|
On March 27 2012 17:35 NoctemSC wrote:HSM is also extremely slow. your opponent can split his army to reduce damage, a lot of the time you can figure out which unit is HSM target and just run that unit away.
The biggest issue is that the damage is not done fully in the radius and the splash is very weak.
The seeker missile is no where close to being as strong as fungal and storm, but it shouldn't be either, since that unit has so many other spells.
Basically, against anything not stacked, it's extremely ineffective.
|
The biggest flaw with the above theory is that you fail consistently to explain why:
1. only late game TvP is questioned?
2. GM guys (merz, beasty) shared the same feeling for late game TvP. Yet you always conveniently forget about this and try to spin it that is only a gold-platinum Terran thing.
Until you incorporate these 2 points into your reasoning we have every right to call this "theory" biased.
|
On March 27 2012 21:03 Kakaru2 wrote:
The biggest flaw with the above theory is that you fail consistently to explain why:
1. only late game TvP is questioned?
2. GM guys (merz, beasty) shared the same feeling for late game TvP. Yet you always conveniently forget about this and try to spin it that is only a gold-platinum Terran thing.
Until you incorporate these 2 points into your reasoning we have every right to call this "theory" biased.
And you consistently get protoss and zerg pros complaining about their matchups being unbalanced in either early, mid, or lategame. Terrans complain about lategame TvZ, zergs claim to still have trouble against T/P in the earlier stages and protoss complain about motherships being a requirement in lategame PvZ else they "straight out lose".
Pros are knowledgeable about the matchups but i think they too have a hard time being objective in their analysis.
|
On March 27 2012 21:03 Kakaru2 wrote:
The biggest flaw with the above theory is that you fail consistently to explain why:
1. only late game TvP is questioned?
2. GM guys (merz, beasty) shared the same feeling for late game TvP. Yet you always conveniently forget about this and try to spin it that is only a gold-platinum Terran thing.
Until you incorporate these 2 points into your reasoning we have every right to call this "theory" biased.
Show me data that says that Terran struggles somewhere else. Before someone does that, the things you want the "theory" to include are just not discussworthy in an objective discussion. (though in my opinion Plansix's theory is just as little valid, as the theory that Terrans quit because of TvP is... no data, only personal feeling)
Furthermore beasty and merz are both proplayers that commented on highlevel play, the level of play that people say they don't want to discuss here.
|
I suggest we take a step back. All of the theories put forward have valid pros and cons. As none of them provides a perfect fit to the data, we need to just evaluate them as they are, and find out what their problems are. It's unlikely we know what's going on, but it's equally implausible that there is no problem.
Evidence for the existence of a problem:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time.
2) Less points for terrans in the gold league.
Counter: Equal points in lower and higher leagues, despite anecdotal evidence that the situation is similar.
3) Statistics from people's ladder seasons that show less T's.
Counter: Nothing I can remember, just general skepticism due to small samples. Correct me if I'm wrong.
4) No lans won by foreigner terrans (someone said this, is it true?!).
Counter: Some foreigner terrans have consistent high placements (Kas, Thorzain, Happy, Beastyqt) like 2nd and 3rd. Smaller tournaments are won by them too.
I think collecting evidence like this is more worthwhile at this stage than arguing for theories, as we have now established that no theory is without flaws. So, what have I missed?
|
On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time.
Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them.
|
On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
Counter: Nothing I can remember, just general skepticism due to small samples. Correct me if I'm wrong.
4) No lans won by foreigner terrans (someone said this, is it true?!).
Counter: Some foreigner terrans have consistent high placements (Kas, Thorzain, Happy, Beastyqt) like 2nd and 3rd. Smaller tournaments are won by them too.
I don't think anyone has really put that forward as a counter-argument (that I've seen), those are just the names that have been put forward as the top foreign Terrans. And if it has been put forward I'd call it into question -- Happy and Beastyqt have zero results in major tournaments, Kas got 3rd at WCG 4 months ago plus a couple of minor results in secord tier tournaments, and Thorzain's last significant result was second in the Dreamhack Invitational nearly 7 months ago. When it comes to the premier tournaments like MLG and IPL, I think the best result was Sjow placing 8th at MLG Orlando 8 months ago. Pretty grim.
|
On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them.
Hmm, interesting, the diamond league in Europe has had Terrans lose percentage points every patch. There's a 5% overall decrease in T population in diamond. Also, diamond Zs went from 25% to 35% in diamond.
