TLPD Winrate Charts: December - Page 8

On January 03 2012 03:38 Jermstuddog wrote:


and Early +1 armor Marines would put things back in place. I don't see the problem.

On January 03 2012 03:38 Jermstuddog wrote:


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 03:35 Gurafity wrote:


It was at the BlizzCon, way before the deadly EMP nerf.

On January 03 2012 02:31 Tehweenus wrote:
Can't we all just look at this from an objective standpoint briefly?

1. People read into things whatever they personally would like to see. Terran success is because Terran's are skilled. Protoss success is imbalance.

2. The individual with a highly subjective and quite generally wrong opinion is always right, and need not evidence himself to people who are too plainly stupid to understand his higher level of thinking inspired by the unjust experiences he has suffered.

3. People subscribe to mob mentality. If enough people say something that is inherently false is actually true, then it becomes true.

That is what we can get from these graphs. These graphs are actually TL's Bible.

On January 03 2012 03:01 Tyrant0 wrote:


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 03:53 TheMooseHeed wrote:
These results always confuse me.

Most zergs I know say zvt is easy and zvp is impossible, but apparently we are favored zvp and have been for a while? I guess it must just be at the highest levels that this is the case.

On January 03 2012 04:09 secretary bird wrote:



If both players dont really micro a lot most of the time zerg will beat terran and the protoss deathball beats zerg but if they do the result can be very different I think that explains it.

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 03 2012 04:21 Sabu113 wrote:


This is what J is seeking:
Q.The match-making in the battle-net is designed so that players usually have around 50% win ratio in the ladder. How are you able to achieve that?
Hide Spoiler - A. (David Kim) All we can get are numbers. The match-making may be 50:50 overall, but PvT Matchup tends to be 65% Terran winning. There are other ways for us in calculating these numbers.
Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=297048

As for your posts, are you stating that the game was balanced and the better player won in the PvT matchup during the pre-1.4.2 period ?

On January 03 2012 04:28 secretary bird wrote:


Thats for korean GM only obviously.

On January 03 2012 04:28 secretary bird wrote:


Thats for korean GM only obviously.

On January 03 2012 04:30 SeaSwift wrote:
Badfatpanda, what you are saying makes no sense.

The reason why players have high ELO is because they win a lot. Therefore, player ELO will be higher when their matchup is imbalanced in favour of their race. Therefore, using high ELO of a race to disprove race imbalance in that race's favour is completely illogical.



No, it's not. Read the thread. In the top spoiler, he talks about the Korean GM in particular, but below that he's talking about Ladder in general. And yes, I know this was before 1.4.2, read the spoilered quote and you'll find Sabu was talking about pre-1.4.2

On January 03 2012 04:33 secretary bird wrote:


Of course it is look at the link for the balance snapshot how could it change from protoss favored overall to terrans winning 65% in such a short time with no changes.

On January 03 2012 04:35 SeaSwift wrote:


??? He didn't say it was Protoss favoured overall. He said "overall Protoss seems quite weak while Terran and Zerg seem about the same". I have no idea where you are getting this all from.