|
After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go:
As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results:
- Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days.
TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
|
Zerg has 1 more 2nd place?! IMBA!!!!
|
I'd like to quote Nick_54 over in this thread
On December 19 2012 13:24 Nick_54 wrote:
I guess this is the palce to put my grievances with Blizzard saying the game seems "fine." I go to the highest level of competition premier tournaments on liquipedia. I start with May. 27 tournament sample size so 54 finalists. Terran has 5 wins and 4 runnerup finishes.
Thats 1 in 6 finalists are terran. It should be 1 in 3. I just want the game to be fair and not queen turtle into infestor into corrupter infestor broodlord every game. I want to see my terran favorites fight on a level playing field and be ale to compete.
I get some of this may be satire from Ver, but some of it is true and accurate.
|
Thanks Khaldor, I agree!
Wish more people could see something like that.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance.
|
On December 19 2012 16:42 opterown wrote:
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance.
why?
|
|
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 16:46 Insoleet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:42 opterown wrote:
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance. why?
you're looking at two players out of an entire player field, possibly 32 or even up to 72 players. in this case, what is more relevant is individual skill, not balance. for example, throw taeja in a pool of mediocre zergs and he will probably come first. but throw a bunch of mediocre terrans and mediocre zergs together and you will likely get a zvz final. you want to compare results from players of similar skill, not players who stand out.
for example, you may look at IEM singapore and DH winter and say "oh look we had TvP finals" when the zergs who were at either tournament weren't top tier like the finalists. there were no korean zergs at DH and stephano/nerchio, skilled as they may be, are not as good as hero or taeja. the same thing applies for IEM - while there were quite a few zergs playing, they were all pretty mediocre. both zergs in the semifinals also lost by just one map too.
these are just some examples
that thread is stupid, but does it matter if i post there or not? i've read the thread. what i meant by posting over there too was directed at khaldor; i posted on reddit
|
On December 19 2012 16:54 opterown wrote:that thread is stupid, but does it matter if i post there or not? i've read the thread
doesn't. I just wanted to see the logic of your previous post and I was confused because I couldn't find it and I didn't know if I was messing up, that's all.
|
I completely disagree with what you say Opterown. We are looking at an entire year here. There are a lot of arguments why this does not reflect balance or why it does. In the end it simply shows that it's possible for each race to win tournaments. And that's all that I've been saying.
Where did I state that this makes the game balanced? I even pointed out that it doesn't. The only point that I am making here is that the state of the game is not as bad as the balance whiners make it out to be. And at the same time I agree that some things have to be changed. I simply hate the continues bitching that led to a lot of people echoing it over and over again.
|
And this is exactly what blizzard wants, a close to perfect ratio before wol dies out and hots takes over. Browder and Kim won't fail to remind us that after +2 years of competition, they managed to get even distribution amongst the three races, like BW ! I'm not sure they will be keen to tell us how they achievied it though, but let's say the infestor era we've been suffering from these past 6 months sure managed to close the gap and achieve the so desired "balance".
|
On December 19 2012 16:27 nomyx wrote:I'd like to quote Nick_54 over in this threadShow nested quote +On December 19 2012 13:24 Nick_54 wrote:
I guess this is the palce to put my grievances with Blizzard saying the game seems "fine." I go to the highest level of competition premier tournaments on liquipedia. I start with May. 27 tournament sample size so 54 finalists. Terran has 5 wins and 4 runnerup finishes.
Thats 1 in 6 finalists are terran. It should be 1 in 3. I just want the game to be fair and not queen turtle into infestor into corrupter infestor broodlord every game. I want to see my terran favorites fight on a level playing field and be ale to compete.
I get some of this may be satire from Ver, but some of it is true and accurate.
Except that is dumb. If a race won 1/3 of competitions then the game WOULD be broken. You have to take players skill into account. If in the last 11 tournaments we had 4 zerg wins, 4 terran wins, and 3 protoss wins, and the 12th tournament has a PvT finals, the P shouldn't win just because that would make it even with zerg/terran. The protoss should win because he is better than his opponent on that day. Did you know in BW flash had a 71% winrate vs zerg? That doesn't mean terran is imba, it means flash is so much better than his opponents that he wins more than he loses. He was so good that he skews the results of any tournament he enter to favor terran if you look at statistics. Sure there are players that can beat flash, but if they play early in a tournament and flash wins, then hey look there's no protoss in the finals! There are so many factors that go into winning a tournament that go beyond game balance, so looking at that as a guide in any sense is pointless.
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
Could you break this down by quarter? I'm curious because it seems like every recent tournament has ended with a Zerg winning. I'm not saying that's the case as that could easily be confirmation bias but it would be interesting to see if these ratios have changed from the beginning of the year to the end of the year and what the trend is now.
That's probably a more accurate way of determining if the game is "balanced" anyway. This shows that the game is roughly balanced over the course of a year but doesn't say much about the balance now.
|
You can spin statistics to say anything, you really have to dive into how the statistics were taken before you make assumptions, kinda like what opterown said.
|
On December 19 2012 16:54 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:46 Insoleet wrote:On December 19 2012 16:42 opterown wrote:
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance. why? you're looking at two players out of an entire player field, possibly 32 or even up to 72 players. in this case, what is more relevant is individual skill, not balance. for example, throw taeja in a pool of mediocre zergs and he will probably come first. but throw a bunch of mediocre terrans and mediocre zergs together and you will likely get a zvz final. you want to compare results from players of similar skill, not players who stand out. for example, you may look at IEM singapore and DH winter and say "oh look we had TvP finals" when the zergs who were at either tournament weren't top tier like the finalists. there were no korean zergs at DH and stephano/nerchio, skilled as they may be, are not as good as hero or taeja. the same thing applies for IEM - while there were quite a few zergs playing, they were all pretty mediocre. both zergs in the semifinals also lost by just one map too. these are just some examples that thread is stupid, but does it matter if i post there or not? i've read the thread. what i meant by posting over there too was directed at khaldor; i posted on reddit
The zergs at iem were not pretty mediocre when compared to the playing field. Revival, Vortix, and Yugioh are not really mediocre compared to grubby and sting.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:04 goswser wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:54 opterown wrote:On December 19 2012 16:46 Insoleet wrote:On December 19 2012 16:42 opterown wrote:
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance. why? you're looking at two players out of an entire player field, possibly 32 or even up to 72 players. in this case, what is more relevant is individual skill, not balance. for example, throw taeja in a pool of mediocre zergs and he will probably come first. but throw a bunch of mediocre terrans and mediocre zergs together and you will likely get a zvz final. you want to compare results from players of similar skill, not players who stand out. for example, you may look at IEM singapore and DH winter and say "oh look we had TvP finals" when the zergs who were at either tournament weren't top tier like the finalists. there were no korean zergs at DH and stephano/nerchio, skilled as they may be, are not as good as hero or taeja. the same thing applies for IEM - while there were quite a few zergs playing, they were all pretty mediocre. both zergs in the semifinals also lost by just one map too. these are just some examples that thread is stupid, but does it matter if i post there or not? i've read the thread. what i meant by posting over there too was directed at khaldor; i posted on reddit The zergs at iem were not pretty mediocre when compared to the playing field. Revival, Vortix, and Yugioh are not really mediocre compared to grubby and sting.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/IEM_Season_VII_-_Singapore
yugioh and revival topped their groups, vortix took out revival, and was in turn barely taken out by sting 3-2 in some pretty scrappy games. it's not like grubby and sting dominated their way across the zerg playing field haha. i agree that the zergs are probably just as good or even better than the finalists but that was a small stroke of bad luck haha
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:00 Khaldor wrote:
I completely disagree with what you say Opterown. We are looking at an entire year here. There are a lot of arguments why this does not reflect balance or why it does. In the end it simply shows that it's possible for each race to win tournaments. And that's all that I've been saying.
Where did I state that this makes the game balanced? I even pointed out that it doesn't. The only point that I am making here is that the state of the game is not as bad as the balance whiners make it out to be. And at the same time I agree that some things have to be changed. I simply hate the continues bitching that led to a lot of people echoing it over and over again.
well i'm not arguing that different races can win tournaments, haha. what i'm saying is that even though the number of wins are pretty even across races, that doesn't mean that in a head to head, each race has an even chance of winning. maybe the best terran can beat the best zerg 1v1, but that's not related to balance so much as it is related to individual skill. the average terran versus the average zerg is what we should be looking at for balance, not the top tier haha
i don't even play the game, i don't really care about balance but rather i care about entertaining games and for my favourites to win. i have favourites of each race so i've very little in terms of investment for racial balance.
and yes, the game is more balanced than what some make it out to be, especially those who have a vested interest in balance (e.g. progamers themselves). but they're generally the vocal minority who whine haha. but i don't think this is the way to show them that this game is balanced or otherwise.
|
Gonna repost this cose i posted it in a pretty forgotten thread.
On December 08 2012 12:54 Belha wrote:
Win rates latelly have been missleading. If you don't differentiate between the facts and the quality of the stats, then the numbers worth nothing.
Here I looked deeper inside the most important tournaments from the last months, not just blind numbers, analysis.
2012 MLG Fall Championship:
Top 4: 1º Life; 2º Leenock; 3º Bomber; 4º Flash ; All code S level
About Top4: 2 top Z's in the world, and 2 top T's in the world. (2z 2T 0P)
Toughest opposition: Basically best of the best, with the exception of Startale P's, Hyun, Sniper and Mvp.
2012 Battle.net World Championship
Top4: 1º Parting ; 2º Creator; 3º Rain; 4º Sen
About Top4: Prolly the best 3 P's in the world, and foreigner Z. (1z 0T 3P)
Toughest opposition: Roro (code B), Curious (code A), Stephano, then pure foreigners
Observation: The 3 code S participants ended with the 3 top spots. Only 4T (all non korean) among 32 players.
World Cyber Games 2012:
Top 4: 1º Parting; 2ºAdelscot; 3º MacSed; 4º Lowely
About Top4: Top korean P and 3 foreigners. (1z 0T 3P)
Toughest opposition: MKP....... That's it. The rest of the player pool was just gm level, weaker compared to top pro level.
IEM Season VII - Singapore
Top 4: 1º Sting; 2º Grubby; 3º Slivko; 4º Vortix
About Top4: Korean T, and 3 foreigners. (2z 1T 1P)
Toughest opposition: Not much. MC (code A boss toss), Revival (code B zerg) and Yugioh (code A z).
Observations: Only 3 T players, only 1 korean, who took the trophy.
2012 DreamHack Open: Winter
Top4: 1º Hero; 2º Taeja; 3º monchi and Nerchio.
About Top4: Top korean P and Top korean T. Then 2 foreigners. (1z 1T 2P)
Toughest opposition: Naniwa, TheStc and Stephano. Rest are foreigners and foreign level koreans.
Observations: No korean Z. Only 4 T, still 2 managed to Ro8.
GSL Code S Season 4
Top4: 1º Life; 2º MvP; 3º Taeja and Rain.
About Top4: Top tier koreans. (1z 2T 1P)
Toughest opposition: Best of the best.
GSL Code S Season 5
Top4: 1º Sniper; 2º Hyun; 3º Bogus and Ryung.
About Top4: All top tier koreans. (2z 2T 0P)
Toughest opposition: Best of the best.
Observation: 1 P in Ro8
IGN ProLeague Season 5
Top4: 1º Leenock; 2º Violet; 3º Polt; 4º Bomber.
About Top4: All top tier koreans. (2z 2T 0P)
Toughest opposition: Best of the best, both koreans and foreigners (no Kespa players tho).
Observation: No P at Ro8, clear Z dominance in Tournament bracket.
What can you get from all these?
From the weaker tournaments (with the least quality of players, few koreans and lot of foreigners):
- Terrans are usually the least represented race between foreigners, by a huge margin.
- All were won almost always simply by the most notable/safe bet players. In those cases, those players were the invited korean P's.
Now all the tournaments that held all best of the best in the player pool (aka the players are not a limiting factor), have this facts:
- From the 4 top8's : 15z 12T 5P
- From the 4 top4's : 7z 8T 1P (all koreans)
- All were won by Z players.
Ok, I should add it the GSL Blizzard Cup Top6.
|
Has anybody else noticed that these statistics show 39 1st place finishes and 46 2nd place finishes?
|
On December 19 2012 17:12 SupaChalupa wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that these statistics show 39 1st place finishes and 46 2nd place finishes?
LOL, my bad :D Terran came in 2nd 8 times and not 15. Copy & Paste Error, sorry
|
counting top places for the whole 2012 without taking into consideration the balance patches is totally meaningless.
|
Unfortunately, there is something called "weight" which you did not consider. If you want to do statistical analysis, you must consider the associated weights. Otherwise, the conclusion is fault.
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
|
I agree with you Khaldor, but one issue related to balance I can think of is that Mid to late game the game is not balanced.
Many of the tournament wins you sampled ended in the first minutes of the game.
If you ask any of the top tier players it seems that if you don't end the game quickly(as any race other than zerg) Your going to have a harder time winning. Which isn't balance. It's clearly a balance issue late-game at the moment. I can admit that other races are winning tournaments as-well. But games should be a even graph until the game ends. And currently that's not the case.
|
On December 19 2012 17:17 StavrosHL wrote:
counting top places for the whole 2012 without taking into consideration the balance patches is totally meaningless.