Another interesting statistic is to take the top 100 in sc2ranks. Protoss has 40% of that, T and Z are equal in statistics. The first patch shows a reverse picture (Z being worse, still). What strikes me most about taking top100-500-1000 etc is the amount of fluctuation. There's differences between leagues, regions, patches. A lot of data, but difficult to make sense of.
|
On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them.
yeah, people say that, but it has only been true at bronze, where it still is true. Protoss has always been the most played race at any skill level above.
Between 1.03 (the oldest patch sc2ranks has saved) and 1.2.0, there is hardly any difference in the amount of Terrans in all leagues. A small decrease of Terrans, Protoss and Random players, in favor of Zerg going from 20-25% to 25-30%
Then from 1.2.0 up to now we have another increase in Zergs and Protoss players and Terran players decreasing alike.
Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally.
From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from.
Additionally, you can see that neither race is inactive by looking at the "average points", though it seems like zergs have always had the most points, which would explain why the higher leagues (the ones in which you have to advance) have gotten more zergheavy over time but also that zerg players seem to be a little more active, at least in the lower levels where zergs have somewhat significantly more points.
|
On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from.
Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it.
|
On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it.
Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable.
|
Lol lots of arguments
Zero data - apart from player distributions but you only have figures ... you cant talk about % switching because you dont have that data.
Its precisely the same as listening to 2 fundamentalists argue that the dinosaurs were put there to test us vs a giant spaghetti monster.
Don;t get me wrong it can be interesting but cant help but feel its just noise.
|
On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable.
nope, they aren't stable. apart from this "platinum-crack" where Terrans seem to decrease rather hard, Protoss players decrease somewhat in the same speed as Terran players. They just always had the most players, so they are still the most played race at a lot of levels, but less played than ever before.
|
On March 27 2012 20:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 19:42 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 19:24 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 19:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 18:47 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post.  Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias.  As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread. I responded on this topic some pages ago, but noone seemed to take note, so I'm gonna quote what I wrote there: Also the theory of Terrans being inactive and therefore their MMR dropping more slowly than it would if they played (and lost) does not hold: sc2ranks.com gives you the average points of a player of a race and all across the leagues and continents, I have not seen any level on which the placed Terran players would have significantly less points than their Z/P counterparts, which would be the case if the theory would be true. It might be true that you and everyone else in this thread do only play their placement match, but all in all Terrans are as active as the other two races. That's a great point. There is a significant point difference for terrans at gold and below levels, but in platinum and diamond (where I would expect it as well, there isn't one). Perhaps terrans get stuck earlier? But that's a good find by Big J. I guess it wasn't noted because you labeled it as a MMR argument. There is another confusion in this issue, which is the MMR thing. I cannot really lose to lower ranked Z or P, I lose a lot in diamond, but win pretty much every game in Platinum. There just seem to be huge gaps between the leagues, where in diamond people seem to macro, micro like me, play standard, while the guys below me are, as by the definition of mmr, significantly worse. Well, in my opinion (which is somewhat what I wrote in that long post the quote comes from), Terrans get stuck somewhere around platinum level. That's the one level where Terrans are the fewest compared to the other leagues and also compared to the other races. It's the one and only significant data this thread has yet presented (but noone ever pointed this details out). The comparisons between 1.2.0 and 1.4.3 karpo made, were showing that Terrans decreased ~2.5% in that timeframe overall. But if you only compare platinum level, it's somewhat of 5% decrease. Without any further data, I think all comes down to guessing why it is like that in detail, but whatever it is, it seems to balance out during diamond and around masters skilllevel. Below gold, all dynamics are somewhat flawed in my opinion, as there are way more Terrans and Protoss starters than Zerg ones and any statement about why a race suffers more at that level than another one can't be answered without taking into account whatever makes T>P>>Z in terms of attractiveness. (f.e a popular arguement would be that Terran, but also Protoss are both campaign races and therefore a lot of players that try to ladder, but abbandon it very fast again, will be considered Terrans or Protoss and thereby lower the average points of those races and make it look like a lot of T/Ps can't get out of bronze/silver) I have always felt this about terrans at the gold/plat level. There appears to be a binary status of any terran around that level. Option A: player attempting macro or Option B: One base madness. When you look into these levels of play, you hear about "builds" like 3 rax medivac. Now for all of us that know better, that build sounds horrible. But apparently it gives gold and silver level protoss are run for their money. It shouldn't be surprising, since terran is powerful on one base and some players on that level are not aware of TL or the word build. I personally think that this causes problems for some terran players working their way up the ranks. If the terran player did not know better, they would think they were playing the game "right". After all, they are winning. But as the protoss and zerg are advancing up the ladder, they are learning to sniff these builds out and deal with them. But the one-base terran player is not and may still be getting wins with 3 rax medivac. And that will continue until they hit a hard wall, where all the skills they learned getting to that point might be useless. I don't think it accounts every reason a terran leaves, but I think it could be why some in the gold/plat drop out. Some of them may have just been playing the game "badly" because they could and it was effective. But then they reached a level where they could no longer play that way.
