|
On April 08 2013 09:59 dsjoerg wrote:
Of course this doesn't exactly prove that Widow Mines are OP, but at the very least it suggests that getting/preventing mass widow mines is an important part of TvZ.
What a carefully worded political statement. You should work for Fox News. The OP is simple correlation causation and does nothing but harm the discussion because astute readers will determine the OP is ridiculous, and less discerning readers will jump to unnecessary conclusions. You could have made the exact same thread with swarm hosts, void rays, marines, whatever. People need to realize that just because something is in a chart doesn't mean it has any sort of legitimacy.
You lost all claims of being unbiased and not having an agenda by failing to truncate the original quote to this:
I'd be interested to see winrates vs T once there are large numbers of widow mines out
instead, you included this
Watching GM streams, it feels like the rate is around 10%, and the mines are allowing (relatively) mediocre players to beat Top8 Zergs nearly every time.....
Thanks for including a random redditor's completely unsubstantiated statements. Care to NAME these top 8 zergs losing to mediocre terrans every time?
|
Guys, you missed a brilliant suggestion. Clearly, the problem isn't in the unit itself but the timing. We see that more than 10 mines AT THE 15 MINUTE MARK leads to better win rates. So, just as with hellbats and marines and bunkers, we need to change the TIMING at which they are available.
To easily achieve a later timing, we change when their production can be built. As WMs are built from the factory, we just add the simple constraint that the factory requires an armory.
|
Why not make Widow mines require a fusion core? They seem to kinda fly in the air sometimes, so that would make sense.
|
On April 08 2013 11:24 Faust852 wrote:
GGtrackers is not the kind of sites where people put the replays on ? Considering it, people are more prone to put replay of their victories, as people plays more with WM now, it's logical that the winrate ratio is higher.
Generally, you run the uploader app which uploads all replays -- if you want to remove the losses, you need to go and delete them manually (which defeats the point, as ggtracker helps you analyse trends over time).
|
On April 09 2013 04:21 Snoodles wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2013 09:59 dsjoerg wrote: Watching GM streams, it feels like the rate is around 10%, and the mines are allowing (relatively) mediocre players to beat Top8 Zergs nearly every time..... Thanks for including a random redditor's completely unsubstantiated statements. Care to NAME these top 8 zergs losing to mediocre terrans every time?
Hi - I'm the "unsubstantiated redditor", and my observations were based on watching streams over the weekend.
How does Stephano/TLO/Kane sound to you (Kane is not pro, but Top8 on NA and usually wins way more than he loses), TLO and Stephano you may have heard of.
As I said in reddit: The 10% percent is a perception of mine, and I'm seeing Stephano/TLO/Kane/etc find it very hard to beat Terrans at all, losing to lower-ranked players, and also getting hammered by players of equal level e.g. see Stephano vs Demuslim (where you would hope to see 50/50 over several matches, but Stephano won maybe 1 match out of 8).
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On April 08 2013 10:26 Gihi wrote:
In my opinion the game should be balanced around the highest level of play, not based on master league stats.
Comments like this -.-
This thread didn't even mention balance...
|
If you wish to attack someone about bias in the question, direct it at me (who asked the question) as opposed to the OP, who put in a lot of effort to answer the question (as originally asked by me in the reddit post).
As for saying "let's look at vipers / marines / barracks / drones" sure, go ahead, you will then have an analysis on that unit, which says nothing per se about the analysis with WMs, so doesn't seem to add much to the discussion at hand.
The hardcore statistical analysis to do here is to take all games, with unit compositions at all times (looks kinda doable if you look at the graphs in ggtracker) and then run predictive models over the dataset (glm or similar) to see if there are significant variables.
For extra points, take into account how active the player was with a unit (broadly, how often it was given a command to move/attack) to get a feel for how focused the player was on actually using the unit.
|
don't know if this has been added or if it's completely irrelevant, but might the increased win-rate not be a result of just not knowing how to deal with it properly yet?
10% sounds much but does it imply OP-nes? I find these numbers kinda saying nothing without being able to compare them to let's say the win rates of no supply depot barracks or some other things that were nerved.
|
On April 09 2013 04:41 SC2Frozen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 04:21 Snoodles wrote:On April 08 2013 09:59 dsjoerg wrote: Watching GM streams, it feels like the rate is around 10%, and the mines are allowing (relatively) mediocre players to beat Top8 Zergs nearly every time..... Thanks for including a random redditor's completely unsubstantiated statements. Care to NAME these top 8 zergs losing to mediocre terrans every time? Hi - I'm the "unsubstantiated redditor", and my observations were based on watching streams over the weekend. How does Stephano/TLO/Kane sound to you (Kane is not pro, but Top8 on NA and usually wins way more than he loses), TLO and Stephano you may have heard of. As I said in reddit: The 10% percent is a perception of mine, and I'm seeing Stephano/TLO/Kane/etc find it very hard to beat Terrans at all, losing to lower-ranked players, and also getting hammered by players of equal level e.g. see Stephano vs Demuslim (where you would hope to see 50/50 over several matches, but Stephano won maybe 1 match out of 8).
