• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 00:57
CEST 06:57
KST 13:57
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 1 - Final Week6[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall12HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0
Community News
Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed13Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll4Team TLMC #5 - Submission extension3Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation17$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced7
StarCraft 2
General
Who will win EWC 2025? The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome
Brood War
General
Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL ASL20 Preliminary Maps BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Starcraft in widescreen
Tourneys
Cosmonarchy Pro Showmatches [Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project The PlayStation 5
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Summer Games Done Quick 2025!
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Men Take Risks, Women Win Ga…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 705 users

Ladder-Balance-Data - Page 24

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 22 23 24 25 26 Next All
Not_That
Profile Joined April 2011
287 Posts
July 15 2012 19:41 GMT
#461
Yay, graphs.

[image loading]
ZjiublingZ
Profile Joined September 2011
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
July 15 2012 20:09 GMT
#462
On July 15 2012 20:53 skeldark wrote:
Update the result with a lot of stats:

Result


Source Main Data
+ Show Spoiler +

- The data is biased towards EU/US and towards higher skill-rate.

Gamescount: 125976
Sc2-Accounts: 45203

-worst to best player: 3200 MMR
-one average win/loose on Ladder: +16 / -16 MMR

TIME Filter: only between 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT - 12 Jul 2012 16:52:47 GMT


Average MMR per Race
+ Show Spoiler +
Race account count: 15814
Data average MMR: 1539.46

Difference in average MMR per Matchup:
T-P: -62.14
T-Z: -117.03
P-Z: -54.89




Average Win-ratio per Race
+ Show Spoiler +


TvP 50.43 Games: 6700
TvZ 46.7 Games: 8118
PvZ 51.61 Games 9189



Win-ratio per Race over Game-Time
+ Show Spoiler +

TvP

gamelength,%race1 win,%race2win, %of games
0,44.9,55.1,3.66
5,40.71,59.29,13.9
10,58.32,41.68,24.21
15,59.7,40.3,24.78
20,45.72,54.28,18.31
25,37.79,62.21,9.16
30,35.04,64.96,3.49
35,46.71,53.29,2.49

TvZ
gamelength,%race1 win,%race2win, %of games
0,37.13,62.87,3.78
5,33.78,66.22,9.15
10,46.91,53.09,15.96
15,52.51,47.49,22.12
20,47.88,52.12,22.9
25,44.36,55.64,14.3
30,50.0,50.0,6.65
35,48.08,51.92,5.12

PvZ

gamelength,%race1 win,%race2win, %of games
0,47.38,52.62,4.57
5,38.3,61.7,11.39
10,59.72,40.28,25.07
15,50.17,49.83,25.36
20,49.97,50.03,17.34
25,53.21,46.79,9.14
30,51.0,49.0,4.37
35,58.89,41.11,2.75


This is really cool.

Especially awesome to see TvZ 50/50 at 30 minutes, and PvZ 51/49 at 30 minutes.
Atrimex
Profile Joined July 2011
193 Posts
July 16 2012 20:37 GMT
#463
Winrates in ladder are total useless. Look at EU GM. Only 18% Terrans remaining. Maybe the winrate is still around 50%, because all the terrans with a lower winrate are dropped down one league. Even when only Kas & Happy will remain in EU GM the winrate can be around 50%. However, this gives no clue about balance.
Account252508
Profile Joined February 2012
3454 Posts
July 16 2012 20:40 GMT
#464
--- Nuked ---
Rick Deckard
Profile Joined October 2010
90 Posts
July 18 2012 13:47 GMT
#465
I believe varying average MMR between races is not an indicator of imbalance.

Here's why, imagine there is a race exactly like zerg but is only be played by blind people, call it blind-zerg. This race would have a very low average MMR as blind people obviously can't play starcraft as well as sighted people. But because the blind-zerg race is the same as zerg it's no weaker than zerg. Thus a low average MMR per race doesn't necessarily imply that race is weaker.

In conclusion the statistics gathered in the study provided can't be used to make conclusions about how well starcraft 2 is balanced.

In practice the data is confounded by the fact that the average skill of of players of different races is not necessarily the same. Dividing race MMR by number of players per race to determine average race MMR doesn't change this.
Zacsafus
Profile Joined May 2010
England255 Posts
July 18 2012 14:11 GMT
#466
On July 18 2012 22:47 Rick Deckard wrote:
I believe varying average MMR between races is not an indicator of imbalance.

