EPTOr to quote idra : Terran doesn't die to random shit :D
Edit : Btw am i the only one who read the post. Why is there 10+ people saying 64% not bad that is not what this post was about at all.
Top Tier Korean ZvT and TvZ TLPD statistics - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
box1989
13 Posts
Or to quote idra : Terran doesn't die to random shit :D Edit : Btw am i the only one who read the post. Why is there 10+ people saying 64% not bad that is not what this post was about at all. | ||
|
patrick321
United States185 Posts
Just look at some of the variables it uses + Show Spoiler + c_1 is the cost associated with activities for updating the household list c_2 is cost per individual interview f_1 and f_2 are the first and second stage’s sampling fraction This math was clearly done with a specific goal in mind and esports wasn't it. | ||
|
schmutttt
Australia3856 Posts
On March 16 2012 11:30 acrimoneyius wrote: those extra few percents probably account for bunker rushing/2 rax and helion run-bys, which are extremely unforgiving for zerg and even top tier players die to all the time. Makes you wonder if they'll ever put in a marine range upgrade (but that would possibly screw up TvP) ??? Why would you bring up ZvT being unforgiving then wondering if they will bring in a buff to a unit that obviously does NOT need one? | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
| ||
|
Fubi
2228 Posts
On March 16 2012 11:14 neoghaleon55 wrote: The optimal minimum sample size is 20. Above 20, the n value does not relevantly contribute over all (n-1) to the statistics. I'm sure you remember from your AP stats class and college. Here's an article to refresh your memory http://www.ime.usp.br/~abe/ICOTS7/Proceedings/PDFs/InvitedPapers/3J3_ALIA.pdf The statistics presented in the OP are greater than 20 sample sizes and thus are relevant. He's saying you didn't calculate the margin of errors for your stat; a small sample size, however relevant, does not necessarily mean statistically significance. That +-5% could simply be within the boundaries of margin of error of the stats (I'm not saying it is, just saying you didn't calculate it). | ||
|
nAgeDitto
United States428 Posts
On March 16 2012 12:28 jinorazi wrote: how about comparing with other stats, because to me it seems its like squirtle vs charizard vs leaf thingy. bulbasaur!! anyways, I think the shift in meta game and when the players actually play the matchup makes a big difference too. But from the number of recent games I think it still holds true. | ||
|
Oboeman
Canada3980 Posts
On March 16 2012 11:46 hawthwang wrote: psssssst notice how 4/5 of MMA's losses are from DRG so it looks like DRG is the only one who really beats MMA, but plenty of other terrans take maps (but not usually full series) off of DRG. It's kind of the uncomfortable truth about the match-up. Counting series instead of maps (with Bo1s in there as well so it's still iffy at best) DRG is 20-7. There were a lot of 2-1s contributing to his 64% win rate, where has MMA has lots of 2-0's, and fewer losses in Bo1s. | ||
|
Raambo11
United States828 Posts
On March 16 2012 11:26 xrapture wrote: Most of the best players in Korea are Terrans. I mean ffs man look at the Terran's you listed: MMA, Alive, MKP, MVP, Taeja, Gumiho. They are JUGGERNAUTS. Yeah trying to compare is silly. I mean symbol is great and all, but these guys have all made top 4, and the first 4 of them multiple times I believe | ||
|
drbrown
Sweden442 Posts
On March 16 2012 11:24 Gator wrote: conclusion: having 300 apm and sick multitasking makes you good at TvZ But its not enough for ZvT? The only Terran really standing out among those is MMA, i think OP should've included Happy as well since his vZ record is pretty sick. Still, wish we would get a sAviOr in SC2, cause when the supposed "god of ZvT" loses more than a third of his games, it's still pretty mediocre. | ||
|
neoghaleon55
United States7435 Posts
| ||
|
IntoTheBush
United States552 Posts
Any Terran will agree they that Terran can be strong early game if you catch your opponent off guard, but after about 18 minutes and Zergs eco kicks in we start fighting an uphill battle... | ||