Stephano got huge problem vs a Finnish Terran called Fuzer. Fuzer is actually a very funny guy and is drunk 24/7 but that he can actually be 50% vs Stephano is almost insane and he is properly drunk .
On another note do Tanks even exist anymore? I haven't seen a tank in a TvZ match since Hots came out
|
On April 08 2013 10:05 Bippzy wrote:
Still interested that more widow mines is correlated with more wins. But, correlafion doesn't mean causation, especially in an infant metagame.
While that is something I might normally say as well, I'd say that it does not apply here. It seems pretty clear cut that over all levels of play widow mines are having a direct impact on terran win rates. I don't see what other causative agent could cause the win that also correlates with getting many widow mines; the argument that only better players use them is ruled out. The only causation that isn't there is that they're OP; with a young game and unexplored strategies it can't be said that they're overpowered.
The bigger factor is statistical significance and accurate representation. There may not be enough games here to come to a proper conclusion, or at least not enough games of the proper circumstances.
Despite this, I'd say they are OP anyway, but that's just my own pessimistic personal opinion. Aside from that I'm not much a fan of the unit. It's more-or-less terrany and fills a niche role unlike the swarm host, but just like the swarm host it's a low-skill/no-skill burrowing unit that kills stuff for free (although unlike the swarm host it's much more unstoppable in some ways)
On April 09 2013 05:26 Benjamin99 wrote:
On another note do Tanks even exist anymore? I haven't seen a tank in a TvZ match since Hots came out
Personally I've seen lots of tank use with both bio and mech; they are the best unit possible to defend and synergize with widow mines too. In my opinion tanks are the most crucial unit for terran; Personally I feel as if I'd win countless more games if I never faced a tank.
|
On April 09 2013 05:26 Benjamin99 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 04:41 SC2Frozen wrote:On April 09 2013 04:21 Snoodles wrote:On April 08 2013 09:59 dsjoerg wrote: Watching GM streams, it feels like the rate is around 10%, and the mines are allowing (relatively) mediocre players to beat Top8 Zergs nearly every time..... Thanks for including a random redditor's completely unsubstantiated statements. Care to NAME these top 8 zergs losing to mediocre terrans every time? Hi - I'm the "unsubstantiated redditor", and my observations were based on watching streams over the weekend. How does Stephano/TLO/Kane sound to you (Kane is not pro, but Top8 on NA and usually wins way more than he loses), TLO and Stephano you may have heard of. As I said in reddit: The 10% percent is a perception of mine, and I'm seeing Stephano/TLO/Kane/etc find it very hard to beat Terrans at all, losing to lower-ranked players, and also getting hammered by players of equal level e.g. see Stephano vs Demuslim (where you would hope to see 50/50 over several matches, but Stephano won maybe 1 match out of 8). Stephano got huge problem vs a Finnish Terran called Fuzer. Fuzer is actually a very funny guy and is drunk 24/7 but that he can actually be 50% vs Stephano is almost insane and he is properly drunk . On another note do Tanks even exist anymore? I haven't seen a tank in a TvZ match since Hots came out
They got a huge buff in HotS
They now cost 2 supply and have more than triple the damage but have a longer attack cooldown and shorter range.
|
On April 09 2013 05:33 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2013 10:05 Bippzy wrote:
Still interested that more widow mines is correlated with more wins. But, correlafion doesn't mean causation, especially in an infant metagame. While that is something I might normally say as well, I'd say that it does not apply here. It seems pretty clear cut that over all levels of play widow mines are having a direct impact on terran winrates. I don't see what other causative agent could cause the win that also correlates with getting many widow mines; the argument that only better players use them is ruled out. The only causation that isn't there is that they're OP; with a young game and unexplored strategies it can't be said that they're overpowered. Despite this, I'd say they are OP anyway, but that's just my own pessimistic personal opinion. Aside from that I'm not much a fan of the unit. It's more-or-less terrany and fills a niche role unlike the swarm host, but just like the swarm host it's a low-kill/no-skill burrowing unit that kills stuff for free (although unlike the swarmhost it's much more unstoppable in some ways)
I still can't figure out how a 5 range unit with a cooldown longer than a stalker warp-in can be *more* game changing that Medivac boost....
|
|
|
On April 09 2013 04:41 SC2Frozen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 04:21 Snoodles wrote:On April 08 2013 09:59 dsjoerg wrote: Watching GM streams, it feels like the rate is around 10%, and the mines are allowing (relatively) mediocre players to beat Top8 Zergs nearly every time..... Thanks for including a random redditor's completely unsubstantiated statements. Care to NAME these top 8 zergs losing to mediocre terrans every time? Hi - I'm the "unsubstantiated redditor", and my observations were based on watching streams over the weekend. How does Stephano/TLO/Kane sound to you (Kane is not pro, but Top8 on NA and usually wins way more than he loses), TLO and Stephano you may have heard of. As I said in reddit: The 10% percent is a perception of mine, and I'm seeing Stephano/TLO/Kane/etc find it very hard to beat Terrans at all, losing to lower-ranked players, and also getting hammered by players of equal level e.g. see Stephano vs Demuslim (where you would hope to see 50/50 over several matches, but Stephano won maybe 1 match out of 8).
