|
So as effect of patch balancing TvZ we have now third month with matchup being around 55% when for at least 9 months before patch winrates were newer worse than 54%. Good job Blizzard
Also nice that Korean graph now have much bigger sample size.
|
On August 09 2012 00:25 peidongyang wrote:
gosh i love quickly scrolling through this thread every month very briefly
Hahahaha.
Yeeeeeah buddy.
|
On August 09 2012 00:40 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:33 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:32 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:16 Sated wrote:On August 09 2012 00:12 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
Huh? what does that mean? Your statement makes no sense whatsoever.
Theoretically I should have same 50% win rate against opponent with similar MMR, regardless of their race.
Not saying if it's true, but if I have 60% win rate against T/P of similar MMR but 30% against Z of similar MMR, which would maintain my pace, it is not balanced game no matter what level I play.
You can't balance the game for all levels because the races have different mechanics. This means that you have to choose a level of mechanical skill at which to balance the game. Obviously, for the game to remain a competitive sport, you can only choose to balance at the highest level - balancing at any other level would make the game a joke as a competitive sport. On August 09 2012 00:19 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:17 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
It's true, but for a game to be fun you'd expect to have 50% chance fighting similarly skilled player regardless of race. I just used MMR because that's the best we have, since there is no skill bar on profile. I'm not saying it is not balanced at lower level, I'm just saying that the idea of "balance doesn't matter unless you are Code S level" is pretty stupid. You cant have both though. Balancing lower leagues would either completely drop the skill ceiling as a whole, or would create glaring balance issues on the high levels That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level. This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly". youre not listening to anything people are saying at this point. people have already explained why you cannot balance at all levels of play, unless you want to simplify the game as a whole. just go back and read what people have already said I read that, that is NOT a reason, it's a conclusion, one with no evidence of backing it up. Here is why I think the game can be balanced on all level: You start with 3 races that's completely identical (well, then it's 3 races, but whatever) Change one tiny things for each race so it's still balanced on all skill level. Now you have 3 distinct (well, not very different, still) races that's are balanced across skill levels keep doing that, theoretically you can have 3 fundamentally different races that is balanced on all levels. It by no means easy to do. I'm not even sure if current SC2 is balanced or not across level, but we shouldn't give up balancing lower level just because 3 races are different. Competitive SC2 might mean alot on this forum, but majority of SC2 player cares absolutely nothing about it. They bought the game, want to enjoy it, and deserve a balanced gameplay even when they suck.
If you just wanted to enjoy the game, why would you care one bit about balance? So you can blame your losses on something other than yourself?
|
On August 09 2012 00:40 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:33 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:32 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:16 Sated wrote:On August 09 2012 00:12 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
Huh? what does that mean? Your statement makes no sense whatsoever.
Theoretically I should have same 50% win rate against opponent with similar MMR, regardless of their race.
Not saying if it's true, but if I have 60% win rate against T/P of similar MMR but 30% against Z of similar MMR, which would maintain my pace, it is not balanced game no matter what level I play.
You can't balance the game for all levels because the races have different mechanics. This means that you have to choose a level of mechanical skill at which to balance the game. Obviously, for the game to remain a competitive sport, you can only choose to balance at the highest level - balancing at any other level would make the game a joke as a competitive sport. On August 09 2012 00:19 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:17 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
It's true, but for a game to be fun you'd expect to have 50% chance fighting similarly skilled player regardless of race. I just used MMR because that's the best we have, since there is no skill bar on profile. I'm not saying it is not balanced at lower level, I'm just saying that the idea of "balance doesn't matter unless you are Code S level" is pretty stupid. You cant have both though. Balancing lower leagues would either completely drop the skill ceiling as a whole, or would create glaring balance issues on the high levels That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level. This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly". youre not listening to anything people are saying at this point. people have already explained why you cannot balance at all levels of play, unless you want to simplify the game as a whole. just go back and read what people have already said I read that, that is NOT a reason, it's a conclusion, one with no evidence of backing it up. Here is why I think the game can be balanced on all level: You start with 3 races that's completely identical (well, then it's 3 races, but whatever) Change one tiny things for each race so it's still balanced on all skill level. Now you have 3 distinct (well, not very different, still) races that's are balanced across skill levels keep doing that, theoretically you can have 3 fundamentally different races that is balanced on all levels. It by no means easy to do. I'm not even sure if current SC2 is balanced or not across level, but we shouldn't give up balancing lower level just because 3 races are different. Competitive SC2 might mean alot on this forum, but majority of SC2 player cares absolutely nothing about it. They bought the game, want to enjoy it, and deserve a balanced gameplay even when they suck.
