I haven't seen a thread for this yet, but I figured it would be a good topic for discussion. Stumbled upon this as I was browsing reddit, all credit goes to ChaosTerran.
It includes: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16) The parameters he used served to minimize the amount of amateur games and maximize the amount of professional games. - CT
My first thought with looking at the statistics would be that zerg is in a pretty terrible place ZvT at the moment, and ZvP isn't in the best place either. TvP on the other hand looks to be very close.
ZvP is pretty balanced according to the stats 48% vs. 52% - pretty much even. If anything, I hope Blizzard doesn't nerf Terran but buff Z a slight bit - or just wait it out awhile longer. HOTS is still new, and the pro's still win with Zerg.
Huh, didn't think Z was that bad, numbers aint that great though. However i thought protoss was in a worse place, guess I watch WCS korea to much and not much else.
Pretty solid statistics, actually. While Zerg are a bit low, I think it has to do with them all being so used to WoL ezmode still (joke). I feel like Blizzard needs to change Mutalisks (nerf in some way) and buff some of the other Zerg units. In fact, I'd like to see a Nydus worm change (buff). I also think reducing the energy cost on Contaminate would open a lot more builds and well-thought out timings for Zerg.
It's interesting how the least played matchup was TvZ but the stats are 56/44 (roughly). Quality > Quantity!!
pretty balanced looking and the ZvT while looking skewed also has the lowest number of games recorded thus far, so the sample size is smaller, therefore allowing for a greater Delta imo. Interesting.
On May 02 2013 02:45 synd wrote: I don't trust this statistics at all
Any reasoning for that lol?
52/48 is almost definitely within margin of error, although we don't know exactly what the margin of error is.
I don't know if including qualifiers was a good idea because of the potential for amateur vs pro matches, but there should be so few of them included that they get drowned out in the sample anyways. Kind of interesting statistics, and I'm not too too surprised by what I see.
Even 55/45 is potentially close to margin of error, although in this case it's unlikely. I hope we see buffs to zerg and not nerfs to whatever is necessary - it's usually a much more entertaining way of doing the game.
Please point out why the methodology is flawed; I don't see any inherent selection/etc. bias in the samples. I also don't see your reasoning about the sample size. Sample sizes of 1,000 are often used to properly represent the national population - they're usually seen as accurate as well. The problem is they need to be representative of the population. If this is supposed to reflect the pro scene, it does so well.
You don't actually want a large sample size. If the sample size gets too large, you actually increase your error. Smaller samples are almost always better as long as you get past the initial 50-100 sample size road block.
On May 02 2013 02:47 Blezza wrote: Tbh that ZvP stat looks fine, only ZvT is a problem right now
This issue currently is that Zerg's haven't adapted to the new meta game. Terrans and Protoss have only had slight changes to their vZ matchups while Zerg has completely changed. I'd say we give it another month or two before balance changes related to vZ matchups are released.
As far as non-mirror matchups go, PvZ has seen the largest amount of change. 1gas gateway openings are becoming viable and with the addition of new harassment, protoss is opting for heavy gas gateway openings as well. Also with zerg playing with new strategies such as early swarm host busts, I just don't see how we should try to conclude anything until the metagame can stabilize a little more. That being said, I think the new voidrays feel a little too strong, but we still need more time to know for sure.
On May 02 2013 02:45 synd wrote: I don't trust this statistics at all
What reason do you have not to trust them? They seem fairly legitimate, however they could be zerg bias, but I personally doubt it.
Anyone can maake statistics with whatever sample size. However there was one guy who actually made a statistics with proofs about his data gathering. He had an actual sample size with very detailed info that even exceeded into winrate per specific tournament. I prefer to wait for that destined one who makes the 'right' statistics instead of trust a random guy.
On May 02 2013 02:47 Blezza wrote: Tbh that ZvP stat looks fine, only ZvT is a problem right now
This issue currently is that Zerg's haven't adapted to the new meta game. Terrans and Protoss have only had slight changes to their vZ matchups while Zerg has completely changed. I'd say we give it another month or two before balance changes related to vZ matchups are released.
Ye that's a fair point, hard not to let the bias creep in
On May 02 2013 02:54 Faust852 wrote: Without WCS EU Qualifers, TvZ would be much more even I think.
Well the EU quals are in there becuase they actaully happened? That's like saying Hitler was a nice guy if it wasn't for the holocaust.
Lot of very strong terrans (Happy, Strelok, etc..) played theses qualifers while no good Zergs played them because they were already quilified. And it's a shitton of games but it's not very relevent.
EPT