Agree. And it does not tell what the CURRENT balance looks like.
|
On December 19 2012 17:00 Khaldor wrote:
We are looking at an entire year here.
Whats the reason to look at the entire year if at early 2012 and at late 2012 (after infestor patch and ghost nerf) it was different games (absolute different balance)? You can collect statistics only on period of time when no balance changes are made (better starting after month or two after patch when people figure out how to play with that changes) and judge on that.
Roughly speaking its juggling with facts.
If you can find a terran winning major tournament last couple month - you're lucky, make a wish... but you know better that it didnt happen.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
one more point i suppose is that even though liquipedia tries to be the definitive source, even with "premier" tournaments there are clearly different tiers of "premiership". for example, IPL5, GSL, etc stand out and are much larger and have better players than the IEMs and smaller dreamhacks, for example. several of the terran wins are at those smaller tournaments e.g.
IEM singapore
DH valencia
IEM cologne
ASUS ROG
Summer Arena
DH stockholm
are all fairly "lower tier" premier tournaments compared to the MLG championships and IPLs, WCSs and GSLs etc. The last major premier win was by aLive and that was in april :p
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
I don't agree with looking at winners and runners up as anything significant in balance discussions.
More important is the racial distribution for each round and racial success rate per round. Even if a P wins first place, it's more telling of balance if every player in the Ro8 except for one is of one race. >.>
|
WHile i's true that the balance whine got out of hand lately, opterown is right. Premier tounraments are not = Permier tournaments. And those with the most stacked pool (IPL, GSL) have been dominated by Zerg now, while Protoss is doing not that great, and terran is doing horrendously bad. Also you have to consider, that the zerg domination really got out of hand in the second half of 2012. So the state of the game is actually worse, than these stats make it out to be.
Look at the blizzard cup. (which you and wolf are casting, so I don't have to tell you that  ) Look at all the foreign zergs who are suddenly nearly on korean level.
Thank you for looking those stats up though.
|
Nice try at calming down the balance whiners... but it doesn't work like this. Balance whiners don't care about statistics, much less so about meaningless statistics like this.
|
Hey Khaldor I posted this on reddit and I really think you should add it to your OP
Results in premier tournaments since Queen Patch -
Zerg: 1st 10 times, 2nd 11 times
Protoss: 1st 11 times, 2nd 11 times
Terran: 1st 5 times, 2nd 4 times
Since otherwise it will be the same problem, 80% of the post will be people saying the results include before any whining started.
|
These numbers don't really help determine anything. Over the course of the last year, there's been many balance patches. If each race is really overpowered 1/3rd of the time, the year is going to have good results on the whole. The fact that Zerg was much weaker at the start of the year says nothing about their strength now, although these numbers try to make it.
For this information to be useful, we'd have to break it down by patch, month, or quarter.
Edit: looks like someone did right above me:
On December 19 2012 17:32 Hiea wrote:
Hey Khaldor I posted this on reddit and I really think you should add it to your OP
Results in premier tournaments since Queen Patch -
Zerg: 1st 10 times, 2nd 11 times
Protoss: 1st 11 times, 2nd 11 times
Terran: 1st 5 times, 2nd 4 times
Since otherwise it will be the same problem, 80% of the post will be people saying the results include before any whining started.
This is my point.
|
Whats the point figuring out is some tournament is major or not? It was different games during this year, and now even patch zerg Idra started to win some games last months...
User was warned for this post
|
First/Second/Third place winnings are not enough, there's a ton of other factors as someone else pointed out, so taken just like that can be misleading.. those stats are nice on the appearance but definitely not something to refer to when mentioning balance
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
see, the funny thing with such a low stat pool is that:
zerg: 45% winrate in finals
protoss: 46% winrate in finals
terran: 62% winrate in finals
+ Show Spoiler +obviously terran is the strongest race, right?
haha, which sort of shows my point :p these stats don't mean all that much for the greater balance picture.
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
Khaldor,
I have several problems with this.
Basically you say don't qq, but the reason for this is that we feel like its falling on deaf ears. Like when you casted the GSTL at IPL4 and people were shouting we want lan. They added this in HOTS.
The biggest problem that i have is how many people are not interested in the game anymore from zerg imbalance. Fundamentally, I don't feel like subscribing to the GSL right now when every tournament is infestor broodlord corruptor. I think that has to be the number one driver of the game. Money. Money talks. I think that the reason why you should not say things like this is that your livelihood depends on blizzard fixing this. I have long argued that adding 1 food supply cost for infestors and brood lords would basically fix the game. Zergs could still do a spine drop to get higher than 200 supply.
Tournaments try to add certain maps to make other races more viable. Most tournaments use ohana now just to give toss a chance. I hate watching PvZ on ohana. Its just aweful.
I'm surprised that you are supporting balance right now more than anyone else. Match win rates are way more important that tournament wins. I think your argument is weak. The question I have is how many people are still going to watch starcraft or play hots if they are not confident in the leadership. Money talks, don't forget that.
In the GSL the players with the highest match winrates are
1. Life, sniper DRG, leenock, hyun for individuals.
2. sniper, yonghwa, symbol, Leenock, JYP for the team games.
How many fight clubs did hyun win?
I want to see creator, squirtle, parting, supernova, marineking, MVP, rain, seed, Yonghwa, Major, have a fighting chance in the future. I don't feel like blizzard is part of the community any more for being so passive about this for so long.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On December 19 2012 17:45 opterown wrote:see, the funny thing with such a low stat pool is that: zerg: 45% winrate in finals protoss: 46% winrate in finals terran: 62% winrate in finals + Show Spoiler +obviously terran is the strongest race, right? haha, which sort of shows my point :p these stats don't mean all that much for the greater balance picture.
Mvp only has a 66% win ratio in tournament finals, so it's not even Mvp's fault terran are so strong in finals 
|
On December 19 2012 17:51 tokinho wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Khaldor, I have several problems with this. Basically you say don't qq, but the reason for this is that we feel like its falling on deaf ears. Like when you casted the GSTL at IPL4 and people were shouting we want lan. They added this in HOTS.The biggest problem that i have is how many people are not interested in the game anymore from zerg imbalance. Fundamentally, I don't feel like subscribing to the GSL right now when every tournament is infestor broodlord corruptor. I think that has to be the number one driver of the game. Money. Money talks. I think that the reason why you should not say things like this is that your livelihood depends on blizzard fixing this. I have long argued that adding 1 food supply cost for infestors and brood lords would basically fix the game. Zergs could still do a spine drop to get higher than 200 supply. Tournaments try to add certain maps to make other races more viable. Most tournaments use ohana now just to give toss a chance. I hate watching PvZ on ohana. Its just aweful. I'm surprised that you are supporting balance right now more than anyone else. Match win rates are way more important that tournament wins. I think your argument is weak. The question I have is how many people are still going to watch starcraft or play hots if they are not confident in the leadership. Money talks, don't forget that. In the GSL the players with the highest match winrates are 1. Life, sniper DRG, leenock, hyun for individuals. 2. sniper, yonghwa, symbol, Leenock, JYP for the team games. How many fight clubs did hyun win? I want to see creator, squirtle, parting, supernova, marineking, MVP, rain, seed, Yonghwa, Major, have a fighting chance in the future. I don't feel like blizzard is part of the community any more for being so passive about this for so long.
No they didn't...?
|
Mayans where right, terran died in 2012
|
Posted a similar response in the reddit thread:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
THAT is where most of the complaining is coming from, really. When you have ENTIRE god damn matchups dominated by a single unit (infestor) it just makes things completely horrible to watch, and will (rightly so) spark balance discussion.
I'd be interested to know how many non Zerg tournament champions have A) Been against a Zerg player and B) Were as a result of the non Zerg competitor winning more than 1 long term macro game.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p
|
Breaking it down by quarter, you get, for the first place:
Terran/Zerg/Protoss:
Jan - May: 6, 2, 2
April - Jun: 3, 4, 3
Jul - Oct: 3, 5, 4
Nov - Dec: 1, 2, 4
For second place:
Terran/Zerg/Protoss
Jan - May: 3, 5, 2
April - Jun: 1, 3, 6
Jul - Oct: 2, 6, 4
Nov - Dec: 2, 2, 3
Granted, this doesn't exactly say a lot, it shows that terran completely wrecked faces in the start of the year, and then slowly faded away into the void. on another note, anyone that knows how to make this easier to read? it looks like a mess 
|
On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p
It's ok, but the sheer volume of ZvZs lately outweighs that IMO
Too many people in this thread seem to be focusing way too hard on number of tournament wins by each race (including Khaldor) when the problem is stale and unvaried viewer experience. You would not see nearly as much complaining, even if one race was winning more than the other if the games were actually varied and interesting again.
Just imagine what the conversation would be like if we still had pre Queen buff TvZ, yet Zerg was still edging out tournament victories. I can pretty much guarantee it would be much different, because those games were varied, and very skill based.
|
On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p
edit: damnit, firefox crashed. accidental double post sorry
|
No one cares about facts anymore. We've let people feel like they're entitled to whine way too much.
People just live in a fantasy world at this point. There's this idea that everything a Terran does is so insanely difficult, Terran players are so good...They should win every game really. And Zergs? All they do is a-move. Fungal is basically like a-moving anyway. Mutas? That's not real harassment. It's easy, zerg harassment. Splitting (NOT broodlords) , force fields, this is the only micro that counts. Never mind that it's actually probably easier to harass than it is to defend harassment;Terran players are better because they drop stuff. Even when they lose they're better.
Fortunately if you just get off the Internet you realize that people are usually not as retarded as the vocal minority that infested starcraft would make you think.
|
Khaldor,
I have several problems with this.
Basically you say don't qq, but the reason for this is that we feel like its falling on deaf ears. Like when you casted the GSTL at IPL4 and people were shouting we want lan. They added this in HOTS.
The biggest problem that i have is how many people are not interested in the game anymore from zerg imbalance. Fundamentally, I don't feel like subscribing to the GSL right now when every tournament is infestor broodlord corruptor. I think that has to be the number one driver of the game. Money. Money talks. I think that the reason why you should not say things like this is that your livelihood depends on blizzard fixing this. I have long argued that adding 1 food supply cost for infestors and brood lords would basically fix the game. Zergs could still do a spine drop to get higher than 200 supply.
Tournaments try to add certain maps to make other races more viable. Most tournaments use ohana now just to give toss a chance. I hate watching PvZ on ohana. Its just aweful.
I'm surprised that you are supporting balance right now more than anyone else. Match win rates are way more important that tournament wins. I think your argument is weak. The question I have is how many people are still going to watch starcraft or play hots if they are not confident in the leadership. Money talks, don't forget that.
In the GSL the players with the highest match winrates are
1. Life, sniper DRG, leenock, hyun for individuals.
2. sniper, yonghwa, symbol, Leenock, JYP for the team games.
How many fight clubs did hyun win?
I want to see creator, squirtle, parting, supernova, marineking, MVP, rain, seed, Yonghwa, Major, have a fighting chance in the future. I don't feel like blizzard is part of the community any more for being so passive about this for so long. [/QUOTE]
they dont have a fighting chance? 7 of those u mentioned are in the top 20 in earnings this year
|
I think that measuring the game's balance by the amount of championships won by a race is also a fundamentally flawed say to do it. I mean, there are just so many factors that can change who wins a championship, such as pure luck, the skill of the player, the races of the players invited, the races of the players available, the races of the players who chose to attend after qualifying, the maps played, the condition of the players at the time they play, etc., etc.
Given all of those factors, I'd say this thread is pretty inconclusive.
|
On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p
I showed a game to a friend that plays little and spectates less. It was Life v Scarlett.
Life was harassing and doing damage all game long and my friend was really getting into the game. Then there was a big battle where armies just lined up ship-of-the-line style and a billion infested terrans came out on both sides. No-one, including the casters, knew what was going on and when the dust settled, Scarlett was ahead. From that moment on the game was a joke.
We cannot have a spectator strategy game if the result of games is down to silly spamming engagements where no-one knows the outcome. From the spectator's perspective, we could have those battles decided by rolling die.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 18:29 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p I showed a game to a friend that plays little and spectates less. It was Life v Scarlett. Life was harassing and doing damage all game long and my friend was really getting into the game. Then there was a big battle where armies just lined up ship-of-the-line style and a billion infested terrans came out on both sides. No-one, including the casters, knew what was going on and when the dust settled, Scarlett was ahead. From that moment on the game was a joke. We cannot have a spectator strategy game if the result of games is down to silly spamming engagements where no-one knows the outcome. From the spectator's perspective, we could have those battles decided by rolling die.
sometimes it is bad, but a lot of the time there are cool games too :p
|
On December 19 2012 18:29 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p I showed a game to a friend that plays little and spectates less. It was Life v Scarlett. Life was harassing and doing damage all game long and my friend was really getting into the game. Then there was a big battle where armies just lined up ship-of-the-line style and a billion infested terrans came out on both sides. No-one, including the casters, knew what was going on and when the dust settled, Scarlett was ahead. From that moment on the game was a joke. We cannot have a spectator strategy game if the result of games is down to silly spamming engagements where no-one knows the outcome. From the spectator's perspective, we could have those battles decided by rolling die.
You just accused zerg of being OP against zerg
|
My biggest problem isn't about what race wins most, it's just that it's not entertaining to watch that really annoys me.
|
I can not watch code a because terrans win every game there I bet 1 000 $ that up and downs will be dominated by terrans as it always is.
|
On December 19 2012 18:37 Arnstein wrote:
My biggest problem isn't about what race wins most, it's just that it's not entertaining to watch that really annoys me.
