|
Starcraft 2 is incredibly well balanced.
We are talking 5% differences that are shifting either way With three races, bronze through to Pros playing, 10,000s of games being played and watched, millions of combinations of units/maps/matchups/play styles, and to still come out with balance like this is very impressive.
I have never found another game that has even come close (excluding BW). Love this game and love watching the brilliant strategies people are developing to turn the tide every week/month.
|
Well it looks like Terran were right after all, it was 55.3% which is 0.3% imbalance. Atleast most Terran players look pretty stupid now which is good.
|
On July 03 2012 04:32 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 03:01 canikizu wrote:On July 03 2012 02:33 SeaSwift wrote:On July 03 2012 00:54 platonichat wrote:On July 03 2012 00:40 SeaSwift wrote:On July 03 2012 00:32 Shiori wrote:On July 03 2012 00:28 Roggay wrote:On July 03 2012 00:09 Shiori wrote:
Incomplete set of data. Everyone who plays this game regularly knows that TvZ is utterly Zerg favoured, and that PvZ is utterly Zerg favoured if the Toss doesn't all-in. You don't need a graph to show this. Just look at the way you must play the game. Everyone who read TL regularly knows that you are a whiner too... Find me some professional Terrans (or honest Zergs) who think that TvZ isn't favouring Zerg right now. Besides, didn't you see the updated stats? Terran is at 41% if you factor those in. Considering Zerg was at 39% just last month, that actually isn't too bad at all considering how much whine was going round. edit: I was expecting something like a 25% winrate for Terran to justify all the whine. Nope, turns out that when Terran goes below 45% for the first time in the race's entire history it is enough to justify a forum explosion. Even forgetting about the fact that it was Terran at 39-41% last month, not Zerg, the fact that you expect a 25% winrate in TvZ in order to justify the MU being imbalanced shows you have no idea how this stuff works. This reddit post should be required reading for people to talk about these graphs. There is no way any race could get a 25% winrate especially not in the month after a change. Yeah, ignore the mistake. My apologies. I didn't say that. I didn't say that I "expect a 25% winrate in TvZ in order for the MU to be imbalanced". That is just putting words into my mouth. I said that there was so much whine - to the extent that the MU seemed to be literally impossible - and MKP etc were coming out with "10% winrate in practice" or 20% and the like in interviews. Comparatively, 41% is not bad at all. I don't think it will ever reach 25%, no matter how imbalance the MU is. Like anything else, it gets harder and harder to reach higher/lower percent. People will notice that it is not working (GSTL stop sending Terran out), or Terran will fail to qualify for tournaments (qualifier stat doesn't appear on TLPD). So if there're no Terran, there're no stats to count. Also Korean stats has small size, so one or two games mean so much more. For example, Teaja went 7-2 vs Zerg last month, so Teaja alone contribue 5+% of the winrate. With Korean TvZ 50.9%-49.1%, I'd say Teaja streak make all the difference. Well you also have to realize for all of june Symbol went 8-2 zvt as he has been crushing players in general almost no matter the race in GSTL/GSL.
You can count Teaja because statistically, he's the outliner. You can't count Symbol because he's not an outliner within Zerg race. Other players, such as DRG, Moon, Sniper,.... also posted similar results in last month. So while Symbol posted the best result out of all, it's not enough to call him outliner.
|
On July 03 2012 04:46 Tuczniak wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 04:38 zhurai wrote:On July 03 2012 03:42 mrtomjones wrote:On July 03 2012 02:07 MysteryTerran wrote:On July 03 2012 01:15 sieksdekciw wrote:On July 02 2012 22:29 Tsubbi wrote:On July 02 2012 22:26 Asha` wrote:On July 02 2012 22:23 Whole wrote:
Seems that Korean Terrans were busy figuring out the new TvZ while International Terrans were busy complaining about balance. All the korean Terrans complain about TvZ =p but they're just much better players so still win games. oh you! ofc they complain about z, 51% winrate must feel underpowered after 2 years of dominating They complain because it is ridiculous to be more mechanically skilled than your opponent and yet have no real chance of winning unless your opponent messes up. I love you for this post. This is 100% accurate also. I played a game the other day where I outplayed a Protoss completely and still lost. Like someone said earlier they just need a few Archons and to continuously warp in Chargelots and eventually you will overrun the Terran Are you honestly trying to argue that a Terran CAN'T beat a Zerg now dude? Seriously? Want to know why you didn't beat that Protoss? Because you did not outplay him in every way like you claim. Stop thinking you are perfect or mechanically better than your Zerg and Protoss counterparts and start thinking about what you can do better instead. Man.. the whine is ridiculous. Want to know why Terran whiners are the most disliked? Because for some reason they seem to all think they are better than Protoss and Zerg players. When Protoss or Zerg complain they complain about their units sucking or whatever. Terrans complain about that and then say that they are better than the P's and Z's and can't ever win any games ever even though they are the superior player and never make mistakes... yah...... nope back in the day that zerg complained the most (especially idra), they said that terran players sucked. although this was back when I was playing z, and already thought the game was balanced already so /shrug Since beta terrans defended their domination saying that terran players are naturaly better than everyone else. That's where it came from and some of them are still using it in their rhetorics.