Here's why, imagine there is a race exactly like zerg but is only be played by blind people, call it blind-zerg. This race would have a very low average MMR as blind people obviously can't play starcraft as well as sighted people. But because the blind-zerg race is the same as zerg it's no weaker than zerg. Thus a low average MMR per race doesn't necessarily imply that race is weaker.

In conclusion the statistics gathered in the study provided can't be used to make conclusions about how well starcraft 2 is balanced.

In practice the data is confounded by the fact that the average skill of of players of different races is not necessarily the same. Dividing race MMR by number of players per race to determine average race MMR doesn't change this.


But blind people aren't more likely to pick one race over another, its not possible to imply that one race has worse players on it, at the highest levels everyone is competent and displays good skill so your point isnt valid at high levels, or really at any level because there is no bias between the races of which a handicapped/less-skilled player would pick
aintthatfunny
Profile Joined April 2012
193 Posts
July 18 2012 14:16 GMT
#467
It's kinda funny how the people this effects the least are the ones who care the most about it.
I promise I'll behave.
Rick Deckard
Profile Joined October 2010
90 Posts
July 18 2012 14:26 GMT
#468
On July 18 2012 23:11 Zacsafus wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 18 2012 22:47 Rick Deckard wrote:
I believe varying average MMR between races is not an indicator of imbalance.

Here's why, imagine there is a race exactly like zerg but is only be played by blind people, call it blind-zerg. This race would have a very low average MMR as blind people obviously can't play starcraft as well as sighted people. But because the blind-zerg race is the same as zerg it's no weaker than zerg. Thus a low average MMR per race doesn't necessarily imply that race is weaker.

In conclusion the statistics gathered in the study provided can't be used to make conclusions about how well starcraft 2 is balanced.

In practice the data is confounded by the fact that the average skill of of players of different races is not necessarily the same. Dividing race MMR by number of players per race to determine average race MMR doesn't change this.


But blind people aren't more likely to pick one race over another, its not possible to imply that one race has worse players on it, at the highest levels everyone is competent and displays good skill so your point isnt valid at high levels, or really at any level because there is no bias between the races of which a handicapped/less-skilled player would pick


It's not necessary for blind people pick one race over another for my point to be valid. I don't expect blind people to play starcraft. What I've shown is that differences in average MMR per race doesn't always imply imbalance, even significantly different average MMRs. This is proof by contradiction, it only requires a single counter example to disprove a rule.

Given that (my proof is valid that) differences in average MMR per race doesn't imply imbalance in general, it also doesn't per se imply imbalance in starcraft 2.

I'm not making a statement about the balance of the game at either high or low skill level. Just pointing out a logical flaw in the argument that different average race MMRs indicate imbalance. As best I can tell the author of the study has concluded because average MMR per race is different therefore the game is imbalance. I believe that logic to be flawed.
Account252508
Profile Joined February 2012
3454 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-18 14:54:01
July 18 2012 14:52 GMT
#469
--- Nuked ---
Lysenko
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Iceland2128 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-18 15:12:00
July 18 2012 14:58 GMT
#470
OK, so I've gone back over the "find your MMR in one game" post by not_that and I am confused about a few things that represent a large leap from there to this post.

* Not_that's work makes a lot of sense, but it's quite clear (and stated very explicitly in that post) that you can only use that technique to find a master league player's MMR with respect to the 0 point of master league. How have you backed out MMRs for the other leagues, particularly considering how many different offsets there are per league and that you can't see the offsets?

* All of this work (in this post) seems to be overlooking the fact that Not_that's F function may actually be nonlinearly dependent on MMR. That is, "actual" MMR, where difference between two players' MMRs predicts a likelihood of win vs. loss, could map nonlinearly into the ladder-point-space "MMR" number that's being compared to adjusted points in not_that's F function. The result, if this were the case, would be that MMR changes after a game would not proportionally track the won or lost points, and the system would rely on MMR stabilization and the feedback between MMR and ladder points to force ladder points to reach equilibrium with MMR.

More to the point, if that were the case it would also cause the ladder-point-space MMR number not to follow a normal distribution, since it would be a normal distribution with a nonlinear mapping applied to it.