I totally agree with you, i think the problem is that zerg dont have choici do go infestor broodlords which is NOT spectator friendly. Blizz have done a good thing in WoL by nerfing infestor and buffing other zerg tech (hydras, mutas, ultras...).
Maybe hots will be more cool to watch but i'm afraid the damage is done.
|
On December 19 2012 18:33 thuracine wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:29 Ghanburighan wrote:On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p I showed a game to a friend that plays little and spectates less. It was Life v Scarlett. Life was harassing and doing damage all game long and my friend was really getting into the game. Then there was a big battle where armies just lined up ship-of-the-line style and a billion infested terrans came out on both sides. No-one, including the casters, knew what was going on and when the dust settled, Scarlett was ahead. From that moment on the game was a joke. We cannot have a spectator strategy game if the result of games is down to silly spamming engagements where no-one knows the outcome. From the spectator's perspective, we could have those battles decided by rolling die. You just accused zerg of being OP against zerg
Wait, what? No. We were discussing whether "zvz is really fun to watch these days"? What has this got to do with balance?
Opterown, ZvZ is actually a MU I used to like a lot. But its current version tends to be less viewer friendly. And the culprit is still the infestor.
|
On December 19 2012 18:33 thuracine wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:29 Ghanburighan wrote:On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p I showed a game to a friend that plays little and spectates less. It was Life v Scarlett. Life was harassing and doing damage all game long and my friend was really getting into the game. Then there was a big battle where armies just lined up ship-of-the-line style and a billion infested terrans came out on both sides. No-one, including the casters, knew what was going on and when the dust settled, Scarlett was ahead. From that moment on the game was a joke. We cannot have a spectator strategy game if the result of games is down to silly spamming engagements where no-one knows the outcome. From the spectator's perspective, we could have those battles decided by rolling die. You just accused zerg of being OP against zerg
Hm... since when did OP become the abbreviation for Overly boring for People to watch?
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
Go play ladder as T at a decently high level on any ladder and
- take an economic/army/whatever advantage against T and see how it plays out
- take an economic/army/whatever advantage against P and see how it plays out
- take an economic/army/whatever advantage against Z and enjoy only being barely behind.
Or watch high level terrans stream. People lose from 1-2 bases up. I won't disagree with the fact that, hypothetically, on a 14 hour/day practice scenario, the best korean terran playing flawlessly can have a perfectly even game vs the best Z. Anything below perfection for the Terran just gets punished too easily.
I respect you a lot, but you're just wrong on this one.
People don't echo thoughts off twitter, they state their own thoughts after playing/following the game. They get frustrated. Blizzard, while probably focused on HoTS just ignores this matter, so naturally, people will get angry and even more vocal.
I agree with saying that 'it's not as bad as some make it to be' - at the same time, it also doesn't help pretending that Z doesn't have serious 'issues' at the moment.
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
Blizzard Cup 5Z 4P 1T shows 'quality' of tournaments won by Terran
Also
Major tournaments:
Race 1st 2nd
Zerg 16-15
Terran 8-8
Protoss 10-9
Minor tournaments
Zerg: 34-25
Terran: 16-19
Protoss 20-21
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 19:40 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Blizzard Cup 5Z 4P 1T shows 'quality' of tournaments won by Terran Also Major tournaments: Race 1st 2nd Zerg 16-15 Terran 8-8 Protoss 10-9 Minor tournaments Zerg: 34-25 Terran: 16-19 Protoss 20-21
i suggest not paying much attention to minor/major tournaments since those lists are not updated very regularly and are often inconsistent
|
On December 19 2012 19:24 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 18:33 thuracine wrote:On December 19 2012 18:29 Ghanburighan wrote:On December 19 2012 18:04 opterown wrote:On December 19 2012 18:03 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
I agree with you that maybe it's not as imbalanced as people make it out to be. However, as a spectator, Wings of Liberty is currently 100% awful to watch except for TvT or TvP. PvP can be interesting sometimes, and it's slowly been getting better. However, every matchup involving a Zerg is just disgusting and frustrating to watch.
i actually think zvz is really fun to watch these days lol. it's not bad, give it a try :p I showed a game to a friend that plays little and spectates less. It was Life v Scarlett. Life was harassing and doing damage all game long and my friend was really getting into the game. Then there was a big battle where armies just lined up ship-of-the-line style and a billion infested terrans came out on both sides. No-one, including the casters, knew what was going on and when the dust settled, Scarlett was ahead. From that moment on the game was a joke. We cannot have a spectator strategy game if the result of games is down to silly spamming engagements where no-one knows the outcome. From the spectator's perspective, we could have those battles decided by rolling die. You just accused zerg of being OP against zerg Wait, what? No. We were discussing whether "zvz is really fun to watch these days"? What has this got to do with balance? Opterown, ZvZ is actually a MU I used to like a lot. But its current version tends to be less viewer friendly. And the culprit is still the infestor.
just mad you didn't give scarlet credit for stopping those engagements and earning the upper hand latter in the game.
|
Khaldor: Look at these numbers guys - maybe we could calm down the balance complaining abit?
Community: Lemmie ****ing tell you why these numbers are completely useless and why it's okay for me to complain all the time.
Then proceeds to talk about balance and problems with the game...
T_T
Nice try Khaldor! <3
|
Pointless to try to change the game with HOTS 2 months away. Hots will have a lot more variety of play, and will be overall more symetricly balanced. Zerg definetly wont be favored late game, i would say protoss might be, but not by a huge margin. Mid game zerg will have more pressure possibilities thanks to hydra speed, new improved mutaslisks, and swarm hosts. Terran will be able to have some sort of map control mid game with widow mines, and finally, mass spine infestor turtle definetly wont be viable in zvp anymore, spines might become a waste of money late game thanks to the tempest.
Overall, you can expect a very exciting first few months of Hots, until people discover that this god damn new toss air army is pretty damn strong LOL.
|
On December 19 2012 19:42 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 19:40 keglu wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Blizzard Cup 5Z 4P 1T shows 'quality' of tournaments won by Terran Also Major tournaments: Race 1st 2nd Zerg 16-15 Terran 8-8 Protoss 10-9 Minor tournaments Zerg: 34-25 Terran: 16-19 Protoss 20-21 i suggest not paying much attention to minor/major tournaments since those lists are not updated very regularly and are often inconsistent
For minor tournaments maybe still results which are updated are probably accurate i quess.
|
On December 19 2012 19:50 Cereb wrote:
Khaldor: Look at these numbers guys - maybe we could calm down the balance complaining abit?
Community: Lemmie ****ing tell you why these numbers are completely useless and why it's okay for me to complain all the time.
Then proceeds to talk about balance and problems with the game...
T_T
Nice try Khaldor! <3
To be honest, the numbers are useless, unless blizzards design philosophy involves "buffing certain races at certain time to achieve "perfect balance" in major winning tournaments. if that's the case (pretty much the same they did with WoW), the game is doomed.
|
terran is dieing protoss and zerg are at the top right now
|
i think perhaps top 8 or championship bracket race distribution is more interesting than top 2. We all know there are sick players representing each race and they can win a tournament no matter what the current patch is.
|
Great, another thread that uses statistics without context which only relies on correlation without any proof of actual causation or how it is even linked to the correlation in question in the first place.
Guys, did you know, the amount of pirates has drastically decreased over the past centuries, did you also know that Global warming has increased? The less pirates we have the more global warming we will have, Correlation BABY!
|
these stats don't really mean anything. it's pretty obvious to me there is a problem when EVERY SINGLE progamer agrees there is a problem with the game, or that they don't like the game. and it's not like they say it's for different reasons.. as a dood who plays ladder from time to time, i find it very discouraging that I can play macro games and win when i play well against P and T just about every game yet this does not work against zerg, as the fundamentals of rts don't seem apply to them.. their defense is dogshit before infestors pop but once they do, so many timings (edit: and more importantly, harassment and poking options) are just removed from the table and it devolves into a boring macro game where, if the zerg plays somewhat decently, the other player needs to play SIGNIFICANTLY better in order to win, whether or not they were ahead or behind going into post-infestor game states.
kind of strange you of all people would ask the community to stop complaining about balance. you should want the infestor dealt with, too, really. and maybe -1 fungal range will do the trick, but of course only lots of time and data will tell that story
|
On December 19 2012 18:09 MilesTeg wrote:
No one cares about facts anymore. We've let people feel like they're entitled to whine way too much.
People just live in a fantasy world at this point. There's this idea that everything a Terran does is so insanely difficult, Terran players are so good...They should win every game really. And Zergs? All they do is a-move. Fungal is basically like a-moving anyway. Mutas? That's not real harassment. It's easy, zerg harassment. Splitting (NOT broodlords) , force fields, this is the only micro that counts. Never mind that it's actually probably easier to harass than it is to defend harassment;Terran players are better because they drop stuff. Even when they lose they're better.
Fortunately if you just get off the Internet you realize that people are usually not as retarded as the vocal minority that infested starcraft would make you think.
Pretty much this.
It seems like there are no legitimate wins or losses anymore. Everyone make so many excuses. It's a joke.
|
Khaldor... I am sorry but I have to disagree with this post. It is interesting that there are still some (zerg?)-players that are arguing the gameplay so heavily. The easiest way is to look at lower level play. Probably foreigners in tournaments. I don't see any terrans the numbers a quiet low. And if you look at the gameplay... I don't see at which state of the game a zerg army ist that unforgiving as a terran army... same is for protoss (where protoss is laging in options vs brood infestor to a certain level) terran has the options but it is hard to execute AND to stay on the same level as zerg (economywise at 20 minutes Blizz time) also note that terran is compared to protoss in ALL matchups the race with the weakest army composition after a certain time. Why someone should arguee that? I don't know. I think the difference in micro mangemanet are pretty obvious...
|
I fail to see what the winners and runner-ups of the whole year has got to do with the current State of the Whine™
People tend to dislike the mass infestors and what it does to the zerg match-ups, and we get to see a lot of those these days.
|
On December 19 2012 19:39 n0ise wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Go play ladder as T at a decently high level on any ladder and - take an economic/army/whatever advantage against T and see how it plays out - take an economic/army/whatever advantage against P and see how it plays out - take an economic/army/whatever advantage against Z and enjoy only being barely behind. Or watch high level terrans stream. People lose from 1-2 bases up. I won't disagree with the fact that, hypothetically, on a 14 hour/day practice scenario, the best korean terran playing flawlessly can have a perfectly even game vs the best Z. Anything below perfection for the Terran just gets punished too easily. I respect you a lot, but you're just wrong on this one. People don't echo thoughts off twitter, they state their own thoughts after playing/following the game. They get frustrated. Blizzard, while probably focused on HoTS just ignores this matter, so naturally, people will get angry and even more vocal. I agree with saying that 'it's not as bad as some make it to be' - at the same time, it also doesn't help pretending that Z doesn't have serious 'issues' at the moment.
I think it's hilarious how everyone in this thread keeps proving Khaldor right. The community does indeed feature a lot of people who are prone to gross exaggerations.
|
On December 19 2012 20:23 Integra wrote:
Great, another thread that uses statistics without context which only relies on correlation without any proof of actual causation or how it is even linked to the correlation in question in the first place.
Guys, did you know, the amount of pirates has drastically decreased over the past centuries, did you also know that Global warming has increased? The less pirates we have the more global warming we will have, Correlation BABY!
Pretty much.
From reddit:
Sorry, Khaldor but basing it off this is not a good idea, considering people weren't crying about balance pre queen patch.
Results in premier tournaments since Queen Patch -
Zerg: 1st 10 times, 2nd 11 times
Protoss: 1st 11 times, 2nd 11 times
Terran: 1st 5 times, 2nd 4 times
Now this seems pretty good for protoss/zerg, and awful for terran, and not to mention that quite a few of the protoss ones were things like WCS, which the playerbase was chosen before zergs started dominating, WCG where CombatEx was in the Ro8 and the Dreamhack Summer with 2-3 koreans, aswell as the start of the sentry/immortal all in.
As for terrans, their first win came at MLG Summer Arena won by TaeJa. Even though there were a lot of zergs, TaeJa only faced Losira and won 2-1.
Asus ROG, another tournament won by TaeJa, he didn't play a single zerg and there was only 8 of them in a 32 player tournament.
Dreamhack Valencia won again by TaeJa, he defeated 3 zergs, but the only notable one is Stephano 2-1 in a non elimination match, and other 2 EU zergs.
IEM Cologne won by Mvp, it was the first sighting of the hellion/banshee opener and caught the EU zergs with their pants down, not to mention Mvp vs eu zergs? he should be winning most of the time.
And at last, IEM Singapore with a very weak overall playerbase, and still there was no terrans in the tournament, but luckily 2 qualified via the open bracket.
Also, while the results are not as imbalanced as all the whine would have you think, the gameplay is fucking atrocious in any Zerg matchup.
|
On December 19 2012 20:23 Integra wrote:
Great, another thread that uses statistics without context which only relies on correlation without any proof of actual causation or how it is even linked to the correlation in question in the first place.
Guys, did you know, the amount of pirates has drastically decreased over the past centuries, did you also know that Global warming has increased? The less pirates we have the more global warming we will have, Correlation BABY!