They're not naturally better by any means, but there are definitely more top Terrans than top Zergs, and slightly more top Terrans than top Protosses. It's got nothing to do with natural ability; it's just random skewing. A lot of really good players happened to pick Terran.
|
On July 03 2012 04:45 hzflank wrote:
However, I do not see 41% on those graphs, I see 45%. It is not fair to compare different data sets on the same graph (TLPD one month and TLPD plus extras the next). In addition, I think you need at least two months (if not 3) of consistant statistics after a patch hits before you can make a good assumption. But if a winrate was to stay below 45% for 3 months in a row then I was consider there to be a balance problem.
The problem in this case is that you'll have three months of shitty balance in the game before you can make a judgement based on statistics, which is a result of making a big change that's completely unecessary and which will degrade an already balanced matchup, both in balance and fun.
|
Seems like the Ravens have started to immigrate back to Korea for the summer season.
|
Lmao @ ZvT winrates.
That's disgustingly skewed in Zerg favor.
|
On July 03 2012 04:52 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 04:45 hzflank wrote:
However, I do not see 41% on those graphs, I see 45%. It is not fair to compare different data sets on the same graph (TLPD one month and TLPD plus extras the next). In addition, I think you need at least two months (if not 3) of consistant statistics after a patch hits before you can make a good assumption. But if a winrate was to stay below 45% for 3 months in a row then I was consider there to be a balance problem. The problem in this case is that you'll have three months of shitty balance in the game before you can make a judgement based on statistics, compared to making a big change that's completely unecessary to an already balanced matchup
I don't disagree. But if you want an ideal solution then you would need a large number of good amateurs to beta test balance patches before they went live. If you just make a balance change based on a couple of thousand games of data then you might as well ignore that data when making your balance decisions.
Another thing to consider: Assume Zerg is now overpowered versus Terran. Is that because queen range was buffed or because zerg players started to make more queens?
|
On July 03 2012 04:52 Dalavita wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 04:45 hzflank wrote:
However, I do not see 41% on those graphs, I see 45%. It is not fair to compare different data sets on the same graph (TLPD one month and TLPD plus extras the next). In addition, I think you need at least two months (if not 3) of consistant statistics after a patch hits before you can make a good assumption. But if a winrate was to stay below 45% for 3 months in a row then I was consider there to be a balance problem. The problem in this case is that you'll have three months of shitty balance in the game before you can make a judgement based on statistics, which is a result of making a big change that's completely unecessary and which will degrade an already balanced matchup, both in balance and fun.
People also don't seem to understand that tiny sample sizes like this make it very rare for there to ever be 3 consecutive months of the same low winrate. Bet your ass that the second Terran's winrate increases even half a percent, Zergs will say "see! the metagame is figuring itself out!" You're never going to get 45%, 45%, and 45% 3 months in row because it's too unlikely even if that really is the chance of winning against a Zerg player.
|
On July 03 2012 04:55 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 04:52 Dalavita wrote:On July 03 2012 04:45 hzflank wrote:
However, I do not see 41% on those graphs, I see 45%. It is not fair to compare different data sets on the same graph (TLPD one month and TLPD plus extras the next). In addition, I think you need at least two months (if not 3) of consistant statistics after a patch hits before you can make a good assumption. But if a winrate was to stay below 45% for 3 months in a row then I was consider there to be a balance problem. The problem in this case is that you'll have three months of shitty balance in the game before you can make a judgement based on statistics, compared to making a big change that's completely unecessary to an already balanced matchup I don't disagree. But if you want an ideal solution then you would need a large number of good amateurs to beta test balance patches before they went live. If you just make a balance change based on a couple of thousand games of data then you might as well ignore that data when making your balance decisions. Another thing to consider: Assume Zerg is now overpowered versus Terran. Is that because queen range was buffed or because zerg players started to make more queens?