|
Hipsv
135 Posts
The actual relevance of these statistics is zero because you immediately assume that the chance of winning a match was always 50% when that is and has never actually been true. | ||
|
HyperionDreamer
Canada1528 Posts
On March 16 2012 12:18 ETisME wrote: I am sorry but you got the stats wrong. The over 20 requirement is for cluster analysis, something that you aren't doing because you are not trying to make any clusters out from the data set. The over 20 thing you talked about is just for normal hypothesis testing, which you aren't doing. You need to calculate out the optimal minimal sample size based upon your confidence interval etc in short, you need to calculate out a sample size that truely represent the population. Merely 50 games out of his entire ZvT history does not make sense Yep. The study cited in the OP pertains to a specific type of stats testing, called cluster analysis. Maybe read up on it a bit before you cite it as valid, OP. You're talking about simple testing for type 1/2 statistical errors, so you would need a much larger sample size. I did a post a while ago doing rigid scientific statistical analysis on korean matchup percentages, and I think even a sample size of ~200 games rendered a ~7% difference statistically irrelevant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_analysis Edit: It was a sample size of 130, and an ~8% statistical difference. This was rendered statistically insignificant using standard p-level analysis. Here's the link to my analysis. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=317114¤tpage=12#226 | ||
|
neoghaleon55
United States7435 Posts
On March 16 2012 12:46 Hipsv wrote: The fact of the matter is that you are including wins/losses from different periods where Terran's did have an advantage over Zerg, not calculating margins of error and even still tilting the statistics that much the MOST you come up with is 5% and you exaggerate the discrepancy. This quite obviously points to an agenda to prove that Terran is overpowered vs Zerg because you likely play Zerg and are looking for validations to your losses despite the fact that the common opinion is contrary to what you experience. The actual relevance of these statistics is zero because you immediately assume that the chance of winning a match was always 50% when that is and has never actually been true. Where are you getting this "tilting the statistics" and "exaggerating"? All this information is from TLPD...if you have a problem with them, tell teamliquid. and I'm not exaggerating , 5% is very lenient, if you look at the numbers it's actually closer to 6-7%...but people like nice numbers like 5  | ||
|
Mr. Nefarious
United States515 Posts
Terran is very strong at the highest level for two main reasons. 1. Terran benefits the most from extreme multitasking. If you have a spare 400apm, you can always marine split, always drop and get away, always stutter step well, you can get 15 kills with a banshee and get away with 5hp, you always can repair hurt units and always salvage buildings just in time. Almost every unit in the Terran army becomes exponentially stronger the better you can control it. Therefor, players that have very high APM and multitasking achieve a level of cost efficiency that is very difficult to match by lower level players. The other prong of my theory is actually very simple. Terran is typically the safest from cheese, and are very hard to attack directly if they are turtling. A higher average cost efficiency produced by excellent control combined with the ability to play very safe if turtling could lead to the highest level Terrans having the most stability as well as becoming exponentially stronger as multitasking and unit control skill increases. This is just my theory based on watching GSL, playing games on the NA ladder and casually training. Solution: Examine ways to make the other races more "micro-able". While some micro is needed for Z/P at the moment, it is not nearly as beneficial as extreme micro is for T. Instead of playing with damage numbers, analyze the unit