Although you are right, there is way more linkage between balance and tournaments results than between pirates and global warming.
The thing you should have pointed out was that balance isn't necessarily the main factor into one's win of a major tournament but rather that its direct consequence, the meta-game, is what influences results.
|
I agree that the results of premier tournaments are not the best indicator, yet I didn't hear a real argument so far why it isn't a rough indicator. Just because the game feels imbalanced doesn't mean it actually is. For example, most guys feel they are underpaid in their job. Our feeling is not as accurate as the cold facts that – over an entire year – each race had good chances to win a tournament.
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is.
For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go?
People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss.
I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct.
|
On December 19 2012 21:53 Otolia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 20:23 Integra wrote:
Great, another thread that uses statistics without context which only relies on correlation without any proof of actual causation or how it is even linked to the correlation in question in the first place.
Guys, did you know, the amount of pirates has drastically decreased over the past centuries, did you also know that Global warming has increased? The less pirates we have the more global warming we will have, Correlation BABY!
Although you are right, there is way more linkage between balance and tournaments results than between pirates and global warming.
You are making too sweeping general statements about this.
You mean there exists a link between balance and tournaments performance which is true. My example still stands however since people are making up their own link or cause of how the statistics should be used just as I did in the example with the pirates, as in they aren't explaining the links or causes that actually behind the statistical data. It's just guess work.
|
On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct.
Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is?
|
On December 19 2012 22:33 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct. Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is?
Yes, He's the guy that starts a topic then neglects to respond to any of the criticism except for the first 2 posts
|
Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
While those numbers look relatively even, you need a much more elaborate analysis. Things like:
-What tournaments are these? More prestigious cups and prize pools, location (Korea or foreign), how many people were in the tournament, how many players from each race entered in... these are all important.
-What's the breakdown per quarter year? If one race won all their tournaments in the past three months and nothing beforehand, that's far different than if every race has won the same number of tournaments every quarter. We also need to take patches into consideration.
-Which players, and how many players from each race, won these tournaments? If, for example, only 3 Korean players were responsible for every 1st and 2nd place Zerg title this year, whereas there were a much larger number of Terran and Protoss finalists (including both Koreans and foreigners), then those differences indicate something important to us.
|
On December 19 2012 17:15 Khaldor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 17:12 SupaChalupa wrote:
Has anybody else noticed that these statistics show 39 1st place finishes and 46 2nd place finishes? Copy & Paste Error, sorry
Or is it? Have you been contacted by David Kim and have you heard of patchzerg conspiracy?
|
On December 19 2012 22:36 NeWeNiyaLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:33 [F_]aths wrote:On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct. Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is? Yes, He's the guy that starts a topic then neglects to respond to any of the criticism except for the first 2 posts
He is probably busy following the proscene.
Also there is little substantial criticism in this thread.
|
On December 19 2012 22:33 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct. Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is?
I know Khaldor for a long time, from his wc3 days as a manager of 4k and mouz, and have been actively followig him. However, I can't agree with information which is simply not true or misguided. I have a brain on my own, I have watched all major tournaments this year, I play at masters/ gm level, zerg has been dominating, terran has been almost non existent. Look on TL and on BattleNet there are numerous threads stating why and how op zerg is, and there are numerous threads discussing the utter zerg dominance on almost any major tournament.
With all due respect to Khaldor, I can't accept the results he presents nor accept a statement that balance is or was fine. I have seen otherwise and I think any sane person following the scene will agree that zerg is and was dominating the proscene, hence starcraft was anything but balanced.
|
On December 19 2012 22:32 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 21:53 Otolia wrote:On December 19 2012 20:23 Integra wrote:
Great, another thread that uses statistics without context which only relies on correlation without any proof of actual causation or how it is even linked to the correlation in question in the first place.
Guys, did you know, the amount of pirates has drastically decreased over the past centuries, did you also know that Global warming has increased? The less pirates we have the more global warming we will have, Correlation BABY!
Although you are right, there is way more linkage between balance and tournaments results than between pirates and global warming. You are making too sweeping general statements about this. You mean there exists a link between balance and tournaments performance which is true. My example still stands however since people are making up their own link or cause of how the statistics should be used just as I did in the example with the pirates, as in they aren't explaining the links or causes that actually behind the statistical data. It's just guess work.
Way to discard the second paragraph and disagree with me even though I was agreeing with you.
You don't like people arguing with you, do you ?
|
On December 19 2012 16:54 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:46 Insoleet wrote:On December 19 2012 16:42 opterown wrote:
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance. why? you're looking at two players out of an entire player field, possibly 32 or even up to 72 players. in this case, what is more relevant is individual skill, not balance. for example, throw taeja in a pool of mediocre zergs and he will probably come first. but throw a bunch of mediocre terrans and mediocre zergs together and you will likely get a zvz final. you want to compare results from players of similar skill, not players who stand out. for example, you may look at IEM singapore and DH winter and say "oh look we had TvP finals" when the zergs who were at either tournament weren't top tier like the finalists. there were no korean zergs at DH and stephano/nerchio, skilled as they may be, are not as good as hero or taeja. the same thing applies for IEM - while there were quite a few zergs playing, they were all pretty mediocre. both zergs in the semifinals also lost by just one map too. these are just some examples that thread is stupid, but does it matter if i post there or not? i've read the thread. what i meant by posting over there too was directed at khaldor; i posted on reddit
Stephano and Nerchio are as skilled as Taeja and Hero ( in my opinion and many will agree ), they have similar results ( Stephano is the one who has the most out of the four ) you can think what you want though, but dont present it as a fact when it's not
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On December 19 2012 22:42 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:36 NeWeNiyaLord wrote:On December 19 2012 22:33 [F_]aths wrote:On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct. Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is? Yes, He's the guy that starts a topic then neglects to respond to any of the criticism except for the first 2 posts He is probably busy following the proscene. Also there is little substantial criticism in this thread.
i got plenty in first two pages
|
On December 19 2012 22:45 RaelSan wrote:
Stephano and Nerchio are as skilled as Taeja and Hero
If a moving your army while pumping roaches/lings from 11 hatches is equivalent of stimming, splitting, dropping on 3 places at once, focus firing with tanks and just being an awesome micro god, yes, then Stephano is as skilled as Taeja.
|
On December 19 2012 22:45 Otolia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:32 Integra wrote:On December 19 2012 21:53 Otolia wrote:On December 19 2012 20:23 Integra wrote:
Great, another thread that uses statistics without context which only relies on correlation without any proof of actual causation or how it is even linked to the correlation in question in the first place.
Guys, did you know, the amount of pirates has drastically decreased over the past centuries, did you also know that Global warming has increased? The less pirates we have the more global warming we will have, Correlation BABY!
Although you are right, there is way more linkage between balance and tournaments results than between pirates and global warming. You are making too sweeping general statements about this. You mean there exists a link between balance and tournaments performance which is true. My example still stands however since people are making up their own link or cause of how the statistics should be used just as I did in the example with the pirates, as in they aren't explaining the links or causes that actually behind the statistical data. It's just guess work. Way to discard the second paragraph and disagree with me even though I was agreeing with you. You don't like people arguing with you, do you ?
Like you said, we both agree, therefor I did not argue and instead simply filled you in on the parts which you did not understand. The second paragraph was fine, that's why I did not include it since that's fully possible as well.
|
On December 19 2012 22:36 NeWeNiyaLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:33 [F_]aths wrote:On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct. Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is? Yes, He's the guy that starts a topic then neglects to respond to any of the criticism except for the first 2 posts
The guy who "neglects to answer posts" had to go to the GSL to cast the Blizzard Cup after he wrote his last post. Sorry I can't be at two places at once. I'm working on it, but it's not as easy as I thought
|
On December 19 2012 22:51 madespecifically wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:45 RaelSan wrote:
Stephano and Nerchio are as skilled as Taeja and Hero If a moving your army while pumping roaches/lings from 11 hatches is equivalent of stimming, splitting, dropping on 3 places at once, focus firing with tanks and just being an awesome micro god, yes, then Stephano is as skilled as Taeja.
Jeez. Like it's all he's able to do?
Anyway, I agree with Kaldor on this subject, the game isn't perfect right now, but the situation isn't as bad as some people claim (whatever the stats) and it's certainly not as bad as it used to be, I remember the time where only Nestea was successful as a Zerg in the ZvT match up and people were claiming that the match up was balanced but just that terrans were just better player.
Furthermore, about balance of the game, people just complains about certains units (Sometimes without letting the metagames evolves like Muta in PvZ at early 2012, remember? ) and forgot that maps usually plays way more in the balance of a match up.
|
On December 19 2012 22:55 Khaldor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:36 NeWeNiyaLord wrote:On December 19 2012 22:33 [F_]aths wrote:On December 19 2012 22:17 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is Those stats must be rigged or chosen selectively so that balance doesn't seem as bad as it was/is. For a year zergs have been dominating tournaments, to the point where Scarlett could take games off MMA or other code S terrans. I have been actively following the pro scene and tournaments and I have barely seen a terran even make it to top 3, let alone win. Even if you show me stats telling that zerg hasn't been dominating both proscene and ladder, I wouldn't believe it. Balance was and still is heavily in zerg's favor. The gsl zvz finals, the bwc with 15 zergs out of 32 players, where did those tournaments go? People who were not following the proscene as actively as I did might believe that stuff, but not me. It doesn't explain why there are countless numbers of threads on TL and on BattleNet stating how imbalanced infestor brood lord is, how easily zergs reach late game, and how much more skill it takes to win with terran vs zerg than with zerg vs terran or protoss. I am not calling those stats presented bullshit, just incomplete, or selectively chosen. Anyone who follows the proscene in the recent year must know that those stats can't simply be correct. Do you know who Khaldor, the author of the OP, is? Yes, He's the guy that starts a topic then neglects to respond to any of the criticism except for the first 2 posts The guy who "neglects to answer posts" had to go to the GSL to cast the Blizzard Cup after he wrote his last post. Sorry I can't be at two places at once. I'm working on it, but it's not as easy as I thought
You have much to learn from TotalBiscuit, young Khaldorwan That man never fails to respond to a post that mentions his name.
+ Show Spoiler +Now waiting for TB to intentionally not respond to prove me wrong
|
There's one thing that a lot of the posters in here don't seem to understand: I never said the game is balanced, on the contrary. I said it's not and that some things have to be changed. The whole issue is also more directed at the PvZ whining than anything else. Terran has been struggeling in the last 6 months.
The point here is that there is so much bitching going around that I was curious. One very common argument is that Protoss can't win any tournaments anymore. So I looked it up and found those stats. Of course they don't say anything about Protoss struggeling in the lategame and being "forced" to end the game early. But they show very clearly that Protoss has won quite a significant amount of Premier Tournaments and is quite able to perform well on the top level. That does NOT mean that the game is perfect as it is. But it definitely means that the current complaints are taking it too far.
And that's all that I've been saying here. Nothing else. Complain about certain aspects of the game: yes. Whining like little girls that have been spanked by their parents: no.
|
I don't like the term Premier Tournament here. Can you compare an IEM to a MLG or an event like GSL or IPL where more than 80% of the very top players in the world are participating?
Of course not. Those just a little smaller tournaments are oftentimes dominated by the few(1-4) top players that participate. This makes the data you could take from the results there pretty useless. What can we take from a championship level GSL terran defeating 10 midtier european zergs in a row? Nothing!
Then we have the thing with the queenrangepatch in the middle of the year. I can't imagine any terran complaining about TvZ before that patch, the matchup was fine there and in a good spot. So why do you take data from before that point into account here, when you want to adress the current complains?
Addionally we have what opterown mentioned. There are many more factors that play into winning a tournament than balance and skill. To actually win a big tournament many things have to come together, hell even what you eat for breakfast and during the tournament plays a huge role and 39 might be a way to little samplesize to rule out those random factors.
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things.
|
On December 19 2012 22:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times While those numbers look relatively even, you need a much more elaborate analysis. Things like: -What tournaments are these? More prestigious cups and prize pools, location (Korea or foreign), how many people were in the tournament, how many players from each race entered in... these are all important. -What's the breakdown per quarter year? If one race won all their tournaments in the past three months and nothing beforehand, that's far different than if every race has won the same number of tournaments every quarter. We also need to take patches into consideration. -Which players, and how many players from each race, won these tournaments? If, for example, only 3 Korean players were responsible for every 1st and 2nd place Zerg title this year, whereas there were a much larger number of Terran and Protoss finalists (including both Koreans and foreigners), then those differences indicate something important to us.
Exactly what I thought when I first read the OP. I think I'm gonna have to start breaking down some numbers.
|
On December 19 2012 23:01 TeeTS wrote:
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things.
I'm disappointed that people like you (and belive me, you are not alone in this) don't even get what point I'm trying to make. You guys are arguing things that have nothing to do with what I said. I bet half of the posters in here didn't even read the first post I made.
But I kinda gave up already. It's pointless in this community to try to reason an argument without people instantly drifting to a completely different topic. The tweets alone that I got are a joke and nothing else. People quoting random "facts" or numbers that are simple falsifications or plain lies. At the same time I'm trying over and over again to come back to my original point only to see it ignored in the post following mine.