To your question; both.
However, they started to add more queens simply because they were stronger.
|
On July 03 2012 04:53 DemigodcelpH wrote:
Lmao @ ZvT winrates.
That's disgustingly skewed in Zerg favor.
If sarcastic, very bad attempt since most would read this as serious.
If not sarcastic, very bad reading abilities and no knowledge of understanding what makes a statistic "skewed" or "imbalanced". That graph is damn near where it should be for win-rates.
*Side-note* Agree with the "get-rid-of-Terran-egos" posts I see here. You're all not awesome perfect players or you'd be where MKP is not on lolbnetladder.
|
On July 03 2012 04:59 sCCrooked wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 04:53 DemigodcelpH wrote:
Lmao @ ZvT winrates.
That's disgustingly skewed in Zerg favor. If sarcastic, very bad attempt since most would read this as serious. If not sarcastic, very bad reading abilities and no knowledge of understanding what makes a statistic "skewed" or "imbalanced". That graph is damn near where it should be for win-rates. *Side-note* Agree with the "get-rid-of-Terran-egos" posts I see here. You're all not awesome perfect players or you'd be where MKP is not on lolbnetladder.
Did you miss the part where someone showed that if you include TSL4 KR qual stats, Terran dips to 41%?
|
On July 03 2012 02:28 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 02:22 SniXSniPe wrote:On July 03 2012 02:20 Plansix wrote:On July 03 2012 02:18 SniXSniPe wrote:On July 03 2012 02:15 Plansix wrote:On July 03 2012 02:13 SniXSniPe wrote:
Why did they not include the TSL4 KR qualifiers? It would put Terran at around 41%ish win-ratio against Zerg. Because it is a qualifer, so anyone could sign up? I am pretty sure they did not include qualifers for other tournaments either. http://www.teamliquid.net/tournaments/admin/?action=bracket&id=3217Go through that list, and point out any subpar players for me. The fact is, every single TSL4 KR qualifier is completely stacked. If they don't include the qualifier for other tournaments, why would they include this one? Just because there are good players does not mean its a tournament. Because then you will have ignorant individuals claiming the statistics "prove" that match ups like TvZ are just fine, when in reality it is the opposite. That is not how the process works. You can't just pick numbers that prove a specific point. They have to take the same results from the same sources every month. They cannot just add in qualifiers one month because favors a specific result.
Same sources would mean same players, not same qualifiers which means that adding additional tournaments (high lvl only such as different qualifiers) can only be better for determining real numbers because there's more games played.
|
I'd be interested in seeing what some of the win rates are at different phases of the game, I'd bet that Zerg probably wins the majority of games that are over 20 minutes given how powerful and accessible its late game army is compared to the other two races. I don't want to say that Zerg is necessarily imbalanced, but I think the other races (especially Terran) are definitely struggling in late game situations vs Zerg.
|
On July 03 2012 00:41 Charon1979 wrote:
This Thread is very interesting...
last month:
"look how imbalanced it is in Korea!"
"The sample is too small and doesnt include all..."
"Doesnt matter! Zerg imba!"
"Look at the international graph, it got a bigger sample size and is pretty balanced"
"International doesnt matter!"
This month:
"wtf Korea balanced... you must have made this up!"
"its the same like every month..."
"no you made it up and besides the sample size is too small and doesnt cover all tournaments!"
"but last month you said...."
"Shut up! Just look at international!"
"but last month..."
"Doesnt matter, zerg imba!"