You could also say that Protoss and Zerg players get away with bad buildorders for a longer time than terran on those levels because let's be honest Terrans are not the only ones using gimmicky buildorders at diamond or below.
|
On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable.
Yeah. That would also make some sense. As for the people favor switching to zerg instead of protoss, it might be that zerg mechanics are very different from both terran and protoss that would make some people drawn to it. Could also be that some people consider PvT match-up rather boring so they would choose zerg so that they could avoid that match-up once and for all. I think the first most important thing is to find out why terran players who have switched to zerg wanted to choose that race instead of protoss. That would at least take out some of the possibilities.
|
On March 27 2012 23:37 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable. nope, they aren't stable. apart from this "platinum-crack" where Terrans seem to decrease rather hard, Protoss players decrease somewhat in the same speed as Terran players. They just always had the most players, so they are still the most played race at a lot of levels, but less played than ever before.
Well, that's not entirely true. In Diamond, Protoss had one larger (1.2%) decrease between patches 1.2 and 1.3 (KA removal and Super-fungal), but besides that stayed stable for many patches (<0.5% change). The overall 2.5% change is way less than the 5% change from T. This might suggest a correlation between nerfs and race-switching.
|
On March 27 2012 23:48 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 23:37 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable. nope, they aren't stable. apart from this "platinum-crack" where Terrans seem to decrease rather hard, Protoss players decrease somewhat in the same speed as Terran players. They just always had the most players, so they are still the most played race at a lot of levels, but less played than ever before. Well, that's not entirely true. In Diamond, Protoss had one larger (1.2%) decrease between patches 1.2 and 1.3 (KA removal and Super-fungal), but besides that stayed stable for many patches (<0.5% change). The overall 2.5% change is way less than the 5% change from T. This might suggest a correlation between nerfs and race-switching.
correct me if I'm wrong, but those are the numbers I got from 1.3.0 --> 1.4.2 for Terran and Protoss (globally)
Protoss
Master: 32,72 --> 33,52 = +0,8
Diamond: 33,36 --> 31,92 = -1,44
Platinum: 34,05 --> 32,06 = -1,99
Gold: 35,16 --> 32,60 = -2,46
Silver: 35,62 --> 32,89 = -2,73
Terran
Master: 30,86 --> 29,60 = -1,26
Diamond: 28,10 --> 26,44 = -1,66
Platinum: 29,24 --> 25,45 = -3,79
Gold: 31,18 --> 27,22 = -3,96
Silver: 33,59 --> 30,96 = -2,63
so for me this looks somewhat like I said; Silver, Diamond are same decrease; Gold, Platinum the Terran decrease is harder; Master (and GM), Protoss is slightly increasing, Terran decreasing.
Still Protoss is decreasing as well apart from the highest level.
|
On March 28 2012 00:05 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 23:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:37 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable. nope, they aren't stable. apart from this "platinum-crack" where Terrans seem to decrease rather hard, Protoss players decrease somewhat in the same speed as Terran players. They just always had the most players, so they are still the most played race at a lot of levels, but less played than ever before. Well, that's not entirely true. In Diamond, Protoss had one larger (1.2%) decrease between patches 1.2 and 1.3 (KA removal and Super-fungal), but besides that stayed stable for many patches (<0.5% change). The overall 2.5% change is way less than the 5% change from T. This might suggest a correlation between nerfs and race-switching. correct me if I'm wrong, but those are the numbers I got from 1.3.0 --> 1.4.2 for Terran and Protoss (globally) ProtossMaster: 32,72 --> 33,52 = +0,8 Diamond: 33,36 --> 31,92 = -1,44 Platinum: 34,05 --> 32,06 = -1,99 Gold: 35,16 --> 32,60 = -2,46 Silver: 35,62 --> 32,89 = -2,73 TerranMaster: 30,86 --> 29,60 = -1,26 Diamond: 28,10 --> 26,44 = -1,66 Platinum: 29,24 --> 25,45 = -3,79 Gold: 31,18 --> 27,22 = -3,96 Silver: 33,59 --> 30,96 = -2,63 so for me this looks somewhat like I said; Silver, Diamond are same decrease; Gold, Platinum the Terran decrease is harder; Master (and GM), Protoss is slightly increasing, Terran decreasing. Still Protoss is decreasing as well apart from the highest level.