When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level.
|
On August 09 2012 00:50 K3Nyy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:40 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:33 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:32 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:16 Sated wrote:
[quote]
You can't balance the game for all levels because the races have different mechanics. This means that you have to choose a level of mechanical skill at which to balance the game. Obviously, for the game to remain a competitive sport, you can only choose to balance at the highest level - balancing at any other level would make the game a joke as a competitive sport. On August 09 2012 00:19 Pazuzu wrote:
[quote]
You cant have both though. Balancing lower leagues would either completely drop the skill ceiling as a whole, or would create glaring balance issues on the high levels
That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level. This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly". youre not listening to anything people are saying at this point. people have already explained why you cannot balance at all levels of play, unless you want to simplify the game as a whole. just go back and read what people have already said I read that, that is NOT a reason, it's a conclusion, one with no evidence of backing it up. Here is why I think the game can be balanced on all level: You start with 3 races that's completely identical (well, then it's 3 races, but whatever) Change one tiny things for each race so it's still balanced on all skill level. Now you have 3 distinct (well, not very different, still) races that's are balanced across skill levels keep doing that, theoretically you can have 3 fundamentally different races that is balanced on all levels. It by no means easy to do. I'm not even sure if current SC2 is balanced or not across level, but we shouldn't give up balancing lower level just because 3 races are different. Competitive SC2 might mean alot on this forum, but majority of SC2 player cares absolutely nothing about it. They bought the game, want to enjoy it, and deserve a balanced gameplay even when they suck. If you just wanted to enjoy the game, why would you care one bit about balance? So you can blame your losses on something other than yourself?
How in the hell does balance not matter when you playing the game? By your logic there is no need to balance a game if it doesn't have a "esports" component? I haven't played since season 4 since all my friends quit, and it's joyless playing ladder with no social aspect, so I don't need to blame anything.
|
On August 09 2012 00:50 NHY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:40 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:33 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:32 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:16 Sated wrote:
[quote]
You can't balance the game for all levels because the races have different mechanics. This means that you have to choose a level of mechanical skill at which to balance the game. Obviously, for the game to remain a competitive sport, you can only choose to balance at the highest level - balancing at any other level would make the game a joke as a competitive sport. On August 09 2012 00:19 Pazuzu wrote:
[quote]
You cant have both though. Balancing lower leagues would either completely drop the skill ceiling as a whole, or would create glaring balance issues on the high levels
That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level. This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly". youre not listening to anything people are saying at this point. people have already explained why you cannot balance at all levels of play, unless you want to simplify the game as a whole. just go back and read what people have already said I read that, that is NOT a reason, it's a conclusion, one with no evidence of backing it up. Here is why I think the game can be balanced on all level: You start with 3 races that's completely identical (well, then it's 3 races, but whatever) Change one tiny things for each race so it's still balanced on all skill level. Now you have 3 distinct (well, not very different, still) races that's are balanced across skill levels keep doing that, theoretically you can have 3 fundamentally different races that is balanced on all levels. It by no means easy to do. I'm not even sure if current SC2 is balanced or not across level, but we shouldn't give up balancing lower level just because 3 races are different. Competitive SC2 might mean alot on this forum, but majority of SC2 player cares absolutely nothing about it. They bought the game, want to enjoy it, and deserve a balanced gameplay even when they suck. When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level.