So true rofl
|
On July 03 2012 00:09 Falconblade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 00:07 mec wrote:On July 03 2012 00:01 Ctuchik wrote:On July 02 2012 23:53 IshinShishi wrote:
I don't trust this OP considering his posts, where* is the guy that normally does this?Which games were considered here?GSL+GSTL post patch is showing terran being ravaged without soothing. Good on you for being skeptical, but these are indeed legit. =P You can always check my twitter for the originals. Here is the TVZ Korea data for reference: June TvZ: 58-56 GSL and GSTL TvZ: 29-32 Proleague TvZ: 3-6 Kespa Exhibition TvZ: 3-4 KSL Finals TvZ: 3-1 ESV Korean Weekly 5,6,7 TvZ: 20-13 That being said TLPD is flawed. If they counted Code A qualifiers and TSL qualifiers it would skew the winrates heavily in Zergs favor and both of those tournaments are much harder then the ESV tournament but neither is in the TLPD database. Todays OSL qualifiers won't be in the database either and those qualifiers were brutally hard. Code A qualifiers TvZ (not counting amateurs or teamless Koreans): 14-36 TSL4 KR qualifier #1 TvZ: 26-42 TSL4 KR qualifier #2 TvZ: 25-38 TSL4 KR qualifier #3 TvZ: 16-24 Could you make a graph with those games included? I'm just curious how it looks  Would be TvZ in Korea 139 - 196. Which is 41.5% T to 58.5% Z
The graph is based on only TLPD data and doesn't even take in all the data available...
I think 41.5 percent win rate for all the games in korea is much more telling then the graph data shown in OP.
|
On July 03 2012 03:50 Bluerain wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 03:30 Dalavita wrote:On July 03 2012 02:42 Flonomenalz wrote:On July 03 2012 02:36 Shiori wrote:On July 03 2012 02:32 The_Stampede wrote:On July 03 2012 02:30 Shiori wrote:On July 03 2012 01:32 Bluerain wrote:On July 03 2012 00:59 Shiori wrote:
I tire of seeing debate over these graphs, because it's always the same:
If something agrees with the balance whine of the day, everyone who plays the apparently overpowered race claims it's "metagame." If something disagrees, those same people turn right around and take the stats as gospel.
It's pretty simple: watch the games. TvZ and PvZ are both broken because Zerg in general is broken. Yes, Zerg was underpowered at release, but they haven't been for a long time. The other thing to consider is that in many respects, there were simply more top level Korean T/P players in tournaments than Zerg. Nestea is a notoriously weak traveller, and DRG is actually pretty new in the scheme of the Zerg scene; same with Symbol. There was a long period of time in which you had Nestea and then a big void of skill beneath him as far as Zerg went. Even now, I can only think of less than 10 truly top Zerg players, but I can think of at least 20 Terrans and probably 15 Protoss.
Tl;dr when MKP or Hero beat Moon or something it doesn't mean the matchup is balanced. dumbest/most biased post ever plus flame baiting. a biased zerg response would be that zerg is just UP and nestea is just way better so he can win while all other zerg players who are equal in skill to T/P players cannot win due to UP race. see how stupid heavily biased comments are? Except mine's based in fact. If you look at the most mechanically proficient/creative players, you get a lot of Terrans, a decent number of Protosses, and a few Zergs. It's not biased; it's just the way it is. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you're actually a moron. Zing! Feel free to back up your argument with facts rather than sniveling. I don't even play Terran and I can see that they have the most mechanically skilled players. What evidence could you POSSIBLY use to make this claim? Following the scene since release. Playing all races. Knowing what all races have to do during all stages of the game. Listening to what pro players say. Reading up on discussions. Asking random players. Asking people who off race. There might not be any mathematical formula that will give you an unquestionable answer, but everything points to the fact, and making the claim is not sensational at all. I will even go so far as to say that Terran being more mechanically demanding has turned the best terran players into the best players in the world, since they've constantly been improving at a pace that outweighs their Zerg and Protoss counterparts, who due to limited race designs will have to depend on Blizzard to buff them mathematically constantly to compensate. Unless Zerg/Protoss design changes dramatically, this will be the continuing trend throughout SC2s life. Terran gets nerfed, terran players get better, the other races get buffed to compensate. This'll eventually lead into Terran being nigh unplayable anywhere outside the absolute top level of play. It's a problem of shit design in essence. i agree with what you said. it does seem that terran is the race that best utilizes good mechanics and naturally the terran players will just get better and better while zerg/protoss players stagnate in the mechanical aspects of the game and will be buffed in order to keep up. but i was talking about skill in my post which i was meaning as a general term for the ability to win. and winning takes more than just mechanics. many games are lost due to bad decision making as well as limiting mechanics. edit: oh the other guy actually said terran players are not the most mechnically sound but the most creative too. LOL guess i cant argue against such heavy bias you win
I'm assuming by this you don't think Terran players have been the most creative players. Which I laugh at considering we are the race that has the most builds which by definition pretty much makes us the most creative/innovative race. I'm not saying I'm creative, but Terran players as a whole trump the other two races in creativity. Especially Protoss.