Edit: I forgot when I wrote this that lolcanoe's analysis seems to confirm that there is close to a normal distribution to these ladder-point-scale MMR numbers, so this is maybe a moot point.

* Finally, MMR is known not to be Elo, so if there are any points in any of these analyses that assume MMR to be Elo, those points are not valid. I only saw one place in Not_that's post where Elo came up, and it was along the lines of "oh, I saw blah blah blah in the data and that roughly reminds me of blah blah blah in Elo, so it's probably correct." That kind of thing is fine, though maybe not as good a reinforcement as he thinks.

* Edit: REALLY finally -- to the extent that skeldark is emphatic that there is no visible MMR cap in his data, that calls into question whatever process happened to the data before it wound up in ladder-point-scale MMR space, because we KNOW that there is such a cap. If that process is broken, all bets are off.

Bottom line is that I'm not sure that any of these issues are fatal to lolcanoe's analysis of the data set, assuming there's some answer to the first point, though skeldark's approach of generating tons of random games using some black-box code he wrote is a highly dubious way to interpret the data, and the question of why no MMR cap is visible is problematic. (Edit: It may simply be that the MMR cap does not affect enough people in the data set to be clearly evident.)

However, even with lolcanoe's confirmation that there is a modest amount of variation between races in this data set, there's still no way to tell why that is -- whether it comes from game design, player-originated biases in race choice, or simply players not having caught up to the current state of the game in their understanding of how, optimally, to play the races against each other. In that light, this whole discussion is a lot of heat and very little illumination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
Rick Deckard
Profile Joined October 2010
90 Posts
July 18 2012 15:24 GMT
#471
On July 18 2012 23:52 monkybone wrote:
Yes, this assumes a similar skill distribution for each race.

Author has basically just defined balance as average MMR, which doesn't give any information. But taking the skill distribution in consideration, then the MMR distribution gives evidence of balance.


OK. That makes sense then. Thank you for the clarification.

Personally I'll follow top tournament results for significant imbalance indications. I hope that Blizzard continues to improve the balance of WOL.

The win rates over time are interesting in the study. Thank you to whoever took the time to put that together.
Not_That
Profile Joined April 2011
287 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-18 19:02:31
July 18 2012 19:02 GMT
#472
On July 18 2012 23:58 Lysenko wrote:
OK, so I've gone back over the "find your MMR in one game" post by not_that and I am confused about a few things that represent a large leap from there to this post.

* Not_that's work makes a lot of sense, but it's quite clear (and stated very explicitly in that post) that you can only use that technique to find a master league player's MMR with respect to the 0 point of master league. How have you backed out MMRs for the other leagues, particularly considering how many different offsets there are per league and that you can't see the offsets?

* All of this work (in this post) seems to be overlooking the fact that Not_that's F function may actually be nonlinearly dependent on MMR. That is, "actual" MMR, where difference between two players' MMRs predicts a likelihood of win vs. loss, could map nonlinearly into the ladder-point-space "MMR" number that's being compared to adjusted points in not_that's F function. The result, if this were the case, would be that MMR changes after a game would not proportionally track the won or lost points, and the system would rely on MMR stabilization and the feedback between MMR and ladder points to force ladder points to reach equilibrium with MMR.

More to the point, if that were the case it would also cause the ladder-point-space MMR number not to follow a normal distribution, since it would be a normal distribution with a nonlinear mapping applied to it.


Edit: I forgot when I wrote this that lolcanoe's analysis seems to confirm that there is close to a normal distribution to these ladder-point-scale MMR numbers, so this is maybe a moot point.

* Finally, MMR is known not to be Elo, so if there are any points in any of these analyses that assume MMR to be Elo, those points are not valid. I only saw one place in Not_that's post where Elo came up, and it was along the lines of "oh, I saw blah blah blah in the data and that roughly reminds me of blah blah blah in Elo, so it's probably correct." That kind of thing is fine, though maybe not as good a reinforcement as he thinks.

* Edit: REALLY finally -- to the extent that skeldark is emphatic that there is no visible MMR cap in his data, that calls into question whatever process happened to the data before it wound up in ladder-point-scale MMR space, because we KNOW that there is such a cap. If that process is broken, all bets are off.