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
They dont call em patch zergs for nothing.
same stats, but didvided by a patch
before queen range buff
1 places T/Z/P- 8/2/2
2 places T/Z/P- 4/5/3
after
1 places T/Z/P- 5/11/11
2 places T/Z/P- 4/11/12
Thats the real story of a balance
|
On December 19 2012 23:07 Optimus_13 wrote:
They dont call em patch zergs for nothing.
same stats, but didvided by a patch
before queen range buff
1 places T/Z/P- 8/2/2
2 places T/Z/P- 4/5/3
after
1 places T/Z/P- 5/11/11
2 places T/Z/P- 4/11/12
Thats the real story of a balance
Who are the patch protosses then? -.-' lol
I think you misunderstand the difference between "what a patch is supposed to do" and "blah blah blah PATCHZERG blah blah blah!!"
|
On December 19 2012 23:07 Khaldor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:01 TeeTS wrote:
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things. I'm disappointed that people like you (and belive me, you are not alone in this) don't even get what point I'm trying to make. You guys are arguing things that have nothing to do with what I said. I bet half of the posters in here didn't even read the first post I made. But I kinda gave up already. It's pointless in this community to try to reason an argument without people instantly drifting to a completely different topic. The tweets alone that I got are a joke and nothing else. People quoting random "facts" or numbers that are simple falsifications or plain lies. At the same time I'm trying over and over again to come back to my original point only to see it ignored in the post following mine.
I agree with that, the Starcraft Community is way too much whinny about balance, even when I play on ladder I get insulted at the begining of the game just because I play Zerg, even though balance has nothing to do with winrate on ladder game.
Optimus_13 : So your point is that when terran won 8 tournament while Zerg and protoss just 2, the game was more balanced? ^^
|
Last post sum's it up. The game has changed during the course of 2012, so balance should ideally only be taken from the current patch.
Edit: Post by Optimus_13 is what i'm referring to.
|
On December 19 2012 23:07 Khaldor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:01 TeeTS wrote:
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things. I'm disappointed that people like you (and belive me, you are not alone in this) don't even get what point I'm trying to make. You guys are arguing things that have nothing to do with what I said. I bet half of the posters in here didn't even read the first post I made. But I kinda gave up already. It's pointless in this community to try to reason an argument without people instantly drifting to a completely different topic. The tweets alone that I got are a joke and nothing else. People quoting random "facts" or numbers that are simple falsifications or plain lies. At the same time I'm trying over and over again to come back to my original point only to see it ignored in the post following mine.
I totally get your point and I think you are right there. Especially because if we look at the GSL and the current Blizzard Cup we have, these zerg players owning the competition are really good and by no means patch zergs.
The thing I'm not liking here are the stats you use to back up your point. These stats are quite misleading and people liking stats might read your thread halfway through and then think, "hey terran has the same wins like zerg, so it's totally fine now" and there is no need for a change. The stats you are reffering to have major weakpoints which makes them way more useless than plain winratios, which should be taken with caution too!
I like that you want to be educational here, but this thread may achieve the opposite which is disappointing.
|
On December 19 2012 23:07 Khaldor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:01 TeeTS wrote:
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things. I'm disappointed that people like you (and belive me, you are not alone in this) don't even get what point I'm trying to make. You guys are arguing things that have nothing to do with what I said. I bet half of the posters in here didn't even read the first post I made. But I kinda gave up already. It's pointless in this community to try to reason an argument without people instantly drifting to a completely different topic. The tweets alone that I got are a joke and nothing else. People quoting random "facts" or numbers that are simple falsifications or plain lies. At the same time I'm trying over and over again to come back to my original point only to see it ignored in the post following mine.
Khaldor if you wanted to convince people of something then statistics is not the right way to do it. Just look at past statistics threads on TL.Net, what exactly made you think people would go "He is right, look at those numbers!" when practically every previous statistics thread only made people more clearly declare what side they were on regarding the topic in question instead of convincing that they were "wrong" on on their original assessment.
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
On December 19 2012 23:20 Vanadiel wrote:
Optimus_13 : So your point is that when terran won 8 tournament while Zerg and protoss just 2, the game was more balanced? ^^
No my point is that at the moment zergs>terrans notning more
|
On December 19 2012 23:20 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:07 Khaldor wrote:On December 19 2012 23:01 TeeTS wrote:
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things. I'm disappointed that people like you (and belive me, you are not alone in this) don't even get what point I'm trying to make. You guys are arguing things that have nothing to do with what I said. I bet half of the posters in here didn't even read the first post I made. But I kinda gave up already. It's pointless in this community to try to reason an argument without people instantly drifting to a completely different topic. The tweets alone that I got are a joke and nothing else. People quoting random "facts" or numbers that are simple falsifications or plain lies. At the same time I'm trying over and over again to come back to my original point only to see it ignored in the post following mine. I agree with that, the Starcraft Community is way too much whinny about balance, even when I play on ladder I get insulted at the begining of the game just because I play Zerg, even though balance has nothing to do with winrate on ladder game.
I hear you, but that is not really a problem of balancewhine, its a much more general problem with douchiness on ladder. I play terran in diamond and 9 out of 10 wins ends up with the opponent telling me to fuck my mother, go die or similar, all because I have the indecency of winning a macrogame (I never write anything except glhf and gg).
|
On December 19 2012 23:00 Khaldor wrote:
There's one thing that a lot of the posters in here don't seem to understand: I never said the game is balanced, on the contrary. I said it's not and that some things have to be changed. The whole issue is also more directed at the PvZ whining than anything else. Terran has been struggeling in the last 6 months.
The point here is that there is so much bitching going around that I was curious. One very common argument is that Protoss can't win any tournaments anymore. So I looked it up and found those stats. Of course they don't say anything about Protoss struggeling in the lategame and being "forced" to end the game early. But they show very clearly that Protoss has won quite a significant amount of Premier Tournaments and is quite able to perform well on the top level. That does NOT mean that the game is perfect as it is. But it definitely means that the current complaints are taking it too far.
And that's all that I've been saying here. Nothing else. Complain about certain aspects of the game: yes. Whining like little girls that have been spanked by their parents: no.
I was about to write a dickish post about you, then I realised wtf - it's Khaldor! I feel ashamed now
I love you broham, and this post is much more reasonable than your OP - at any rate, it expresses your point more clearly.
I'm a T, and even if the win ratios would be dead even 50-50, the matchup STILL feels completely miserable - you always feel behind in eco, you always feel like you have to push, you need to stretch everything to the limit to maintain a semblance of map control, and at all points you know you're on a ticking time-bomb.
Win ratios which, anyway, are nowhere near even, and this including ridiculous 16h16p no scout against 11/11 which make up for a consistent amount of terran wins... and, obviously, shouldn't
But you talk mainly about ZvP, and that I can't say much about - but from people's posts, I'm not sure if the story is much brighter - it's true however that, at points, P players haven't done bad for themselves either.
|
What was the motivation of making this thread? To pretend like there isn't an obvious imbalance/issues with the game? It's quite easy to lie with statistics and pretend something is something else when it's not.
If you want more telling results, look at the top 16 finishes of a lot of the tournaments in the last 8 months as well as these provided by dvorak on reddit:
dvorak posted on reddit:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being David Kim Sparkles and 10 being IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA how do you rate the Grand Finals of the 8 most recent big-name Premier events:
WCS Asia - PvP
WCS Word - PvP
WCG - PvP
DreamHack Winter - PvT
DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ
GSL Season 5 - ZvZ
MLG Fall - ZvZ
IGN Season 5 - ZvZ"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
As you can see, despite what you tried to make out to be a balanced stat sheet in the OP, that's not how the game actually is. Nor are results anywhere near indicative of balance or the current metagame. Sure, they can be a quick reference, but they don't tell even 1% of the story.
Starcraft's viewership has steadily declined (regardless of what optimistic fanbois and paid casters will tell you) because of the gameplay stagnating into infestor broodlord every game with Zerg, 2 base immortal allins to fight Zerg from Protoss, and Terrans becoming non-existent.
There is a real problem with the game, and any attempt to falsify that or create a fantasy world in which there is no problem is not going to help this game's lifetime run any longer. Instead what it will do is slowly cause more and more people to leave SC2 like they have in recent months because they are not stupid as spectators and got tired of bland, low depth gameplay.
Instead of trying to lie with statistics, you as a caster have a responsibility to this game and the spectators to speak up when there is such an obvious problem with the game. One can only yell "amazing fungal" so many times before spectators realize something is wrong with the game. I have said it before, but Starcraft fans are some of the smartest fans out there - they are not stupid, do not treat them as such or they will simply leave for other games, we as a fan community do not expect a high quality product such as Starcraft 2 being ruined by something as obvious as broodlord/infestor literally every game.
The SC fandom originated from Brood War, so there were of course high expectations, and no one wants to see this game die to glaringly obvious balance issues.
/real talk that is all.
p.s. To all reading this thread, just because someone is a known figure in the community, do not take what they say at face value, at least research it, and question it because they could literally be slinging bs your way. FYI, i do not mean disrespect to khaldor, I am a fan of his casting, became a fan when even after he started getting fame he would still cast "lower level" tournaments on tourney streams which i thought was awesome.
Just gotta keep things real y0.
+ Show Spoiler +
TLDR: StarCraft2 casters, even though not all bad, will try to convince you SC2 is not AS imbalanced as you believe it is, regardless of statistics put right in front of them proving otherwise.
|
On December 19 2012 23:30 Optimus_13 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:20 Vanadiel wrote:
Optimus_13 : So your point is that when terran won 8 tournament while Zerg and protoss just 2, the game was more balanced? ^^ No my point is that at the moment zergs>terrans notning more
Nobody says otherwise, it's the idea that there is "no way a terran can win against a Zerg unless he is one thousand times better" that is pretty much wrong and annoying as hell.
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
On December 19 2012 23:37 Vanadiel wrote:Nobody says otherwise, it's the idea that there is "no way a terran can win against a Zerg unless he is one thousand times better" that is pretty much wrong and annoying as hell.
Did i say something like that?-_-
|
On December 19 2012 17:11 Belha wrote:Gonna repost this cose i posted it in a pretty forgotten thread. Show nested quote +On December 08 2012 12:54 Belha wrote:
Win rates latelly have been missleading. If you don't differentiate between the facts and the quality of the stats, then the numbers worth nothing.
Here I looked deeper inside the most important tournaments from the last months, not just blind numbers, analysis.
2012 MLG Fall Championship:
Top 4: 1º Life; 2º Leenock; 3º Bomber; 4º Flash ; All code S level
About Top4: 2 top Z's in the world, and 2 top T's in the world. (2z 2T 0P)
Toughest opposition: Basically best of the best, with the exception of Startale P's, Hyun, Sniper and Mvp.
2012 Battle.net World Championship
Top4: 1º Parting ; 2º Creator; 3º Rain; 4º Sen
About Top4: Prolly the best 3 P's in the world, and foreigner Z. (1z 0T 3P)
Toughest opposition: Roro (code B), Curious (code A), Stephano, then pure foreigners
Observation: The 3 code S participants ended with the 3 top spots. Only 4T (all non korean) among 32 players.
World Cyber Games 2012:
Top 4: 1º Parting; 2ºAdelscot; 3º MacSed; 4º Lowely
About Top4: Top korean P and 3 foreigners. (1z 0T 3P)
Toughest opposition: MKP....... That's it. The rest of the player pool was just gm level, weaker compared to top pro level.
IEM Season VII - Singapore
Top 4: 1º Sting; 2º Grubby; 3º Slivko; 4º Vortix
About Top4: Korean T, and 3 foreigners. (2z 1T 1P)
Toughest opposition: Not much. MC (code A boss toss), Revival (code B zerg) and Yugioh (code A z).
Observations: Only 3 T players, only 1 korean, who took the trophy.
2012 DreamHack Open: Winter
Top4: 1º Hero; 2º Taeja; 3º monchi and Nerchio.
About Top4: Top korean P and Top korean T. Then 2 foreigners. (1z 1T 2P)
Toughest opposition: Naniwa, TheStc and Stephano. Rest are foreigners and foreign level koreans.
Observations: No korean Z. Only 4 T, still 2 managed to Ro8.
GSL Code S Season 4
Top4: 1º Life; 2º MvP; 3º Taeja and Rain.
About Top4: Top tier koreans. (1z 2T 1P)
Toughest opposition: Best of the best.
GSL Code S Season 5
Top4: 1º Sniper; 2º Hyun; 3º Bogus and Ryung.
About Top4: All top tier koreans. (2z 2T 0P)
Toughest opposition: Best of the best.
Observation: 1 P in Ro8
IGN ProLeague Season 5
Top4: 1º Leenock; 2º Violet; 3º Polt; 4º Bomber.
About Top4: All top tier koreans. (2z 2T 0P)
Toughest opposition: Best of the best, both koreans and foreigners (no Kespa players tho).
Observation: No P at Ro8, clear Z dominance in Tournament bracket.
What can you get from all these?
From the weaker tournaments (with the least quality of players, few koreans and lot of foreigners):
- Terrans are usually the least represented race between foreigners, by a huge margin.
- All were won almost always simply by the most notable/safe bet players. In those cases, those players were the invited korean P's.
Now all the tournaments that held all best of the best in the player pool (aka the players are not a limiting factor), have this facts:
- From the 4 top8's : 15z 12T 5P
- From the 4 top4's : 7z 8T 1P (all koreans)
- All were won by Z players. Ok, I should add it the GSL Blizzard Cup Top6.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments_Medalists/Race
All time results. Terran is op. How does it come that Protoss and Zergs win but Terrans still have more wins lol? Code S never had lesser then 12 terran players. In Code A and Up and Downs only 1 race is winning and it is Terran.