Yeah, there are differences in the global statistics. I guess it's a EU quirk that Protoss does not dip as much before 1.2-1.3 as it does in the rest of the world. Globally, from 1.0.3 to 1.4.2 P dips 3.7 in diamond and Terran 4.3 percent.
But an interesting finding, there are also significantly less Random players in higher leagues. They seem to have fallen into Gold and Silver, though, as unlike P and T, their numbers increase in G and S between 1 and 1.4.2. Zerg got 10-13 percent increases at the expense of Random!, Protoss and Terran decreases in Gold to Diamond. With the highest increase being in Platinum. There, terrans seems to be the most displaced with 6.5% change.
As for Master, protoss and zerg gain a little (0.3 and 2.8, respectively), terran and random lose (2 and 1.1, respectively).
|
On March 28 2012 00:38 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2012 00:05 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 23:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:37 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable. nope, they aren't stable. apart from this "platinum-crack" where Terrans seem to decrease rather hard, Protoss players decrease somewhat in the same speed as Terran players. They just always had the most players, so they are still the most played race at a lot of levels, but less played than ever before. Well, that's not entirely true. In Diamond, Protoss had one larger (1.2%) decrease between patches 1.2 and 1.3 (KA removal and Super-fungal), but besides that stayed stable for many patches (<0.5% change). The overall 2.5% change is way less than the 5% change from T. This might suggest a correlation between nerfs and race-switching. correct me if I'm wrong, but those are the numbers I got from 1.3.0 --> 1.4.2 for Terran and Protoss (globally) ProtossMaster: 32,72 --> 33,52 = +0,8 Diamond: 33,36 --> 31,92 = -1,44 Platinum: 34,05 --> 32,06 = -1,99 Gold: 35,16 --> 32,60 = -2,46 Silver: 35,62 --> 32,89 = -2,73 TerranMaster: 30,86 --> 29,60 = -1,26 Diamond: 28,10 --> 26,44 = -1,66 Platinum: 29,24 --> 25,45 = -3,79 Gold: 31,18 --> 27,22 = -3,96 Silver: 33,59 --> 30,96 = -2,63 so for me this looks somewhat like I said; Silver, Diamond are same decrease; Gold, Platinum the Terran decrease is harder; Master (and GM), Protoss is slightly increasing, Terran decreasing. Still Protoss is decreasing as well apart from the highest level. Yeah, there are differences in the global statistics. I guess it's a EU quirk that Protoss does not dip as much before 1.2-1.3 as it does in the rest of the world. Globally, from 1.0.3 to 1.4.2 P dips 3.7 in diamond and Terran 4.3 percent. But an interesting finding, there are also significantly less Random players in higher leagues. They seem to have fallen into Gold and Silver, though, as unlike P and T, their numbers increase in G and S between 1 and 1.4.2. Zerg got 10-13 percent increases at the expense of Random!, Protoss and Terran decreases in Gold to Diamond. With the highest increase being in Platinum. There, terrans seems to be the most displaced with 6.5% change.As for Master, protoss and zerg gain a little (0.3 and 2.8, respectively), terran and random lose (2 and 1.1, respectively).
I stand behind the idea that this is the point where a casual terran player(aka, he who does not seek builds on TL) either quits or seeks out a more efficent way to play. When we get into the lower leagues, we find more and more of thesse folks who do not know build orders, what MLG is or how many SCV is the right amount to build. Or that going mass maruader is not a good idea. All three races have this point, after all, there is only so much someone can learn on their own.
The higher leagues are a different story. I would expect there to be fewer randoms. But the increase and decreases are well within any standard margin of error. Most of them may have little to do with the game itself. People switch races for any number of reasons or drop out of masters because they just don't have time to keep up with the meta game. I personally play less this year than last year.
|
On March 28 2012 01:48 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2012 00:38 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 28 2012 00:05 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 23:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:37 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 23:27 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 23:23 Mehukannu wrote:On March 27 2012 23:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 22:44 FirstGear wrote:On March 27 2012 22:12 Ghanburighan wrote:
1) Lower sc2 ranks numbers for terran in several leagues.