Is Kane really the new reference of godlike NA Zerg play?
Dammit, NA server, stahp.
No but seriously, we should stop trying to evaluate balance by looking at the NA server...
If you compare it to KR, at the same position, you have Fuzer on NA and Squirtle on KR. That should tell you how serious of a business that server is...
|
On April 09 2013 05:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 05:26 Benjamin99 wrote:On April 09 2013 04:41 SC2Frozen wrote:On April 09 2013 04:21 Snoodles wrote:On April 08 2013 09:59 dsjoerg wrote: Watching GM streams, it feels like the rate is around 10%, and the mines are allowing (relatively) mediocre players to beat Top8 Zergs nearly every time..... Thanks for including a random redditor's completely unsubstantiated statements. Care to NAME these top 8 zergs losing to mediocre terrans every time? Hi - I'm the "unsubstantiated redditor", and my observations were based on watching streams over the weekend. How does Stephano/TLO/Kane sound to you (Kane is not pro, but Top8 on NA and usually wins way more than he loses), TLO and Stephano you may have heard of. As I said in reddit: The 10% percent is a perception of mine, and I'm seeing Stephano/TLO/Kane/etc find it very hard to beat Terrans at all, losing to lower-ranked players, and also getting hammered by players of equal level e.g. see Stephano vs Demuslim (where you would hope to see 50/50 over several matches, but Stephano won maybe 1 match out of 8). Stephano got huge problem vs a Finnish Terran called Fuzer. Fuzer is actually a very funny guy and is drunk 24/7 but that he can actually be 50% vs Stephano is almost insane and he is properly drunk . On another note do Tanks even exist anymore? I haven't seen a tank in a TvZ match since Hots came out They got a huge buff in HotS They now cost 2 supply and have more than triple the damage but have a longer attack cooldown and shorter range.
ha, they also hit air.
|
On April 09 2013 05:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:
I still can't figure out how a 5 range unit with a cooldown longer than a stalker warp-in can be *more* game changing that Medivac boost....
They're similar to a baneling...
- Except it's cloaked/burrowed
- has 5 range instead of ~0
- deals over 6x damage to the main target, and up to double damage on splash targets
- doesn't self-destruct
- can attack air
- they have 3 times more health
- they're faster (than one without speed upgrade)
ALL of that for only 25 more minerals. less than 33% more cost.
Those are huge advantages. Sure they have a large disadvantage of taking a bit of time to attack or to activate, but that's not unlike the difficulty a baneling has (except the baneling will even die); even just using the unit defensively is enough.
Could you imagine if any other race had widow mines? How would you like to pit range 5 marines against this range 5 super baneling?
On April 09 2013 05:37 JonIrenicus wrote:
I wonder why topics like this one don't get closed.
I could do the same analysis for every unit out there.
yeah you could, but what would your results be?
Aside from showing sub-50% winrates when not using a certain unit (like siege tank or marine), i have doubts you will find much cases of increased win-rate like this.
|
On April 09 2013 05:50 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 05:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:
I still can't figure out how a 5 range unit with a cooldown longer than a stalker warp-in can be *more* game changing that Medivac boost.... [...] How would you like to pit range 5 marines against this range 5 super baneling?
It actually happens about 33% of the time when you play Terran...
We Terran players use something we usually call "micro", I don't know what you do yourself or how you call it.
|
On April 09 2013 05:50 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2013 05:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:
I still can't figure out how a 5 range unit with a cooldown longer than a stalker warp-in can be *more* game changing that Medivac boost.... They're similar to a baneling... - Except it's cloaked/burrowed - has 5 range instead of ~0 - deals over 6x damage to the main target, and up to double damage on splash targets - doesn't self-destruct - can attack air - they have 3 times more health - they're faster (than one without speed upgrade) ALL of that for only 25 more minerals. less than 33% more cost. Those are huge advantages. Sure they have a large disadvantage of taking a bit of time to attack or to activate, but that's not unlike the difficulty a baneling has (except the baneling will even die); even just using the unit defensively is enough. Could you imagine if any other race had widow mines? How would you like to pit range 5 marines against this range 5 super baneling?
Banelings are lower tech, more mobile, destroys buildings, chases after targets, are more immediate when used in drops, takes up less supply, etc....
You're right, there are HUGE differences between banelings and widowmines. But I think those differences are working as intended.
|
This could all be so easily solved if widow mines would just die after their first attack. There's absolutely NO reason why they need more than one charge when they're already so cheap in the first place.
|
On April 09 2013 04:04 DidYuhim wrote:
Which makes me think about the real purpose behind making it in the first place.
which is?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