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
There are different levels of balance. There is balance that has to be considered for the highest, most competitive level of gameplay where mindgames and metagame take part. There is balance that has to be considered for masters level players that spam the ladder with their games that may or may not be as good as those competing on stage. Finally, there is the lowest level of balance that needs to be considered as if it is impossible for anyone to move up in the game because of how difficult it is, then no one would ever play.
There are some easy components of StarCraft II and there are some difficult components that only the fairest of fair competitors can take advantage of. Balance isn't just a single construct, it's made of different tiers and different opinions.
|
On December 19 2012 23:37 avilo wrote:
What was the motivation of making this thread? To pretend like there isn't an obvious imbalance/issues with the game? It's quite easy to lie with statistics and pretend something is something else when it's not.
If you want more telling results, look at the top 16 finishes of a lot of the tournaments in the last 8 months as well as these provided by dvorak on reddit:
dvorak posted on reddit:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being David Kim Sparkles and 10 being IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA how do you rate the Grand Finals of the 8 most recent big-name Premier events:
WCS Asia - PvP
WCS Word - PvP
WCG - PvP
DreamHack Winter - PvT
DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ
GSL Season 5 - ZvZ
MLG Fall - ZvZ
IGN Season 5 - ZvZ"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
As you can see, despite what you tried to make out to be a balanced stat sheet in the OP, that's not how the game actually is. Nor are results anywhere near indicative of balance or the current metagame. Sure, they can be a quick reference, but they don't tell even 1% of the story.
Starcraft's viewership has steadily declined (regardless of what optimistic fanbois and paid casters will tell you) because of the gameplay stagnating into infestor broodlord every game with Zerg, 2 base immortal allins to fight Zerg from Protoss, and Terrans becoming non-existent.
There is a real problem with the game, and any attempt to falsify that or create a fantasy world in which there is no problem is not going to help this game's lifetime run any longer. Instead what it will do is slowly cause more and more people to leave SC2 like they have in recent months because they are not stupid as spectators and got tired of bland, low depth gameplay.
Destiny, is that you?
|
No you don't, I wasn't pointing at you, just the general balanced whine on TeamLiquid at every tournament, where people talk more about balance than the game.
|
Nobody cares about pre infestor patch. These results don't mean much, if anything at all.
|
On December 19 2012 17:03 Rowrin wrote:
You can spin statistics to say anything, you really have to dive into how the statistics were taken before you make assumptions, kinda like what opterown said.
This right here. Useless thread.
|
On December 19 2012 23:37 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:30 Optimus_13 wrote:On December 19 2012 23:20 Vanadiel wrote:
Optimus_13 : So your point is that when terran won 8 tournament while Zerg and protoss just 2, the game was more balanced? ^^ No my point is that at the moment zergs>terrans notning more Nobody says otherwise, it's the idea that there is "no way a terran can win against a Zerg unless he is one thousand times better" that is pretty much wrong and annoying as hell.
Yes, but it is a fact you have to be a lot better than your opponent to consistently win with terran vs zerg.
|
On December 19 2012 23:49 namste wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 17:03 Rowrin wrote:
You can spin statistics to say anything, you really have to dive into how the statistics were taken before you make assumptions, kinda like what opterown said. This right here. Useless thread.
Yep. The reddit one got downvoted to oblivion so he posted it here :/
|
What's the point in this, you could manipulate the stats/conclusions in ANY way you want by taking a slightly different sample. If you just look at the games it's obvious that some shit is seriously broken and spectators are switching to LoL and dota because of it. This is very sad because a balanced sc2 would be a clearly superior game to both play and watch.
|
why do people still think that all three races has to win an equal amount of games in tournaments for the game to be considered balanced, lol
|
It is sad to see that Khaldor, especially as a caster, doesn't seem to understand balance. It's not just the quantity of wins, yeah? It's also the quality of the wins.
On 10 May 2012, Blizzard released the infamous Queen patch, after that it was 'Zergs after Zergs' placing first in tournaments. The numbers then become skewed back into "balance", as per your definition.
But in return, the spirit of the game is crushed. Its just game after game of BL/infestor crushing top-tiers Terrans without any possibility of a response to the composition.
/edit
My last post in this god-awful thread. It would have been closed in an instant if it weren't posted by Khaldor.
|
On December 19 2012 23:37 avilo wrote:
What was the motivation of making this thread? To pretend like there isn't an obvious imbalance/issues with the game? It's quite easy to lie with statistics and pretend something is something else when it's not.
If you want more telling results, look at the top 16 finishes of a lot of the tournaments in the last 8 months as well as these provided by dvorak on reddit:
dvorak posted on reddit:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being David Kim Sparkles and 10 being IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA how do you rate the Grand Finals of the 8 most recent big-name Premier events:
WCS Asia - PvP
WCS Word - PvP
WCG - PvP
DreamHack Winter - PvT
DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ
GSL Season 5 - ZvZ
MLG Fall - ZvZ
IGN Season 5 - ZvZ"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
As you can see, despite what you tried to make out to be a balanced stat sheet in the OP, that's not how the game actually is. Nor are results anywhere near indicative of balance or the current metagame. Sure, they can be a quick reference, but they don't tell even 1% of the story.
Starcraft's viewership has steadily declined (regardless of what optimistic fanbois and paid casters will tell you) because of the gameplay stagnating into infestor broodlord every game with Zerg, 2 base immortal allins to fight Zerg from Protoss, and Terrans becoming non-existent.
There is a real problem with the game, and any attempt to falsify that or create a fantasy world in which there is no problem is not going to help this game's lifetime run any longer. Instead what it will do is slowly cause more and more people to leave SC2 like they have in recent months because they are not stupid as spectators and got tired of bland, low depth gameplay.
Instead of trying to lie with statistics, you as a caster have a responsibility to this game and the spectators to speak up when there is such an obvious problem with the game. One can only yell "amazing fungal" so many times before spectators realize something is wrong with the game. I have said it before, but Starcraft fans are some of the smartest fans out there - they are not stupid, do not treat them as such or they will simply leave for other games, we as a fan community do not expect a high quality product such as Starcraft 2 being ruined by something as obvious as broodlord/infestor literally every game.
The SC fandom originated from Brood War, so there were of course high expectations, and no one wants to see this game die to glaringly obvious balance issues.
/real talk that is all.
p.s. To all reading this thread, just because someone is a known figure in the community, do not take what they say at face value, at least research it, and question it because they could literally be slinging bs your way. FYI, i do not mean disrespect to khaldor, I am a fan of his casting, became a fan when even after he started getting fame he would still cast "lower level" tournaments on tourney streams which i thought was awesome.
Just gotta keep things real y0.
These stats are something more in tune with what we've been seeing on tournaments.
Besides, I think it is obvious that landing a so-called 'sick fungal' is far easier than dodging it. All in all, zerg is far easier to play and far more forgiving than terran and it is that discrepancy, that gap in skill requirement that makes up for the steady decline of viewers, and of professional terran players.
|
So basically this thread is khaldor either making a very bad argument and then claiming he never did (often used tactic in debates) or khaldor thinks everyone should understand that his real goal was that protoss are whining for no reason (as a sidenote the "statistics" he uses are entirely worthless for several reasons, one being they dont even control for patches), all while never actually writing that. tl;dr If you cant read khaldors mind he will be angry and whine about teamliquid.
And now he has fled the field? ^^
|
On December 19 2012 23:50 madespecifically wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:37 Vanadiel wrote:On December 19 2012 23:30 Optimus_13 wrote:On December 19 2012 23:20 Vanadiel wrote:
Optimus_13 : So your point is that when terran won 8 tournament while Zerg and protoss just 2, the game was more balanced? ^^ No my point is that at the moment zergs>terrans notning more Nobody says otherwise, it's the idea that there is "no way a terran can win against a Zerg unless he is one thousand times better" that is pretty much wrong and annoying as hell. Yes, but it is a fact you have to be a lot better than your opponent to consistently win with terran vs zerg.
A fact based on what? I'm really curious. How do you quantify the difficulty and the quality of a player?
|
On December 20 2012 00:07 Vanadiel wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:50 madespecifically wrote:On December 19 2012 23:37 Vanadiel wrote:On December 19 2012 23:30 Optimus_13 wrote:On December 19 2012 23:20 Vanadiel wrote:
Optimus_13 : So your point is that when terran won 8 tournament while Zerg and protoss just 2, the game was more balanced? ^^ No my point is that at the moment zergs>terrans notning more Nobody says otherwise, it's the idea that there is "no way a terran can win against a Zerg unless he is one thousand times better" that is pretty much wrong and annoying as hell. Yes, but it is a fact you have to be a lot better than your opponent to consistently win with terran vs zerg. A fact based on what? I'm really curious. How do you quantify the difficulty and the quality of a player?
Based on the amount of effort it is needed to achieve something. Fungal is kiddie game to place, very hard to dodge. It is easier to a move your lings than stim your marines, stutter step and split. It is easier to move your blings than to dodge them.
I think it is clear that commanding a brood lord infestor army is far easier than commanding a mmmv army. It is easier to make ling runbys than making multiprong drops.
|
On December 19 2012 23:37 avilo wrote:What was the motivation of making this thread? To pretend like there isn't an obvious imbalance/issues with the game? It's quite easy to lie with statistics and pretend something is something else when it's not. If you want more telling results, look at the top 16 finishes of a lot of the tournaments in the last 8 months as well as these provided by dvorak on reddit: dvorak posted on reddit: ------------------------------------------------------------------- "On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being David Kim Sparkles and 10 being IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA how do you rate the Grand Finals of the 8 most recent big-name Premier events: WCS Asia - PvP WCS Word - PvP WCG - PvP DreamHack Winter - PvT DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ GSL Season 5 - ZvZ MLG Fall - ZvZ IGN Season 5 - ZvZ" ------------------------------------------------------------------- As you can see, despite what you tried to make out to be a balanced stat sheet in the OP, that's not how the game actually is. Nor are results anywhere near indicative of balance or the current metagame. Sure, they can be a quick reference, but they don't tell even 1% of the story. Starcraft's viewership has steadily declined (regardless of what optimistic fanbois and paid casters will tell you) because of the gameplay stagnating into infestor broodlord every game with Zerg, 2 base immortal allins to fight Zerg from Protoss, and Terrans becoming non-existent. There is a real problem with the game, and any attempt to falsify that or create a fantasy world in which there is no problem is not going to help this game's lifetime run any longer. Instead what it will do is slowly cause more and more people to leave SC2 like they have in recent months because they are not stupid as spectators and got tired of bland, low depth gameplay. Instead of trying to lie with statistics, you as a caster have a responsibility to this game and the spectators to speak up when there is such an obvious problem with the game. One can only yell "amazing fungal" so many times before spectators realize something is wrong with the game. I have said it before, but Starcraft fans are some of the smartest fans out there - they are not stupid, do not treat them as such or they will simply leave for other games, we as a fan community do not expect a high quality product such as Starcraft 2 being ruined by something as obvious as broodlord/infestor literally every game. The SC fandom originated from Brood War, so there were of course high expectations, and no one wants to see this game die to glaringly obvious balance issues. /real talk that is all. p.s. To all reading this thread, just because someone is a known figure in the community, do not take what they say at face value, at least research it, and question it because they could literally be slinging bs your way. FYI, i do not mean disrespect to khaldor, I am a fan of his casting, became a fan when even after he started getting fame he would still cast "lower level" tournaments on tourney streams which i thought was awesome. Just gotta keep things real y0. + Show Spoiler +
TLDR: StarCraft2 casters, even though not all bad, will try to convince you SC2 is not AS imbalanced as you believe it is, regardless of statistics put right in front of them proving otherwise.
WCS Asia - PvP What chinese did you expect to do well?
WCS Word - PvP The best terran at the tournament was LucifroN and he lost in a close series to his brother it is not a bad result.
WCG - PvP MarineKing fails second year in a row it is his problem not balance.
DreamHack Winter - PvT TaeJa is terrible in TvP
DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ The only good terran was TheStC who is Code B and he lost to fraer whose best matchup is PvT
GSL Season 5 - ZvZ Top 4 2T 2Z
MLG Fall - ZvZ Top 4 2T 2Z
IGN Season 5 - ZvZ Top 4 2T 2Z
There are a lot of korean terrans who do not attend events - for example jjakji, GuMiho, Happy, Hack, Maru. There are a lot of Code B terrans on foreign teams and it would be very weird to see them winning over Code S player on proteams.
|
On December 19 2012 23:37 avilo wrote:
The SC fandom originated from Brood War, so there were of course high expectations, and no one wants to see this game die to glaringly obvious balance issues.
/real talk that is all.
the irony to me is that most people argue BW was so insanely successful because each unit was individually imbalanced, but the game itself was balanced.
basically if it ain't infestors, it's koreans. same identical story just 5 years later.
|
On December 19 2012 22:56 Vanadiel wrote:
Anyway, I agree with Kaldor on this subject, the game isn't perfect right now, but the situation isn't as bad as some people claim (whatever the stats) and it's certainly not as bad as it used to be, I remember the time where only Nestea was successful as a Zerg in the ZvT match up and people were claiming that the match up was balanced but just that terrans were just better player.