|
Funny how Protoss was OP flavor of the month a little while back when TvP has been T-favored in May and June. And even now, with the sheer amount of whining about Zerg, it turns out that ZvT is actually fairly close. I don't understand how people can balance whine when their race is at an above 50% winrate in every matchup at the top level. When you do that, there's only one thing for certain: you look entitled as fuck.
|
On July 03 2012 05:15 HolyArrow wrote:
Funny how Protoss was OP flavor of the month a little while back when TvP has been T-favored in May and June. And even now, with the sheer amount of whining about Zerg, it turns out that ZvT is actually fairly close. I don't understand how people can balance whine when their race is at an above 50% winrate in every matchup at the top level. When you do that, there's only one thing for certain: you look entitled as fuck.
Read the thread, not just the biased OP, thanks.
|
On July 03 2012 05:10 Femari wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2012 03:50 Bluerain wrote:On July 03 2012 03:30 Dalavita wrote:On July 03 2012 02:42 Flonomenalz wrote:On July 03 2012 02:36 Shiori wrote:On July 03 2012 02:32 The_Stampede wrote:On July 03 2012 02:30 Shiori wrote:On July 03 2012 01:32 Bluerain wrote:On July 03 2012 00:59 Shiori wrote:
I tire of seeing debate over these graphs, because it's always the same:
If something agrees with the balance whine of the day, everyone who plays the apparently overpowered race claims it's "metagame." If something disagrees, those same people turn right around and take the stats as gospel.
It's pretty simple: watch the games. TvZ and PvZ are both broken because Zerg in general is broken. Yes, Zerg was underpowered at release, but they haven't been for a long time. The other thing to consider is that in many respects, there were simply more top level Korean T/P players in tournaments than Zerg. Nestea is a notoriously weak traveller, and DRG is actually pretty new in the scheme of the Zerg scene; same with Symbol. There was a long period of time in which you had Nestea and then a big void of skill beneath him as far as Zerg went. Even now, I can only think of less than 10 truly top Zerg players, but I can think of at least 20 Terrans and probably 15 Protoss.
Tl;dr when MKP or Hero beat Moon or something it doesn't mean the matchup is balanced. dumbest/most biased post ever plus flame baiting. a biased zerg response would be that zerg is just UP and nestea is just way better so he can win while all other zerg players who are equal in skill to T/P players cannot win due to UP race. see how stupid heavily biased comments are? Except mine's based in fact. If you look at the most mechanically proficient/creative players, you get a lot of Terrans, a decent number of Protosses, and a few Zergs. It's not biased; it's just the way it is. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you're actually a moron. Zing! Feel free to back up your argument with facts rather than sniveling. I don't even play Terran and I can see that they have the most mechanically skilled players. What evidence could you POSSIBLY use to make this claim? Following the scene since release. Playing all races. Knowing what all races have to do during all stages of the game. Listening to what pro players say. Reading up on discussions. Asking random players. Asking people who off race. There might not be any mathematical formula that will give you an unquestionable answer, but everything points to the fact, and making the claim is not sensational at all. I will even go so far as to say that Terran being more mechanically demanding has turned the best terran players into the best players in the world, since they've constantly been improving at a pace that outweighs their Zerg and Protoss counterparts, who due to limited race designs will have to depend on Blizzard to buff them mathematically constantly to compensate. Unless Zerg/Protoss design changes dramatically, this will be the continuing trend throughout SC2s life. Terran gets nerfed, terran players get better, the other races get buffed to compensate. This'll eventually lead into Terran being nigh unplayable anywhere outside the absolute top level of play. It's a problem of shit design in essence. i agree with what you said. it does seem that terran is the race that best utilizes good mechanics and naturally the terran players will just get better and better while zerg/protoss players stagnate in the mechanical aspects of the game and will be buffed in order to keep up. but i was talking about skill in my post which i was meaning as a general term for the ability to win. and winning takes more than just mechanics. many games are lost due to bad decision making as well as limiting mechanics. edit: oh the other guy actually said terran players are not the most mechnically sound but the most creative too. LOL guess i cant argue against such heavy bias you win I'm assuming by this you don't think Terran players have been the most creative players. Which I laugh at considering we are the race that has the most builds which by definition pretty much makes us the most creative/innovative race. I'm not saying I'm creative, but Terran players as a whole trump the other two races in creativity. Especially Protoss.
Oh sweet Jesus... so we have come to this now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
