss that all the Terrans were complaining was off. With new data, the winrate in november was nearly 50% in PvT.
|
On January 03 2012 03:04 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 02:50 K3Nyy wrote:
I feel bad for TvZ. T_T
It's never been Zerg favored since the beginning. But Terrans not OP, they're more skilled. See: this thread.
Its been Zerg favored in August so thats wrong but its not like anybody looks at the statistics they just come in the thread and whine about terran since that wont even get you a warning, now Zergs would have a reason to complain about ZvP but they know better.
|
On January 03 2012 03:24 secretary bird wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 03:04 Jermstuddog wrote:On January 03 2012 02:50 K3Nyy wrote:
I feel bad for TvZ. T_T
It's never been Zerg favored since the beginning. But Terrans not OP, they're more skilled. See: this thread. Its been Zerg favored in August so thats wrong but its not like anybody looks at the statistics they just come in the thread and whine about terran since that wont even get you a warning, now Zergs would have a reason to complain about ZvP but they know better.
he was obviously talking about the international graphs.
the korean graphs dont have enough data to argue based on them.
|
These data come from the pros, and is not representative of all players. P>T in lowers leagues.
|
Great work, thanks for this! 
|
On January 03 2012 03:12 Jermstuddog wrote:
Marine: -5 HP
Think about it.
Early +1 lings would destroy bio play in ZvT, too big a change.
|
On January 03 2012 03:27 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 03:24 secretary bird wrote:On January 03 2012 03:04 Jermstuddog wrote:On January 03 2012 02:50 K3Nyy wrote:
I feel bad for TvZ. T_T
It's never been Zerg favored since the beginning. But Terrans not OP, they're more skilled. See: this thread. Its been Zerg favored in August so thats wrong but its not like anybody looks at the statistics they just come in the thread and whine about terran since that wont even get you a warning, now Zergs would have a reason to complain about ZvP but they know better. he was obviously talking about the international graphs. the korean graphs dont have enough data to argue based on them.
I thought that doesnt even matter, highest skill level only as I hear so often but I guess people choose whatever supports their bias.
|
On January 03 2012 03:28 Gurafity wrote:
These data come from the pros, and is not representative of all players. P>T in lowers leagues.
i think that david kim said that under grandmaster they have the problem that TvP is like 65% for terrans.
not sure if i remember it right (sounds pretty extreme) but i think it was in his last interview
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
It looks quite balanced right now, great :D
On January 03 2012 03:28 Gurafity wrote:
These data come from the pros, and is not representative of all players. P>T in lowers leagues.
I love how people still throw that without any proof, and the mmr system makes you play against opponents of your level anyways
|
On January 03 2012 03:33 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 03:28 Gurafity wrote:
These data come from the pros, and is not representative of all players. P>T in lowers leagues. i think that david kim said that under grandmaster they have the problem that TvP is like 65% for terrans. not sure if i remember it right (sounds pretty extreme) but i think it was in his last interview
It was at the BlizzCon, way before the deadly EMP nerf.
|
Why do people hate micro-reliant matchups (TvP) that rely on whoever has the better splitting/uses abilities first/gets the most out of their units? I mean, isn't that more skill involved than getting into a choke position that you can automatically win vs, or having maps that favor turtling up a 200 food deathball then 1Aing?
What I guess I mean to ask is, how would you like matchups you don't like to be instead? What would you want to be happening, if not better unit control wins when two similarly sized and upgraded deathballs run headlong into each other, provided they withstand getting to a late-game situation.
|
On January 03 2012 03:33 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 03:28 Gurafity wrote:
These data come from the pros, and is not representative of all players. P>T in lowers leagues. i think that david kim said that under grandmaster they have the problem that TvP is like 65% for terrans. not sure if i remember it right (sounds pretty extreme) but i think it was in his last interview
That was for top korean ladder in October I believe.
|
On January 03 2012 03:29 NeonFox wrote:Early +1 lings would destroy bio play in ZvT, too big a change.
and Early +1 armor Marines would put things back in place. I don't see the problem.
Mind you, in BW, marines had 40hp flat all the time and did 1/2 the DPS unstimmed that they do in this game.
yes, different game is different, but we'd still be talking a comparatively buffed marine vs a comparatively nerfed zergling.
|
On January 03 2012 03:32 secretary bird wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2012 03:27 Big J wrote:On January 03 2012 03:24 secretary bird wrote:On January 03 2012 03:04 Jermstuddog wrote:On January 03 2012 02:50 K3Nyy wrote:
I feel bad for TvZ. T_T
It's never been Zerg favored since the beginning. But Terrans not OP, they're more skilled. See: this thread. Its been Zerg favored in August so thats wrong but its not like anybody looks at the statistics they just come in the thread and whine about terran since that wont even get you a warning, now Zergs would have a reason to complain about ZvP but they know better. he was obviously talking about the international graphs. the korean graphs dont have enough data to argue based on them. I thought that doesnt even matter, highest skill level only as I hear so often but I guess people choose whatever supports their bias.
i argued the same way only yesterday in another thread, if you want to check for consistency... i think it was the protoss too limited thread)
im all for such balance stats being taken from the highest level, but that doesnt make 100games of the same 20people more statistically relevant. especially as everyone can see by looking at the korean graphs that the statistical varience is really high there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