Not really, stats for 3 months posted about month ago showed that TvZ was at 41% which is more imbalanced then TvZ was ever in Terran favour
|
Thanks Khaldor for trying to be the voice of reason. Unfortunately people just seem to want to complain and be doomsayers about the state of SCII. The number of times I have watched an epic game and read threads/comments relating to the game and instead of be entertained and amazed by the show of skill, people instead complain about the game itself. It is really grating and off-putting. I know trying to quell people from their whining is more frustrating than smashing your face into a wall, but I appreciate that there are people that are trying here.
So yeah, I agree. The game isn't perfect, but that isn't the end of the world - it is still the most exciting and entertaining thing around to watch and get excited over!
|
I appreciate what you do Khaldor but:
a. I don't think this is threadworthy, any number of zerg imba threads would have worked.
b. The difference between the first half of the year and the second is huge. Broodwar wasn't patched for years but it took a long time to stabilise into the mechanical game it became.
The start of the year saw MarineKing and DRG slugging it out for just about everything, would you say they were the top performers of 2012? Probably not, things change even without a balance update. The full potential of things like the infestor were unlocked and it turned out they favoured P and Z much more than they did Terran.
|
On December 19 2012 23:42 Butterednuts wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is There are different levels of balance. There is balance that has to be considered for the highest, most competitive level of gameplay where mindgames and metagame take part. There is balance that has to be considered for masters level players that spam the ladder with their games that may or may not be as good as those competing on stage. Finally, there is the lowest level of balance that needs to be considered as if it is impossible for anyone to move up in the game because of how difficult it is, then no one would ever play. There are some easy components of StarCraft II and there are some difficult components that only the fairest of fair competitors can take advantage of. Balance isn't just a single construct, it's made of different tiers and different opinions.
That is correct, but not very important on that matter. Esports should aim for balance at highest level first. Normal players who use ladder are getting roughly 50% winrate regardless of balance due to the matchmaking system.
|
I posted this in the lings of liberty thread. Khaldor this isnt appropriate because the patch didn't hit until May. I took the results since in Premier Tournaments in Liquipedia. Here's the result since May.
Zerg - 10 1sts 11 2nds
Protoss - 11 1sts 11 2nds
Terran - 5 1sts 4 2nds
The zerg (and possibly toss haven't watched ro6 yet) totals will go up based on the Blizzard Cup results. The terrans will not as MVP was annhiliated.
This makes it that terran has made 1 in 6 finals over an 8 month time span. It should be 1 in 3.Terran is at HALF of what it should be. I play terran and you can call me biased or make excuses for this. I took facts from liquipedia and presented them here. Its an 8 month sample and happened over 27 tournaments, so I think its enough data.
@Khaldor, I'm a fan of yours, I think you've improved a hell of a lot, I know you have a lot of passion for the game, I know this is your occupation, but I really disagree with you on this one.
@opertown I don't really know if there is a better that takes bias out of the equation. I think over a 27 tournament 8 month sample, the level of competition should about even out. Let me know if you have a better way in mind.
@aike if you think Flash's 2010 in BroodWar is anywhere comparable to what is happening in sc2 now you are out of your damn mind. It was one man dominating not an assortment of zergs. Flash's play was phenomenal. You could tell he was winning because he was the bestr player. He beat players in different matchups in a variety of ways. He still lost in a finals to Jaedong and Effort. He bombed out of both MSL and OSL at the end of that year.
What does zerg do now? Queen turtle (usually), into lategame infestor, broodlord, corrupter deathball. Flash was winning in so many different varieties of ways. Proxy rax, timing pushes, Flash build, bunker rush, extreme late game (vs Calm on Fighting Spirit )
Your example was just Flash over a 6-8 starleague sample size. My arguement is over 27 tournaments from GSL, to IEM, to Dreamhack, to MLG, to IPL. Flash is also just 1 person, the zergs winning now you could name 10 of them that are terran destroyers.
Again, take all this for what its worth. My opinion ( backed by some statistics) is that the game is really had for terran right now and that the game is losing popularity because of it.
|
Not convinced about a direct relationship between 1st place finishes and balance. In most tournaments (especially marathon style ones like MLG, IPL, Dreamhack) there are factors like bracket luck, jet lag, psychological condition, metagame vs a specific player (like a teammate), extended series, nerves, etc. that have a significant outcome on who actually gets the top spot. Of course balance might have a role in who is getting deep in a tournament, especially over a few-month period with no patch, but just looking at 1st place finishes alone is too small of a sample size IMO.
|
On December 20 2012 01:10 Erik.TheRed wrote:
Not convinced about a direct relationship between 1st place finishes and balance. In most tournaments (especially marathon style ones like MLG, IPL, Dreamhack) there are factors like bracket luck, jet lag, psychological condition, metagame vs a specific player (like a teammate), extended series, nerves, etc. that have a significant outcome on who actually gets the top spot. Of course balance might have a role in who is getting deep in a tournament, especially over a few-month period with no patch, but just looking at 1st place finishes alone is too small of a sample size IMO.
He looked at first and second place. Those are the most important places, the 3rd or 4th place of a tournament is seldomly remembered and also does not provide too prize money.
|
Khaldor, I thought you'd be smarter than make a thread taking samples from a whole year in a game like sc2. By your logic (ignoring patches) we could take results from 2011 instead and see that terran is op! It's not indicative of balance anyway though as many people say.
Well said Nick_54
|
Russian Federation15 Posts
On December 20 2012 00:28 DiMano wrote:WCS Asia - PvP What chinese did you expect to do well?
WCS Word - PvP The best terran at the tournament was LucifroN and he lost in a close series to his brother it is not a bad result.
WCG - PvP MarineKing fails second year in a row it is his problem not balance.
DreamHack Winter - PvT TaeJa is terrible in TvP
DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ The only good terran was TheStC who is Code B and he lost to fraer whose best matchup is PvT
GSL Season 5 - ZvZ Top 4 2T 2Z
MLG Fall - ZvZ Top 4 2T 2Z
IGN Season 5 - ZvZ Top 4 2T 2Z
There are a lot of korean terrans who do not attend events - for example jjakji, GuMiho, Happy, Hack, Maru. There are a lot of Code B terrans on foreign teams and it would be very weird to see them winning over Code S player on proteams.
WCS World finals 4 terrans of 32 players
WCG top 8- 2 terrans
DreamHack Winter top 12- 2 terrans
DreamHack Bucharest top 16- 2 terrans
GSL top 16- 8 zergs
IPL top 8- 6 zergs
MLG is the only tornament you can call balnced, thankfully to it format
|
you know whats funny? Pre-Infestor and then the queen patch late 2011/early 2012 we were seeing some of the most epic SC2 we had seen in a while. I really still don't understand what they were thinking when they decided to drastically change the game like this. Map changes have had a role in this as well, but rather have that affect the win rates/balance than these changes that basically made the game so stale so quickly.
Honestly I'm a huge balance whiner self admittedly, but even I'm getting very tired of these threads and the counter argument threads to go with them. None of them really put it better than Ver's post. MMA vs DRG Blizzard Cup, JJajjki vs Leenock, MvP vs Squirtle, Leenock vs MVP, MKP vs DRG...the special time that was Nestea being god zerg.. its all gone and that is the bottomline. If we didn't have the Kespa players to make things exciting the game would be practically dying at this point I think.
|
Does nobody remember BW?
If I recall correctly Protoss had like 2 years where they didn't win a single individual league. (think it was 2004->2006 oov-savior era perhaps?)
Sure there were less individual tournaments, but still..~2 years and no protoss champion.
I'm not sure what would happen in SC2 if some race wouldn't win a GSL for 1-2 yeasr. Forums RIP?
Even if SC2 is theoretically imbalanced, any perceived imbalances that the spectators or the players may have can easily be beaten by player-skill. FruitDealer and Nestea both won titles for zerg when it seemed a bleak time to be a zerg. Same thing for MVP in 2012.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
As long as the database is big enough everything balances out itself. That's why you can also find "hidden code" in any book you want as long as it's big enough and you keep searching for "hidden code". What i'm trying to say: measuring the balance with tourney wins isn't that meaningfull as you leave out: skill of players that participated, daily form, maps played, fatigue, ... and on and on and ... that's a bit to easy Khalle.
I guess you posted this because GSL Blizzard Cup? Well, we got one T there that i not shape right now (Mvp), close defeats from P players - wouldn't judge balance just because of this one tourney. Would still love to see a redesign of Fungal instead a useless dance around them numbers.
|
et tu, khaldor?
i imagined you'd be the guy who would take the side of reason in this.
guess i was wrong
|
On December 19 2012 23:37 avilo wrote:What was the motivation of making this thread? To pretend like there isn't an obvious imbalance/issues with the game? It's quite easy to lie with statistics and pretend something is something else when it's not. If you want more telling results, look at the top 16 finishes of a lot of the tournaments in the last 8 months as well as these provided by dvorak on reddit: dvorak posted on reddit: ------------------------------------------------------------------- "On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being David Kim Sparkles and 10 being IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA how do you rate the Grand Finals of the 8 most recent big-name Premier events: WCS Asia - PvP WCS Word - PvP WCG - PvP DreamHack Winter - PvT DreamHack Bucharest - ZvZ GSL Season 5 - ZvZ MLG Fall - ZvZ IGN Season 5 - ZvZ" ------------------------------------------------------------------- As you can see, despite what you tried to make out to be a balanced stat sheet in the OP, that's not how the game actually is. Nor are results anywhere near indicative of balance or the current metagame. Sure, they can be a quick reference, but they don't tell even 1% of the story. Starcraft's viewership has steadily declined (regardless of what optimistic fanbois and paid casters will tell you) because of the gameplay stagnating into infestor broodlord every game with Zerg, 2 base immortal allins to fight Zerg from Protoss, and Terrans becoming non-existent. There is a real problem with the game, and any attempt to falsify that or create a fantasy world in which there is no problem is not going to help this game's lifetime run any longer. Instead what it will do is slowly cause more and more people to leave SC2 like they have in recent months because they are not stupid as spectators and got tired of bland, low depth gameplay. Instead of trying to lie with statistics, you as a caster have a responsibility to this game and the spectators to speak up when there is such an obvious problem with the game. One can only yell "amazing fungal" so many times before spectators realize something is wrong with the game. I have said it before, but Starcraft fans are some of the smartest fans out there - they are not stupid, do not treat them as such or they will simply leave for other games, we as a fan community do not expect a high quality product such as Starcraft 2 being ruined by something as obvious as broodlord/infestor literally every game. The SC fandom originated from Brood War, so there were of course high expectations, and no one wants to see this game die to glaringly obvious balance issues. /real talk that is all. p.s. To all reading this thread, just because someone is a known figure in the community, do not take what they say at face value, at least research it, and question it because they could literally be slinging bs your way. FYI, i do not mean disrespect to khaldor, I am a fan of his casting, became a fan when even after he started getting fame he would still cast "lower level" tournaments on tourney streams which i thought was awesome. Just gotta keep things real y0. + Show Spoiler +
TLDR: StarCraft2 casters, even though not all bad, will try to convince you SC2 is not AS imbalanced as you believe it is, regardless of statistics put right in front of them proving otherwise.
Its actually worse than you are even admitting. Not only is the infestor terrible as an overall unit, fungal growth is obviosly imbalanced and boring, neural paraiste is too hot and cold spell and infester terrans are just more free units that have no place in a starcraft game. What is worse though is that there is no positional play in STarcraft 2, there is no macro mechanics, the supposed "marco mechanics" are just make the game easy mechanics that are forgiving to even noob players, not to mention pro players. The "macro mechanics" actually make the game easier, instead of the intended? purpose to make it harder. Unless there is a conspiracy that is that Blizzard wants to make the game easier and noob forgiving so they can capture more of the casual base to buy it, even if they don't end up playing it for long.
Then there is the clumped up movement, then there is the baneling which replaced the lurker, then there is the ultra hard counters, etc... Starcraft 2 is going to hell in a hand basket.
It only took off because of the hype and build-up it got for the Brood War fans and supporters, and now we are seeing it diminish incrediby with streams like Idras that were reaching 20k at one point in the first year, now barely have 3k viwers, tournaments that had over 120k viewers are barely getting 40k viewers these days.
So Starcraft 2 is failing big time and I'm afraid no amount of bullshit pretend and tinkering around the edges is going to help save it.
So to all those people who think SC2 is the next best thing since sliced bread, you got a terrible realization in front of you and very, very soon and I'm afraid even HOTS won't be able to save the train-wreck that is SC2.
|
On December 19 2012 23:07 Khaldor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:01 TeeTS wrote:
So I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in this thread by you Khaldor, because this thread only seems to try the same thing you are critizing with it, you post some questionable statistics that may mislead people into assuming wrong things. I'm disappointed that people like you (and belive me, you are not alone in this) don't even get what point I'm trying to make. You guys are arguing things that have nothing to do with what I said. I bet half of the posters in here didn't even read the first post I made. But I kinda gave up already. It's pointless in this community to try to reason an argument without people instantly drifting to a completely different topic. The tweets alone that I got are a joke and nothing else. People quoting random "facts" or numbers that are simple falsifications or plain lies. At the same time I'm trying over and over again to come back to my original point only to see it ignored in the post following mine.
If you read my post on the 1st page, I made a considerable recap of the mayor tourneys the last quarter of the year with a real analysis.
In your OP you said clearly that the game is not as bad as many said. Why? Because in the whole year, All races won almost the same tournaments. That's what you said.