It hard as hell, but so we just give up because 99.999% of people who bought the game doesn't matter?
|
On August 09 2012 00:57 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:50 NHY wrote:On August 09 2012 00:40 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:33 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:32 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
[quote]
That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level.
This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly". youre not listening to anything people are saying at this point. people have already explained why you cannot balance at all levels of play, unless you want to simplify the game as a whole. just go back and read what people have already said I read that, that is NOT a reason, it's a conclusion, one with no evidence of backing it up. Here is why I think the game can be balanced on all level: You start with 3 races that's completely identical (well, then it's 3 races, but whatever) Change one tiny things for each race so it's still balanced on all skill level. Now you have 3 distinct (well, not very different, still) races that's are balanced across skill levels keep doing that, theoretically you can have 3 fundamentally different races that is balanced on all levels. It by no means easy to do. I'm not even sure if current SC2 is balanced or not across level, but we shouldn't give up balancing lower level just because 3 races are different. Competitive SC2 might mean alot on this forum, but majority of SC2 player cares absolutely nothing about it. They bought the game, want to enjoy it, and deserve a balanced gameplay even when they suck. When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level. It hard as hell, but so we just give up because 99.999% of people who bought the game doesn't matter?
It's not hard as hell, it's just impossible. Changing something in the game changes it for all levels of play. The only way to have balance for all levels of play would be to have a different game for each league on the ladder, all with different balance.
|
Surprisingly little drama over the numbers.
Guess Taeja results are still keeping people quiet.
Will be interesting to see how the 'patch zergs' fare before HotS and if foreigner terrans can recover.
On August 09 2012 00:50 NHY wrote:
When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level.
A lot of things actually.
Change in costs of one-time buildings like spawning pool would come close.
|
On August 09 2012 00:57 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:50 NHY wrote:On August 09 2012 00:40 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:33 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:32 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]
[quote]
That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level.
This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly". youre not listening to anything people are saying at this point. people have already explained why you cannot balance at all levels of play, unless you want to simplify the game as a whole. just go back and read what people have already said I read that, that is NOT a reason, it's a conclusion, one with no evidence of backing it up. Here is why I think the game can be balanced on all level: You start with 3 races that's completely identical (well, then it's 3 races, but whatever) Change one tiny things for each race so it's still balanced on all skill level. Now you have 3 distinct (well, not very different, still) races that's are balanced across skill levels keep doing that, theoretically you can have 3 fundamentally different races that is balanced on all levels. It by no means easy to do. I'm not even sure if current SC2 is balanced or not across level, but we shouldn't give up balancing lower level just because 3 races are different. Competitive SC2 might mean alot on this forum, but majority of SC2 player cares absolutely nothing about it. They bought the game, want to enjoy it, and deserve a balanced gameplay even when they suck. When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level. It hard as hell, but so we just give up because 99.999% of people who bought the game doesn't matter?
I'm saying it's impossible. And it's not giving up on 99% of the people. 99% of the people are fine with the way it is.
|
Haha, once more these winrate threads turn into a whine-fest :-D.
The best part is that it doesn't really tell that much about balance. Assuming that the three races are equally attractive to skilled players*, you would expect ~33% of each race represented at the top in a well balanced game. AFAIK this is not the case if you look up the racial distribution in GM and from the experience of various midmaster - GM players of meeting fewer terrans (sc2ranks is down for me atm so can't confirm). There could potentially be an issue where protoss and zerg is easier to play resulting in overrepresentation on ladders and in tournaments (with korean terrans skewing it back to normal, because they are strong enough to use terran to its fullest).
Although a quick glance at code A/S GSL still retains a strong terran representation, even after ro8. So overall the race might not be weaker, but just require more.
A sidenote, I've often seen people refer to WCS racial distribution as a problem (very few terrans in top 8 in almost all national qualifiers). I would be careful concluding anything from that because very few foreigner terrans changed their play after the patch (ie. when most WCS finals took place) and thus got whooped by themelves and their ancient strategies.