Counter: No change in overall, so there just seem to have been less terrans for a long time. Actually when the game was released Terran had the most players significantly and Zerg was woefully underrepresented. As I remember T had the most players for the first 3 seasons. The argument back then was that most people were familiar with terran due to the campaign and decided to start with them. Only around platinum (and somewhat gold and diamond) Terrans are decreasing faster than than their GM/Master/Silver/(Bronze, though I think we shouldn't put too much thought into this) colleagues or than Protoss generally. From this data alone, the question should somewhat be: where do all the zergs come from. Zergs could have come from either people switching races or/and more terran and protoss players would left the game which then would show as a rise in zerg players. It is most likely a combination of both of those that caused it to happen, unless there is something else that could be the cause of it. Well, there is a theory available but I don't know how to test it. Considering that beginners play T, many people that make it higher might switch from T to some other race. This would mean that if 10 T's get promoted, after the switch, only let's say 8 would remain in the higher league. This covers this part of the data. The problem is, why are they switching to Z instead of P? So there should be more to it than just this. In fact, the key here seems to be figuring out the reason why P numbers are stable. nope, they aren't stable. apart from this "platinum-crack" where Terrans seem to decrease rather hard, Protoss players decrease somewhat in the same speed as Terran players. They just always had the most players, so they are still the most played race at a lot of levels, but less played than ever before. Well, that's not entirely true. In Diamond, Protoss had one larger (1.2%) decrease between patches 1.2 and 1.3 (KA removal and Super-fungal), but besides that stayed stable for many patches (<0.5% change). The overall 2.5% change is way less than the 5% change from T. This might suggest a correlation between nerfs and race-switching. correct me if I'm wrong, but those are the numbers I got from 1.3.0 --> 1.4.2 for Terran and Protoss (globally) ProtossMaster: 32,72 --> 33,52 = +0,8 Diamond: 33,36 --> 31,92 = -1,44 Platinum: 34,05 --> 32,06 = -1,99 Gold: 35,16 --> 32,60 = -2,46 Silver: 35,62 --> 32,89 = -2,73 TerranMaster: 30,86 --> 29,60 = -1,26 Diamond: 28,10 --> 26,44 = -1,66 Platinum: 29,24 --> 25,45 = -3,79 Gold: 31,18 --> 27,22 = -3,96 Silver: 33,59 --> 30,96 = -2,63 so for me this looks somewhat like I said; Silver, Diamond are same decrease; Gold, Platinum the Terran decrease is harder; Master (and GM), Protoss is slightly increasing, Terran decreasing. Still Protoss is decreasing as well apart from the highest level. Yeah, there are differences in the global statistics. I guess it's a EU quirk that Protoss does not dip as much before 1.2-1.3 as it does in the rest of the world. Globally, from 1.0.3 to 1.4.2 P dips 3.7 in diamond and Terran 4.3 percent. But an interesting finding, there are also significantly less Random players in higher leagues. They seem to have fallen into Gold and Silver, though, as unlike P and T, their numbers increase in G and S between 1 and 1.4.2. Zerg got 10-13 percent increases at the expense of Random!, Protoss and Terran decreases in Gold to Diamond. With the highest increase being in Platinum. There, terrans seems to be the most displaced with 6.5% change.As for Master, protoss and zerg gain a little (0.3 and 2.8, respectively), terran and random lose (2 and 1.1, respectively). I stand behind the idea that this is the point where a casual terran player(aka, he who does not seek builds on TL) either quits or seeks out a more efficent way to play. When we get into the lower leagues, we find more and more of thesse folks who do not know build orders, what MLG is or how many SCV is the right amount to build. Or that going mass maruader is not a good idea. All three races have this point, after all, there is only so much someone can learn on their own. The higher leagues are a different story. I would expect there to be fewer randoms. But the increase and decreases are well within any standard margin of error. Most of them may have little to do with the game itself. People switch races for any number of reasons or drop out of masters because they just don't have time to keep up with the meta game. I personally play less this year than last year.
You need to explain what you mean by margin of error. There is no measurement error, as far as I can see. And there is virtually no fluctuation, only a steady trend. How would you calculate a margin of error?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