Bottom line is that I'm not sure that any of these issues are fatal to lolcanoe's analysis of the data set, assuming there's some answer to the first point, though skeldark's approach of generating tons of random games using some black-box code he wrote is a highly dubious way to interpret the data, and the question of why no MMR cap is visible is problematic. (Edit: It may simply be that the MMR cap does not affect enough people in the data set to be clearly evident.)

However, even with lolcanoe's confirmation that there is a modest amount of variation between races in this data set, there's still no way to tell why that is -- whether it comes from game design, player-originated biases in race choice, or simply players not having caught up to the current state of the game in their understanding of how, optimally, to play the races against each other. In that light, this whole discussion is a lot of heat and very little illumination.



I'll be happy to address the points in your post as well as future ones you may have.

The output of F gives what we refer to as dmmr, which is the difference between the player's MMR and the opponent's league and tier offset. For example if player A plays opponent B who is from an unknown diamond division tier and has 300 adjusted points before the game and loses 12 points, we can tell that A's dmmr is 300+-14 (the deviation of F for 12 points change matches) in relation to B's diamond tier offset. If B was in master we would know A's MMR right there and then, however for all leagues with multiple tiers it is more complicated than that. This is why the MMR calculator requires more than a single match for players who play opponents below master before it becomes accurate.

Once we have multiple consecutive matches of A against opponents below master, we can infer more about A's MMR by looking at the series as a whole. We know that A's MMR increases after every win and decreases after every loss. From this we can start making predictions of A's opponent's tiers in their leagues. It is a fairly difficult problem and it has taken Skeletor quite a while to get it right, but by the current version of the calculator the predictions are very accurate at high game count. You may dispute his methods, but for the current topic of discussion it's enough to say that the individual races of A or his opponents do not play a role whatsoever. So any potential problem which may exist in the calculation method is unbiased towards producing results that show one race as having a different MMR than the others.

Skeletor described his methods in several posts. You call the calculator a black box, but he has released a source code (which afaik got no attention).

On to next point:
MMR is not ELO (adjusted ladder points are very similar to ELO however). We never claimed that it is, and it's irrelevant. We do not calculate MMR changes, we simply read MMR values and let the ladder system worry about how MMR behaves.

We discussed the surprising behavior of MMR several times and how the "uncertainty value" stored for each player is surprisingly the same for all players who have played some matches since buying the game, even for players who experience DRAMATIC MMR fluctuations. You can literally go from Bronze to Master with 90+% winratio and your uncertainty value will be the same as that of a player who is steady. However once again I emphasize it has nothing to do with current topic as we don't care about the uncertainty value or what system governs MMRs, we simply read MMR values.


Regarding MMR cap, I haven't dug too deep into it. I looked at #1 ranked GM earlier in the season and his adjusted points (around 820 at the time. It's 981 for #1 on Europe atm) were close to his MMR. That to me indicated that if that player is MMR capped, he's probably very close to the cap as adjusted points and dMMR tend to get roughly close to each other after having played enough games and not experience MMR shifts. For a player who is MMR capped we expect his adjusted points to go quite a bit higher than his MMR and towards his uncapped dMMR, the reason for which I explain in #1 in the next paragraph.

The reasons I haven't spent much time on this are:
1) If player A is MMR capped, that doesn't affect A whatsoever. It affects A's OPPONENTS. They receive less points for beating A and lose more points for losing to him. Assuming that only few players at the top are capped, this would spread out across a large multitude of opponents each suffering small impacts from playing against capped players. The capped player's ladder points would otherwise behave as though they are uncapped. They wouldn't notice.
2) We aren't trying to model MMR behavior. We're simply reading it. If MMR is capped - great, we don't care. Those who are capped are GMs anyway (and potentially few high Masters who very much belong in GM but didn't get in due to Blizzard's strange qualification rules for it, i.e. Whitera who didn't get GM until near the end of the season last season). GM league has 1 tier - we easily read MMRs of people who play GMs, we don't care about cap.
Lysenko
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Iceland2128 Posts
July 18 2012 20:37 GMT
#473
On July 19 2012 04:02 Not_That wrote:
Skeletor described his methods in several posts. You call the calculator a black box, but he has released a source code (which afaik got no attention).


Are those posts in this thread? If not, can you link to them? (If they are, I'll go back and look again.)