* Funny note, back when terran dominated GSL, and were overrepresented at high-master - GM, some people argued that terran just naturally was more appealing to talented players (LOL :-D).
|
On August 09 2012 00:49 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:25 peidongyang wrote:
gosh i love quickly scrolling through this thread every month very briefly Hahahaha. Yeeeeeah buddy.
I almost skipped my monthly skim. I'm glad I didn't. Idra and Cloud are great fun.
|
On August 09 2012 00:18 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:13 canikizu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:00 Pazuzu wrote:On August 08 2012 23:55 canikizu wrote:On August 08 2012 23:45 ELA wrote:KR TvZ winrate explained: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HNrRa.jpg) July games v. Z: 10 wins, 1 loss (90.91% winrate) You forgot Gumiho vs Zerg 12-3 (80% winrate) These two alone skew the Terran winrate like 10% or something. 2 players out of how many in korea? skew a winrate 10%? sorry but the math nowhere near checks out there're 321 Korean games, so essentially 3 games ~ 1% if Taeja and Gumiho only won half of their game (Taeja lose 4 more, Gumiho lose 4 more), that were ~ 3% more for Zerg and 3% less for Terran, and ZvT in Korea would be 53%-47%. Oh hey, that's not nice anymore. You can't pick stats like this, because it becomes meaningless. If you suggest that, then what about removing the two Zergs with the best ZvT as well? And then the cycle continues. Really bad terrans or really bad zergs skewing the numbers. Meaningless arguments because removing all outliers will leave you with the median or mean, more or less. Back to square one.
Yes you can pick stats like that. That's the very basic fundamental when you look at chart and statistic. If you trade stock and stuff, and you don't know the source of why the that stock is flying so high, you will get perceived and get burn.
The reasons Taeja and Gumiho are counted as outliners because they contributed a significant number of games in TvZ, and have siginicant higher win rate than other Terran.
Now compared to Zerg players, we have Leenock, Curious, Symbol (100% winrate), Horror (80%), Shine, Life, Sniper, Losira, DRG, Hyun (60%-70%). There are too many players that have good winrate against Terran, and most of them didn't contribue significant number of games to count as outliners. Among the Zerg there're only 2 players that contribute good number of games vT, such as Coca (14-5 73% winrate), and Nestea (4-9, 30%). But comparing between Coca's winnrate and others, he doesn't have any significant winrate that can be counted as outliner. On the other hand, Nestea can be counted as outliner because his winrrate was significantly lower than the rest of the Zerg. But that just proved that if you took Nestea out, ZvT winrate should even be higher.
I rest my case.
|
On August 08 2012 23:35 CaptainCrush wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2012 23:27 iiGreetings wrote:
Whoa pretty danm balanced... because i heard that terran was struggling, but it turns out its dead even with zerg basically. Thanks for this grapefruit!
EDIT:i speak of the korean ladder, as they are ahead of the meta game on average. Unfortunately their metagame is to cheese or 1-base all in most of the time. The international terran win rate shows you what happens if you go beyond the early game :/
Do you even watch GSL? I hate when such misinformed posts are on the first page. Not only are you making shit up to whine, but you discredit terran players that show great play against zergs in macro matches. Fuck off
|
On August 09 2012 00:30 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:25 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:24 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:22 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:20 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:16 Sated wrote:On August 09 2012 00:12 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:04 Sated wrote:On August 09 2012 00:02 ragz_gt wrote:On August 08 2012 23:48 nkr wrote:
[quote]
No, what im saying is that there's no point in balancing the game for anyone but the best. Stop being so angry.
