EPTOne thing I have to ask is whether you cut off the replays of certain maps at the point where you changed the maps. i.e. When the golds were removed from Playhem.
It'd be interesting to see how that effects TvX
31,500 Replays - A look at balance in Starcraft II - Page 15
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CapnAmerica
United States508 Posts
One thing I have to ask is whether you cut off the replays of certain maps at the point where you changed the maps. i.e. When the golds were removed from Playhem. It'd be interesting to see how that effects TvX | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
vpatrickd
Indonesia279 Posts
Cheese wins!! | ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
I think this truly shows the impact of maps on a particular match up. I am a Zerg player myself and I find myself enjoying a particular when played on specific maps (Say Protoss on Tal'Darim) yet I feel continuously helpless on Shattered Temple. Starcraft is really a game of imperfect information but I don't think you should always straight up lose a game if you didn't completely scout or correctly guess his strategy (say 6 gate vs 6 gate robo). On maps like Tal'Darim altar, given that I have strong macro, I can adjust my unit composition to counter the unit composition of my opponent where as on Shattered it's too late regardless of positions. I could say the same of TvZ on most maps, versus on Shakuras Plateau or again Shattered Temple. In any case, I think maps are 100% the reason we have so much balance problems (evident by ladder statistics) and I wish that Blizzard would stop being retarded and use the balanced maps used in the major tournaments aka GSL. Those maps are gorgeous and well-tested. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 06 2012 13:10 Steel wrote: Very nice. I think this truly shows the impact of maps on a particular match up. I am a Zerg player myself and I find myself enjoying a particular when played on specific maps (Say Protoss on Tal'Darim) yet I feel continuously helpless on Shattered Temple. Starcraft is really a game of imperfect information but I don't think you should always straight up lose a game if you didn't completely scout or correctly guess his strategy (say 6 gate vs 6 gate robo). On maps like Tal'Darim altar, given that I have strong macro, I can adjust my unit composition to counter the unit composition of my opponent where as on Shattered it's too late regardless of positions. I could say the same of TvZ on most maps, versus on Shakuras Plateau or again Shattered Temple. In any case, I think maps are 100% the reason we have so much balance problems (evident by ladder statistics) and I wish that Blizzard would stop being retarded and use the balanced maps used in the major tournaments aka GSL. Those maps are gorgeous and well-tested. Blizzard is moving toward the right path with the map pool. The quicker seasons means they can cycle out bad maps quickly and still have time to try new things. With recent map contest, which blizzard has taken note of it, I am sure we will see better maps as time goes on. I really wish they could just accept that some maps should be held back until players are out of the lower leagues. It would allow the higher level players to enjoy the more complex, macro maps; while allowing the newer players to cut their teeth on the smaller maps. There are so many bad players I used to encounter that would build a hidden second base on every large map. Tailoring the map pool to allow players to grow into the larger maps seems like the best way keep everyone happy and learning. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
dangthatsright
1158 Posts
On February 06 2012 18:40 Danglars wrote: If there was SIGNIFICANT imbalances as claimed on some maps, it would've shown up here. Fairly random sampling of players that do online tournaments with no entry fee and low prize money available. The highlighted winrates are fairly confirming of some widely-held beliefs on map balance, and also serve to disprove a lot of contentions frequently put forth. I.E. That Taldarim Altar really favors a particular race. Well it is not uncommon for people to claim so and so map is imbalanced because of so and so spawning positions, so maybe different spawn positions averaging out is a factor? I do agree that significant imbalance at this level overall would probably have shown up in this set of replays, but there is also information we don't have which makes some of us less willing to pass judgment aside from what is quite clear anyways. | ||
|
BoBoForce
Canada27 Posts
| ||
|
syrupychinadian
112 Posts
I find it funny that the highest protoss win-rate is P-G-G-P....guess who's gonna be proxy 2-gating from now on? | ||
|
GeorgeForeman
United States1746 Posts
If so, that's just ass kickin'! Also, nice work, OP. Well presented, etc. etc. | ||
|
Sroobz
United States1377 Posts
| ||
|
downmaster
Canada116 Posts
Also anyone else using the cloud he made as a wallpaper? | ||
|
Zennith
United States795 Posts
On February 07 2012 12:08 Sroobz wrote: These stats mean nothing...I think every single Z and T Korean would agree that Dual Site is the most Z favored map out there. Statistics > Anecdotal Evidence 100% of the time. | ||
|
farside604
Canada127 Posts
| ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
As a I result I think what would be interesting is a critical comparison of the features of Dualsight compared with those of Cloud Kingdom. Could provide some valuable insights into how and why a map can be Protoss favoured and maybe explain away some of the heavier map win rate imbalances (i.e. demonstrate that its a problem with map design rather than a racial imbalance). | ||
|
FreudianTrip
Switzerland1983 Posts
On February 08 2012 02:16 Lightspeaker wrote: Protoss is down in every matchup on every map here except for Cloud Kingdom and for PvZ on Shakuras Plateau. And this is most extreme on Dualsight. As a I result I think what would be interesting is a critical comparison of the features of Dualsight compared with those of Cloud Kingdom. Could provide some valuable insights into how and why a map can be Protoss favoured and maybe explain away some of the heavier map win rate imbalances (i.e. demonstrate that its a problem with map design rather than a racial imbalance). Small ramps versus Open Ground = Forcefields are king or Forcefields do nothing. Some may argue otherwise but I truly believe the sentry is the most important unit in the game for any race. Forge expand is hard on an open natural like dualsight so players that don't feel they can risk it go for either a 1 gate expand which can easily lead to your nexus being cancelled multiple times by mass speedling leaving you behind economically and on tech and army. Or you can go for a saf 3 gate expand which forces you to do a zealot sentry pressure which is such an old build that Zerg has learnt to handle it safely on maps that are GOOD for a zealot sentry pressure and Dualsight is a perfect example of a bad map for such a build. All open ground AND multiple attack paths? There's not enough sentries in the universe to have enough Forcefields to keep your sentries from dying AND cause enough economic damage to put you into a lead/equal position. I'm not saying it's impossible to win just that most of the time you're just going to have to be better than your opponent rather than outplaying him. Edit: all IMO obviously. Feel free to call me bad if you think I'm wrong. | ||
|
fairymonger
United States81 Posts
| ||
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
Cup? (Maybe from tournament names)  >.> Is so common rainbow (?) | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
MrSalamandra
United Kingdom412 Posts
On February 08 2012 21:38 IgnE wrote: Shouldn't we adjust the win rates by something like an overall expected win rate given the relative ratings of the players? If one race's player set has a generally higher rating, then that will skew win rates on certain maps compared to others. Need to find an expected winrate for each map dataset based on relative rating. Given the number of players that would have been involved in this massive number of replays, any variation in the average ability of players for each race is going to be tiny. | ||
| ||