design. Make units attack twice as fast but do the same overall DPS. Allow more units to cancel their attack to move away while still doing damage similar to the marine. These types of changes are obviously targeted solely at the highest level. A-moved roaches will do the same overall DPS in bronze as they will Korea GM, however if they shot twice as quickly they would be a hell of a lot more microable, despite doing the same overall DPS. This would allow additional functionality from players that have the APM to micro their army while maintaining production while not effecting the lowest leagues in the slightest as overall damage output stays the same. A quick check of the best of the best Zerg and Protoss players will reveal Vs T winrates only slightly above 50%, while the best Terrans look invincible with 70-80% winrates vs Z and P. All numbers taken straight from TLPD. MMA 1v1 Record: All: 83-51 (61.94%) VT: 45-29 (60.81%) vZ: 21-5 (80.77%) VP: 17-17 (50.00%) MVP 1v1 Record: All: 124-61 (67.03%) VT: 62-29 (68.13%) vZ: 41-20 (67.21%) VP: 21-12 (63.64%) GuMiho 1v1 Record: All: 84-57 (59.57%) VT: 31-33 (48.44%) vZ: 28-12 (70.00%) VP: 25-12 (67.57%) NesTea 1v1 Record: All: 100-51 (66.23%) vT: 50-39 (56.18%) vZ: 28-5 (84.85%) VP: 22-7 (75.86%) LosirA 1v1 Record: All: 67-57 (54.03%) vT: 25-32 (43.86%) vZ: 16-11 (59.26%) VP: 26-14 (65.00%) DRG 1v1 Record: All: 58-26 (69.05%) vT: 29-16 (64.44%) vZ: 7-2 (77.78%) VP: 22-8 (73.33%) MC 1v1 Record: All: 90-60 (60.00%) vT: 43-30 (58.90%) vZ: 22-19 (53.66%) VP: 25-11 (69.44%) HuK 1v1 Record: All: 34-42 (44.74%) vT: 12-17 (41.38%) vZ: 13-14 (48.15%) VP: 9-11 (45.00%) HerO 1v1 Record: All: 17-26 (39.53%) vT: 4-11 (26.67%) vZ: 10-10 (50.00%) VP: 3-5 (37.50%) As seen clearly above, the only player to break 60% winrate vs T is DRG. With that being said, it's also statistically his worst matchup by nearly 10%. | ||
|
hasuterrans
United States614 Posts
edit: the poster above me did the same thing...these kinds of analysis should be viewed as historical rather than telling about the current state of the game | ||
|
neoghaleon55
United States7435 Posts
On March 16 2012 12:53 Mr. Nefarious wrote: I compiled this for another thread I posted it in, I hope a cross post is ok since the information is directly relevant. A quick check of the best of the best Zerg and Terran players will reveal Vs T winrates only slightly above 50%, while the best Terrans look invincible with 70-80% winrates vs Z and P. All numbers taken straight from TLPD. MMA 1v1 Record: All: 83-51 (61.94%) VT: 45-29 (60.81%) vZ: 21-5 (80.77%) VP: 17-17 (50.00%) MVP 1v1 Record: All: 124-61 (67.03%) VT: 62-29 (68.13%) vZ: 41-20 (67.21%) VP: 21-12 (63.64%) GuMiho 1v1 Record: All: 84-57 (59.57%) VT: 31-33 (48.44%) vZ: 28-12 (70.00%) VP: 25-12 (67.57%) NesTea 1v1 Record: All: 100-51 (66.23%) vT: 50-39 (56.18%) vZ: 28-5 (84.85%) VP: 22-7 (75.86%) LosirA 1v1 Record: All: 67-57 (54.03%) vT: 25-32 (43.86%) vZ: 16-11 (59.26%) VP: 26-14 (65.00%) DRG 1v1 Record: All: 58-26 (69.05%) vT: 29-16 (64.44%) vZ: 7-2 (77.78%) VP: 22-8 (73.33%) MC 1v1 Record: All: 90-60 (60.00%) vT: 43-30 (58.90%) vZ: 22-19 (53.66%) VP: 25-11 (69.44%) HuK 1v1 Record: All: 34-42 (44.74%) vT: 12-17 (41.38%) vZ: 13-14 (48.15%) VP: 9-11 (45.00%) HerO 1v1 Record: All: 17-26 (39.53%) vT: 4-11 (26.67%) vZ: 10-10 (50.00%) VP: 3-5 (37.50%) As seen clearly above, the only player to break 60% winrate vs T is DRG. With that being said, it's also statistically his worst matchup by nearly 10%. Those are really interesting numbers... | ||
|
bokeevboke
Singapore1674 Posts
Just watch some GSL games and you will notice that zergs do a lot of mistakes, like no creep spread, unnecessary unit donations, positioning in battles, not watching for drops or over-extending. Terrans however, always try to squeeze out as much as they can from every sitation. I think when zergs get to level of Effort, JaeDong or Zero they'll learn to use their race to full potential. Then, we will see. But I doubt it will happen, the scene looks stagnated if not degrading. | ||
|
liberal
1116 Posts
| ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
| ||
| ||