That makes zero sense unless you have to be very best to play the game. So random people on ladder, be it gold or master, shouldn't expect a balanced game that they play? If you can't perform the tasks required to play the game at a level where it is balanced then you are the problem, not the game. Huh? what does that mean? Your statement makes no sense whatsoever. Theoretically I should have same 50% win rate against opponent with similar MMR, regardless of their race. Not saying if it's true, but if I have 60% win rate against T/P of similar MMR but 30% against Z of similar MMR, which would maintain my pace, it is not balanced game no matter what level I play. You can't balance the game for all levels because the races have different mechanics. This means that you have to choose a level of mechanical skill at which to balance the game. Obviously, for the game to remain a competitive sport, you can only choose to balance at the highest level - balancing at any other level would make the game a joke as a competitive sport. On August 09 2012 00:19 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:17 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:14 Pazuzu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:12 ragz_gt wrote:On August 09 2012 00:04 Sated wrote:
[quote]
If you can't perform the tasks required to play the game at a level where it is balanced then you are the problem, not the game. Huh? what does that mean? Your statement makes no sense whatsoever. Theoretically I should have same 50% win rate against opponent with similar MMR, regardless of their race. Not saying if it's true, but if I have 60% win rate against T/P of similar MMR but 30% against Z of similar MMR, which would maintain my pace, it is not balanced game no matter what level I play. MMR at low levels cant be read in that way. Your MMR might be comparable to someone, but you could have much better macro/much more micro for example. you would still win against similar level opponents, but because of different reasons. MMR at low levels isnt indicative of balance in the slightest It's true, but for a game to be fun you'd expect to have 50% chance fighting similarly skilled player regardless of race. I just used MMR because that's the best we have, since there is no skill bar on profile. I'm not saying it is not balanced at lower level, I'm just saying that the idea of "balance doesn't matter unless you are Code S level" is pretty stupid. You cant have both though. Balancing lower leagues would either completely drop the skill ceiling as a whole, or would create glaring balance issues on the high levels That's just a very lazy way of looking at it. Why can't it be balanced for all level even when races have different mechanics? It's like saying "This car is amazing when you go 120mph, but any lower it's a completely piece of trash". Guess what, there is not alot place where you can go 120mph, and there is not alot people who are code S level. This analogy makes no sense. The car may be able to go 120 mph, but does everyone have the driving skill to drive this car? So should the car be dumbed down in order for it to perform equally for everyone regardless of driving skill? Better drivers will get better 0-60, better handling, better shifting, better mileage even. The car shouldn't be dumbed down because it is ONLY meant for people who can go 120mph. Do you want SC2 ONLY for people who are code S level, anyone below that should just uninstall it for LoL? No, SC2 shouldn't be simplified for lower leagues. The car analogy makes no sense. Who said it should be simplified / dumbed down? I said it should be balanced. The idea that balanced game-play is a privilege only for Korean pros (not even foreign pros deserve it) is just dumb. Is there any particular reason why game can't be balanced on all level? All I get is a bunch "because races are different it can't be done", it's like saying "airplane is heavier than air so it can't fly".
Why can’t lower level players look to see what they could be doing incorrectly, rather than asking for the game to be changed on a monthly basis? You do not need to be as good as a professional Korean player to beat a zerg of your skill level. You just need to be a little more like them, make decisions like them. You would be surprised how little it takes if you get into the mind set to truly reviewing your play for flaws.
I am currently out of practice as a protoss and get rocked by zergs, but I am not asking the game to be altered because I had to take a few months off. Even if Zergs are doing well against protoss, I still think it is possible to win and I’ll keep my eye on the metagame to see if there are any new ways to get it done.
|
I wonder what the graph would look like if taeja were excluded.
|
On August 09 2012 01:00 pmp10 wrote:Surprisingly little drama over the numbers. Guess Taeja results are still keeping people quiet. Will be interesting to see how the 'patch zergs' fare before HotS and if foreigner terrans can recover. Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:50 NHY wrote:
When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level. A lot of things actually. Change in costs of one-time buildings like spawning pool would come close.
No, it doesn't even come close. Even changing the hp of spawning pool would affect balance differently.
|
On August 09 2012 01:09 ampson wrote:
I wonder what the graph would look like if taeja were excluded.