I wasn't referring to anything he did to calculate league offsets as a black box, because I don't recall seeing the documentation of that. What I was referring to was the code he talked about using to simulate large numbers of imaginary games in an attempt to guess what the likelihood of a given distribution would be.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
Not_That
Profile Joined April 2011
287 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-18 21:56:24
July 18 2012 21:54 GMT
#474
They're probably a bit dated now. This is the one linked in the calculator thread, that discussion happened there. Best way to understand how the calculator figures out the MMR of players below Master is to find Skeletor on TL teamspeak and having a chat with him directly.
We're always glad when people show interest in the theoretical part, and this is certainly something that would benefit from more minds thinking about, particularly when it comes to the as of yet unexplored territories.


Regarding the MMR numbers and the distribution, if you consider a few wins worth of MMR difference between the races as something that falls within the ladder's MMR distribution without being statistically significant, I don't think the part about simulating large numbers of imaginary games adds something to the table that will make you change your mind. As I understand it, it assumes a distribution of MMRs. Whether or not that assumption makes sense considering the data, I propose some of the statisticians who put this thread to so much scrutiny will prove or disprove.
lolcanoe
Profile Joined July 2010
United States57 Posts
July 20 2012 05:39 GMT
#475
On July 18 2012 23:26 Rick Deckard wrote:
It's not necessary for blind people pick one race over another for my point to be valid.

Actually, it is.


On July 18 2012 23:26 Rick Deckard wrote:
This is proof by contradiction, it only requires a single counter example to disprove a rule.

What an awful, awful way to rehash the causation-correlation concerns.

On July 18 2012 23:26 Rick Deckard wrote:
Given that (my proof is valid that) differences in average MMR per race doesn't imply imbalance in general, it also doesn't per se imply imbalance in starcraft 2.

If your "proof" had been valid, you would've been led to no conclusion, and no conclusion alone. In this particular situation, the opposite of your statement is true - differences in average MMR per race would GENERALLY suggest imbalance, however there are specific instances where causation is a concern. Keep in mind without a time-based model, most statistical tests leave causation-correlation debates to reasonable examination. Likewise, there are concerns about sampling, MMR measurement, normality, and applicability to the highest tier of play.

Op has already noted that most players sampled have high average MMR to lessen concerns that the MMR differences was centered around race choices of players who were new to the game, which was the predominant causation-correlation concern. Besides this concern, there seems to be no reasonable account to support the idea that there is a strong race selection-bias at hand here.
Lysenko
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Iceland2128 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-20 14:13:19
July 20 2012 14:10 GMT
#476
On July 20 2012 14:39 lolcanoe wrote:
Op has already noted that most players sampled have high average MMR to lessen concerns that the MMR differences was centered around race choices of players who were new to the game, which was the predominant causation-correlation concern. Besides this concern, there seems to be no reasonable account to support the idea that there is a strong race selection-bias at hand here.


Thing is, I don't see any particular reason to expect that the impact of new-to-the-game players favoring Terran wouldn't trail off measurably all the way to master league. After all, a small but nonzero number of players get quite good at the game very fast.

Edit: Also, remember that that mechanism was just as much a factor in 2010 as today, so players who went through that process then have had plenty of time to improve their play. An excess of Terrans as one goes farther down in the distribution may simply be an echo of choices made two years ago and the fact that race choices tend to be somewhat "sticky" since people tend to like playing what they know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
gillon
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Sweden1578 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-20 15:12:25
July 20 2012 15:10 GMT
#477
On July 18 2012 22:47 Rick Deckard wrote:
I believe varying average MMR between races is not an indicator of imbalance.

Here's why, imagine there is a race exactly like zerg but is only be played by blind people, call it blind-zerg. This race would have a very low average MMR as blind people obviously can't play starcraft as well as sighted people. But because the blind-zerg race is the same as zerg it's no weaker than zerg. Thus a low average MMR per race doesn't necessarily imply that race is weaker.

In conclusion the statistics gathered in the study provided can't be used to make conclusions about how well starcraft 2 is balanced.

In practice the data is confounded by the fact that the average skill of of players of different races is not necessarily the same. Dividing race MMR by number of players per race to determine average race MMR doesn't change this.


You're analogy is simply implying that every Z player is better than every T player. While, statistically speaking, this isn't impossible it's very arrogant to even assume it a possibility.