Now read again my post on the 1st page, the longer one.
I'm gonnna resume it to you: Every time all the best of the best players (not in those tourneys that have like 3 koreans and rest just gm) get together and play a tournament, the Z wins, and have mayority in the top4.
When other race won, if you look at that tournament, there was not many top players, and those top players where the non-Z players, that won the tourney at the end.
That is not good balance at all to me.
|
I think it's way too much of a broad stroke to look at a year and say the game at present is balanced in comparison to the balance of MULTIPLE patches ago. Granted, bitching about it now is hollow masterbation seeing as HotS and such are basically right around the corner (we can deal with any imbalances for another few months I feel).
|
Balance is P(Race winning | race). The OP has compiled P(Race winning) over the last major tournaments. Until you have the information to marginalize, this can't show anything about balance yet.
If someone posted the joint distribution on previous pages, then I apologize in advance for not reading but hopefully you can requote and forgive me - there are too many trolls on TL these days =)
|
On December 19 2012 18:00 thuracine wrote:
Mayans where right, terran died in 2012
god damn so funny how did i not think of that llololol
|
If the point of this thread is not to say that the game is balanced, but instead to say that balance isn't as bad as people make it seem, then I don't think that's any more valid. Terran has completely fallen off the face of the earth over the last several months. It's commonplace to see team lineups, tournament finals, etc. composed entirely of Zerg and Protoss players. Terran players have pretty much stopped winning major events, and there's no indication that this will change, in fact, it seems to be getting worse. The top winrates in the GSL (and most events) are essentially all Zerg players.
On the contrary, I'd actually say balance is much worse than people make it seem. I haven't seen the game this imbalanced since release. I also haven't seen the community this angry and disinterested since release. The constant ZvZs, PvPs, and PvZs are wearing people down. Pro players are screaming IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA IMBA in televised games.
Burying your head in the sand won't fix this.
|
In case you guys didnt know, Ver didnt actually meant what he wrote here. It's halfway between a satire and a troll. (Source : Monk, who helped Ver wrote this thread)
|
Someone who's really in to statistics should find parameters/method to weigh to properly measure balance instead of this useless bullshit.
poor statistics makes for a poor conclusions (however vague it may be).
|
TvZ is sitting at around a 40% win rate for T, that seems terrible enough to justify an outcry and hell, I'm surprised there isn't even more bitching than there currently is.
|
On December 20 2012 04:23 JKM wrote:
Someone who's really in to statistics should find parameters/method to weigh to properly measure balance instead of this useless bullshit.
poor statistics makes for a poor conclusions (however vague it may be).
Khaldor (like stated a few times in the comments) is NOT trying to say that means the game is balanced.
He rather means that every race can win tournaments, and so far the winning have been fairly equal.
Does that mean the game is balance? Not necessary but it means it's not as bad as many people try to make it look like.
|
On December 20 2012 04:52 crbox wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 04:23 JKM wrote:
Someone who's really in to statistics should find parameters/method to weigh to properly measure balance instead of this useless bullshit.
poor statistics makes for a poor conclusions (however vague it may be). Khaldor (like stated a few times in the comments) is NOT trying to say that means the game is balanced. He rather means that every race can win tournaments, and so far the winning have been fairly equal. Does that mean the game is balance? Not necessary but it means it's not as bad as many people try to make it look like.
And the Cleveland Cavaliers have made the playoffs 80% of the time in the last 5 years. They're not as bad as people make them out to be.
As demonstrated above, when you take an aggregate statistic over a period of changes, it gives you no information about the current state. Nobody is arguing that the game is imbalanced in aggregate over the last year, they're arguing that it's imbalanced now. The argument Khaldor is making makes little sense.
P.S. I love your casting Khaldor, no disrespect intended.
|
Tournament results should not even be mentioned in the same sentence with game balance.
|
On December 19 2012 17:03 Rowrin wrote:
You can spin statistics to say anything, you really have to dive into how the statistics were taken before you make assumptions, kinda like what opterown said.
Thats true, but every statistics has to say something. The Graphs on the Lings of Liberty thread for example say very strongly that Korean Terrans do something better than Foreign Terrans, also it says that Foreigner Zerg & Protoss had more success against Korean Terrans than Foreign Terrans, and/or it said that out of the 3 races in Korea, Terran lost the most against Foreign Zerg & Protoss. It was designed to show this in a probably Biased way but if those graphs are true and not falsified it does raise some questions.
|
Blizzard had 3 balance updates in 2012. The statistics reflect a constantly altered game state.
|
At what point do tournament results cease to matter? Extreme example, but say that MVP is responsible for 8 out of 8 terran tournament wins but the zerg and toss wins are spread across many players. If only a small pct of one race are successful (no foreigners and handful of koreans) while several foreigners and a number of koreans are winning with other races, I would think that should affect how you interpret said tournament results...
|
Even if the game is perfectly balanced (which I don't think it is even close to atm) I think a lot of people 'whine' about how the games play out, terran/zerg have to get way ahead/win before zerg gets there super army and normally wins (not always)
This seems like a pretty pointless way to look at balance tho, a year in sc2 is to long to look at (3-6months max imo)
|
Try posting what the top4 in most tournamenst consist of.
|
On December 20 2012 05:03 HwangjaeTerran wrote:
Tournament results should not even be mentioned in the same sentence with game balance.
i dont know... you cant say that tournament results are completely separate from game balance. they may not be as directly related as some people may think, but they're definitely not separate.
i would say your only chance is to look at as much as you can before deciding wether the game is balanced or not, and besides, balance arguments suck no matter what you do
|
On December 19 2012 16:46 Insoleet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:42 opterown wrote:
as i mentioned over there too, premier tournament wins are not exactly the best way to determine balance. why?
Because 2 individuals making it to the final does not mean that the one race who looses is worse than the one who wins and the other way around, it also doesn't mean that the 1 race that didn't make it to the finals is worse than the others.
If you'd have a tournament with say very even race distribution initially of 128 players (getting tvx finals out of a tournament with >50% terran does not make terran imba) and get a round of 16 with 7 terran, 7 toss and 2 zerg you could still end up with say tvz finals. If you only look at the finals p is underpowered, and if zerg wins they are actually imba. 2 out of 128/3 is not op.
When you take tournament results as an indicator of balance you need to be very careful, and atleast look at round 8. Finals don't really say anything. Also it's very important to take the initial racial distribution of the tournament into account. What you should look into is winrates for matchups across all pro level games, that says a lot more imo.
|
Who cares what the numbers say? The point is every ZvT/P being hive rush vs all-in is boring as crap and makes it seem worse than it is since the X is playing vs the clock and the Z is just turtling. Blizzard should make the game fun first and worry about balance later. 50% win ratios don't matter if no one is playing or watching because the game is boring to play.
|
like some said before, you cant just look at the first 2 places and say anything about the balance of the game. you have to consider racial distribution and you also have to take a look at the players that participate in the tournament.
for example when the racial distribution is like 50% zerg 30% protoss and 20% terran it most of the times means that there are a lot of mediocre zerg players and mostly top protoss/terran players, what will falsify the winrates/results.
|
i agree, it's also not just not the TOP TOP tier of gamers that matters, a lot of masters/low gm's across all servers are complaining about zerg being the "retard/broken" race. you have to stop look so optimistic on these *balance vs win rate* things.
Also, I hate to say it, but a caster's opinion on balance shouldn't be taken as important as all pro gamers across this game.
|
Khaldor simply do not understand statistic. Anyway, the main problem is the game is getting more boring to watch everyday. Jaedong is one of the few zergs that is enjoyable to watch :D
|
Premier tournament results are not a good measure of balance because in these tournaments, you have a very few top top players competing for the first place prize. In other words, you have willfully reduced your sample to a very small and therefore more likely inaccurate one. In this situation it is much more likely that a race will appear to be imbalanced simply because there are more better players of that race. The argument which has been made correctly in several threads is that the best way to determine balance is to wait for winrates to flatten to 50% as they always will in a qualifier based system (I'm referring to GSL here) and then checking the distribution of races among those who qualify. In last season's code S there were still far more terrans than any other race, but I do not believe that the winrates have fully equalized yet. Only then will we really be able to get a good read on balance.
|
Khaldor has to be a pretty ignorant person if he doesn't realize that the tournament he currently casts (GSL Blizzard Cup) is composed of the winners of the recent most important major tournaments. How many of them are terran? 1. Which means that this tournament has a ten percent terran portion. And the lone terran who is there is not there because of recent achievement but because of his stellar performance in the past.
Oh btw he totally bopped his group by winning a single game out of 4 bo3s. Anbody who fails to see that terrans is on the ropes at the moment is completely ignorant. Maybe Khaldor should actually follow the SC2 scene. The balance is horrible for Terran right now and it makes my heart bleed to watch another tournament with terrans getting eliminated this early.
It's funny how people like Khaldor or Day9 as well (mocking the term patchzerg) try to pour oil on troubled water instead of actually critising Blizzard for its inaction and indecisiveness.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_GSL_Blizzard_Cup
All of these premier events were played under 1.5.3. but I see none of them won by terran. Where are all the terran winners of premier events post queen patch?
|
What's the point of counting results that took place prior to the queen patch? It completely changed the way an entire matchup was played overnight.
|
Khaldor has to be a pretty ignorant person if he doesn't realize that the tournament he currently casts (GSL Blizzard Cup) is composed of the winners of the recent most important major tournaments. How many of them are terran? 1. Which means that this tournament has a ten percent terran portion. And the lone terran who is there is not there because of recent achievement but because of his stellar performance in the past. Oh btw he totally bopped his group by winning a single game out of 4 bo3s. Anbody who fails to see that terrans is on the ropes at the moment is completely ignorant. Maybe Khaldor should actually follow the SC2 scene. The balance is horrible for Terran right now and it makes my heart bleed to watch another tournament with terrans getting eliminated this early. It's funny how people like Khaldor or Day9 as well (mocking the term patchzerg) try to pour oil on troubled water instead of actually critising Blizzard for its inaction and indecisiveness. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2012_GSL_Blizzard_CupAll of these premier events were played under 1.5.3. but I see none of them won by terran. Where are all the terran winners of premier events post queen patch?
LOL.
I just took a look at the list Khaldors has his information from:
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
He has to be joking right? He really has to be joking. The queen patch hit May 10th. Since then two terrans have won anything truly signifcant with Taeja winning three events and Mvp winning a GSL.
This list is pretty much the best indicator for horrible imbalance. Just to remind you terran late game vs Zerg was already killed off in February with the ghost nerf.
|
while its great that its a nice even distribution of wins across the board for each race. all it proves is that each race has had their time in the limelight.
in the beggining of sc2 Terran was unstoppable, and today they are the weakest race. not even up for debate
so while its great that over the course of years the game has seen even spread of success for each race. its completely irrelevant to the balance problems of the present.
thanks for the stats khaldor, its heartwarming to see that over the time we've all been playing and watching sc2 that each race has done as well as the others at some point(s) in time, but it doesnt change the fact that we are currently dealing with an imbalanced game right now.
|
Okay, wanted to break some stuff down for anyone curious:
- Balance patch was put forward on May 10th 2012.
- 24 events have fully completed since that date.
- Of those 24 events, the breakdown is as follows:
![[image loading]](http://i50.tinypic.com/r76hxz.jpg)
Now, if we only look at the most recent 10 events, it edges out a bit more:
![[image loading]](http://i45.tinypic.com/2mz045x.jpg)
|
On December 21 2012 01:50 divito wrote:Okay, wanted to break some stuff down for anyone curious: - Balance patch was put forward on May 10th 2012. - 24 events have fully completed since that date. - Of those 24 events, the breakdown is as follows: Now, if we only look at the most recent 10 events, it edges out a bit more:
That chart is a much more accurate representation of what we see at tournaments. Good job.
|
On December 21 2012 01:50 divito wrote:Okay, wanted to break some stuff down for anyone curious: - Balance patch was put forward on May 10th 2012. - 24 events have fully completed since that date. - Of those 24 events, the breakdown is as follows: Now, if we only look at the most recent 10 events, it edges out a bit more:
Yeah. Balance is basically as bad as it was before the queen patch.
|
On December 19 2012 16:22 Khaldor wrote:After I posted this on Reddit a few people argued that the information should rather be posted on TL. So here you go: As it's nearly the end of 2012 now and after all the recent balance whining I was curious about the results in Premier Tournaments in 2012. So I took the liberty of having a closer look at Liquipedia and the race distribution for 1st and 2nd place finishers in 2012. Here are the results: - Zerg: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 16 times
- Protoss: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 15 times
- Terran: 1st - 13 times, 2nd - 8 times
What does this mean? I'm not trying to say the game is balanced. Nor am I saying that certain units (Infestors hi?) don't need to be changed. All I am saying is that these days everyone echoes "facts" they've read on Twitter, Reddit or here on TL whithout even thinking about them. The game is certainly not perfect and there are a lot of things that need to be changed, BUT it is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be these days. TLDR: StarCraft2, even though not balanced, is not AS imbalanced as people might want you believe it is
Khaldor i like you man. But this kind of logic is what made the problem with PvZ in the first place. Overall balance instead of gameplay active balance. Most of the PvZ games are awful to watch, the finals today ended up discussing balance (inrmotalsentry vs broodfestors) because the match up is downright boring and mono dimensional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