There are about 800 TvZ international and about 300 TvZ in korea, if I see that right. Taeja played 11 TvZ, some international. This means it would not change much.
|
On August 09 2012 01:10 NHY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 01:00 pmp10 wrote:Surprisingly little drama over the numbers. Guess Taeja results are still keeping people quiet. Will be interesting to see how the 'patch zergs' fare before HotS and if foreigner terrans can recover. On August 09 2012 00:50 NHY wrote:
When you change one tiny things, it affects the balance differently across the skill level. Name one thing that would have an equal affect across the skill level. A lot of things actually. Change in costs of one-time buildings like spawning pool would come close. No, it doesn't even come close. Even changing the hp of spawning pool would affect balance differently.
Hp maybe but as long as you have buildings that's build once per game anywhere from bronze league to code S then chances are it's cost will change a race balance irrelevant to the players skill level.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On August 09 2012 01:04 canikizu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 00:18 lichter wrote:On August 09 2012 00:13 canikizu wrote:On August 09 2012 00:00 Pazuzu wrote:On August 08 2012 23:55 canikizu wrote:On August 08 2012 23:45 ELA wrote:KR TvZ winrate explained: July games v. Z: 10 wins, 1 loss (90.91% winrate) You forgot Gumiho vs Zerg 12-3 (80% winrate) These two alone skew the Terran winrate like 10% or something. 2 players out of how many in korea? skew a winrate 10%? sorry but the math nowhere near checks out there're 321 Korean games, so essentially 3 games ~ 1% if Taeja and Gumiho only won half of their game (Taeja lose 4 more, Gumiho lose 4 more), that were ~ 3% more for Zerg and 3% less for Terran, and ZvT in Korea would be 53%-47%. Oh hey, that's not nice anymore. You can't pick stats like this, because it becomes meaningless. If you suggest that, then what about removing the two Zergs with the best ZvT as well? And then the cycle continues. Really bad terrans or really bad zergs skewing the numbers. Meaningless arguments because removing all outliers will leave you with the median or mean, more or less. Back to square one. Yes you can pick stats like that. That's the very basic fundamental when you look at chart and statistic. If you trade stock and stuff, and you don't know the source of why the that stock is flying so high, you will get perceived and get burn. The reasons Taeja and Gumiho are counted as outliners because they contributed a significant number of games in TvZ, and have siginicant higher win rate than other Terran. Now compared to Zerg players, we have Leenock, Curious, Symbol (100% winrate), Horror (80%), Shine, Life, Sniper, Losira, DRG, Hyun (60%-70%). There are too many players that have good winrate against Terran, and most of them didn't contribue significant number of games to count as outliners. Among the Zerg there're only 2 players that contribute good number of games vT, such as Coca (14-5 73% winrate), and Nestea (4-9, 30%). But comparing between Coca's winnrate and others, he doesn't have any significant winrate that can be counted as outliner. On the other hand, Nestea can be counted as outliner because his winrrate was significantly lower than the rest of the Zerg. But that just proved that if you took Nestea out, ZvT winrate should even be higher. I rest my case.
I don't care if it is skewed for T or for Z.
I am against this kind of approach at looking at the numbers.
In this month's case, it just happens that there are two T outliers that contribute greatly to their win percentage, mostly because they played more games and the sample size is so small that their games affect the overall numbers so much. Fortunately for that person's argument, there weren't any Z outliers, as you showed. However these are numbers for a SINGLE month, with a sample size so small one person can affect it by a significant percentage.
Larger sample size, more months (within the same patch), either outliers will disappear or other outliers will appear because they will be able to play the matchup. They will cancel each other out if the game is near balance.
I don't see how the presence of these outliers is supposed to mean that the numbers are "wrong" or "skewed". Some people are good. Some people suck. That's caused by talent, not balance.
|
United States632 Posts
On August 09 2012 01:09 ampson wrote:
I wonder what the graph would look like if taeja were excluded.
earlier someone crunched the numbers on what would happen if you took out Taeja (10-1) and Gumiho (12-3). result was a terran win rate of 47%
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