EDIT: Basically, what lolcanoe stated.
www.teamproperty.net | "You should hate losing, but you should never fear defeat." - 이윤열
skeldark
Profile Joined April 2010
Germany2223 Posts
August 11 2012 12:23 GMT
#478
Updated the data:

MMR Filter: Above Master
TIME Filter: 1 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 31 Jul 2012 23:59:59 GMT
T: -15.77
Z: -0.77
P: 12.23

MMR Filter: Above Master
TIME Filter: 1 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 11 Aug 2012 11:47:54 GMT
T: -15.24
Z: -7.24
P: 17.76

MMR Filter: No
TIME Filter: 1 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 31 Jul 2012 23:59:59 GMT
T: -45.24
Z: 28.76
P: 6.76

MMR Filter: No
TIME Filter: 1 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 11 Aug 2012 11:47:54 GMT
T: -46.82
Z: 23.18
P: 14.18
Save gaming: kill esport
MockHamill
Profile Joined March 2010
Sweden1798 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-11 12:34:22
August 11 2012 12:31 GMT
#479
On August 11 2012 21:23 skeldark wrote:
Updated the data:

MMR Filter: Above Master
TIME Filter: 1 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 31 Jul 2012 23:59:59 GMT
T: -15.77
Z: -0.77
P: 12.23

MMR Filter: Above Master
TIME Filter: 1 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 11 Aug 2012 11:47:54 GMT
T: -15.24
Z: -7.24
P: 17.76

MMR Filter: No
TIME Filter: 1 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 31 Jul 2012 23:59:59 GMT
T: -45.24
Z: 28.76
P: 6.76

MMR Filter: No
TIME Filter: 1 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 11 Aug 2012 11:47:54 GMT
T: -46.82
Z: 23.18
P: 14.18


Interesting. Terran is UP according to the data. But now when they get faster Ravens Terran will dominate for sure.
Thrombozyt
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
Germany1269 Posts
August 11 2012 12:45 GMT
#480
On August 11 2012 21:31 MockHamill wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 11 2012 21:23 skeldark wrote:
Updated the data:

MMR Filter: Above Master
TIME Filter: 1 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 31 Jul 2012 23:59:59 GMT
T: -15.77
Z: -0.77
P: 12.23

MMR Filter: Above Master
TIME Filter: 1 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 11 Aug 2012 11:47:54 GMT
T: -15.24
Z: -7.24
P: 17.76

MMR Filter: No
TIME Filter: 1 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 31 Jul 2012 23:59:59 GMT
T: -45.24
Z: 28.76
P: 6.76

MMR Filter: No
TIME Filter: 1 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT - 11 Aug 2012 11:47:54 GMT
T: -46.82
Z: 23.18
P: 14.18


Interesting. Terran is UP according to the data. But now when they get faster Ravens Terran will dominate for sure.

I know you're trolling, I'm not sure which group you target... damn.. time to upgrade my sarcasm detector.
Prev 1 22 23 24 25 26 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 5h 3m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 259
StarCraft: Brood War
Leta 181
Snow 156
Noble 25
ajuk12(nOOB) 19
Icarus 8
Dota 2
monkeys_forever874
League of Legends
JimRising 770
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K883
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King98
Other Games
summit1g13897
shahzam1114
hungrybox1013
WinterStarcraft440
C9.Mang0297
ViBE221
NeuroSwarm64
Trikslyr53
ROOTCatZ8
NotJumperer2
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick2368
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• practicex 54
• intothetv
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki17
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift3888
• Rush1787
• Lourlo1174
• Stunt374
Other Games
• Scarra3324
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
5h 3m
OSC
8h 3m
WardiTV European League
11h 3m
Fjant vs Babymarine
Mixu vs HiGhDrA
Gerald vs ArT
goblin vs MaNa
Jumy vs YoungYakov
Replay Cast
19h 3m
Epic.LAN
1d 7h
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
Epic.LAN
2 days
CSO Contender
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Esports World Cup
5 days
ByuN vs Astrea
Lambo vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs TBD
Solar vs Zoun
SHIN vs Reynor
Maru vs TriGGeR
herO vs Lancer
Cure vs ShoWTimE
Esports World Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

JPL Season 2
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

BSL 2v2 Season 3
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Championship of Russia 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters

Upcoming

CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
K-Championship
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.