|
On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend.
I agree, but Protoss still has the highest win rate. What does that tell us?
And even though so many top korea zergs frequently attend and do well in foreign tournaments, the race as a whole has the worst win rate, almost every month. So even top korea zergs seem unable to balance out the statistics, because foreign zergs do so much worse than foreign Protoss players and to a slightly lesser extent Terran players.
|
Looks like pretty good balance atm.
|
On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend.
Edit: sorry, stupid argument, because it's mathematically equal...
So yeah, it's just probably just like that: the more tournaments you take, the closer the stats go to 50:50 regardless of balance. Unless all of the taken tournaments are on "the same skilllevel".
|
On August 04 2013 20:20 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend. I agree, but Protoss still has the highest win rate. What does that tell us? And even though so many top korea zergs frequently attend and do well in foreign tournaments, the race as a whole has the worst win rate, almost every month. So even top korea zergs seem unable to balance out the statistics, because foreign zergs do so much worse than foreign Protoss players and to a slightly lesser extent Terran players.
Im not sure i understand, from my experience foreign scene is where Zerg was historically strongest race.
|
On August 04 2013 20:28 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend. Edit: sorry, stupid argument, because it's mathematically equal... So yeah, it's just probably just like that: the more tournaments you take, the closer the stats go to 50:50 regardless of balance. Unless all of the taken tournaments are on "the same skilllevel".
It's closer to 50% but also more reliable in terms of trends.
For example if you look on oldd TLPD graph:
http://imgur.com/a/5uKDQ if you look at korena graph you can't really drwa any conlsuions from it.
Aligulac graph on other hand show trends really well, especially by looking at TvZ historically it really shows how matchup changed in time.
|
On August 04 2013 22:30 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 20:28 Big J wrote:On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend. Edit: sorry, stupid argument, because it's mathematically equal... So yeah, it's just probably just like that: the more tournaments you take, the closer the stats go to 50:50 regardless of balance. Unless all of the taken tournaments are on "the same skilllevel". It's closer to 50% but also more reliable in terms of trends. For example if you look on oldd TLPD graph: http://imgur.com/a/5uKDQ if you look at korena graph you can't really drwa any conlsuions from it. Aligulac graph on other hand show trends really well, especially by looking at TvZ historically it really shows how matchup changed in time.
Yeah, but what do trends do for us? In the end we want the raw numbers and want to know whether a matchup is really close to 52:48 (ergo balanced), or if it is 60:40 (ergo imbalanced).
|
On August 04 2013 23:03 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 22:30 keglu wrote:On August 04 2013 20:28 Big J wrote:On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend. Edit: sorry, stupid argument, because it's mathematically equal... So yeah, it's just probably just like that: the more tournaments you take, the closer the stats go to 50:50 regardless of balance. Unless all of the taken tournaments are on "the same skilllevel". It's closer to 50% but also more reliable in terms of trends. For example if you look on oldd TLPD graph: http://imgur.com/a/5uKDQ if you look at korena graph you can't really drwa any conlsuions from it. Aligulac graph on other hand show trends really well, especially by looking at TvZ historically it really shows how matchup changed in time. Yeah, but what do trends do for us? In the end we want the raw numbers and want to know whether a matchup is really close to 52:48 (ergo balanced), or if it is 60:40 (ergo imbalanced).
You just have to change criteria of balnace. 60% is not realistic for that much data, i consider anything over 55% heavily favoured,(like TvZ early WoL or ZvT late WoL),
|
Vatican City State733 Posts
The racial biases in this thread are overwhelming. Clean it up guys, this sort of discussion belongs on the bnet forums.
|
thought its about julyzerg winrates 
|
On August 04 2013 23:34 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 23:03 Big J wrote:On August 04 2013 22:30 keglu wrote:On August 04 2013 20:28 Big J wrote:On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:On August 03 2013 19:25 nkr wrote:
Stop using the word sample size when the data is the whole population that is being examined. It's a census
:/ Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend. Edit: sorry, stupid argument, because it's mathematically equal... So yeah, it's just probably just like that: the more tournaments you take, the closer the stats go to 50:50 regardless of balance. Unless all of the taken tournaments are on "the same skilllevel". It's closer to 50% but also more reliable in terms of trends. For example if you look on oldd TLPD graph: http://imgur.com/a/5uKDQ if you look at korena graph you can't really drwa any conlsuions from it. Aligulac graph on other hand show trends really well, especially by looking at TvZ historically it really shows how matchup changed in time. Yeah, but what do trends do for us? In the end we want the raw numbers and want to know whether a matchup is really close to 52:48 (ergo balanced), or if it is 60:40 (ergo imbalanced). You just have to change criteria of balnace. 60% is not realistic for that much data, i consider anything over 55% heavily favoured,(like TvZ early WoL or ZvT late WoL),
early TvZ and late ZvT were 35/65 dude.
|
The reason why Z is so low is because people are inexplicably using hydras when they're basically still just as bad as they were in WoL. It'll always be a trash unit as long as it has 80 hp.
|
On August 05 2013 01:10 Noocta wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2013 23:34 keglu wrote:On August 04 2013 23:03 Big J wrote:On August 04 2013 22:30 keglu wrote:On August 04 2013 20:28 Big J wrote:On August 04 2013 20:12 Liquid`Ret wrote:On August 04 2013 19:59 Big J wrote:On August 03 2013 22:25 keglu wrote:On August 03 2013 22:20 Grovbolle wrote:On August 03 2013 19:33 dani` wrote:
[quote]
Considering Aligulac has between 1300 and 1700 games in July per matchup, it appears to me data in the OP is fact a sample of all available tournament games since it has only 400-500 games per matchup (Korea + international). OP contains: All Premier Tournaments All Major Tournaments All Direct Qualifiers to Premier Tournaments (this does not include Qualifiers for Qualifiers *only incl. later stages) All Premier Teamleagues (GSTL, ATC and PL) All Monthly Finals (Go4SC2 and Zotac Top 16, no weekly tournaments) Was listed in the reddit thread. Thats still 1/3 of games so clearly not whole population Also WCG is listed as premier tournament, i dont see qualifiers to WCG listed. well, aligulac contains all sorts of small tournaments, which screws with balance. As in those tournaments there are very many "Pro vs NonPro" or even just "Master vs Platinum" situations, in which the latter player will lose 99% of the time, regardless of balance. An example what these kind of things do: matchup: AvB is 60:40 balanced with 1000 games in which the players are evenly matched. Then there are 500games in which the winrates are 99% for and 500games in which the winrates are 1% for A. winrate of race A is therefore shown as (60*1000+99*500+1*500)/2000 = 55% instead of the true 60% balance. That's why stats with "lesser tournaments" will always be close to 50:50. As games in which one player is "outmatched" exist for both races and therefore the balance of those games is 50:50, the stats always tend to be closer to 50:50 as they should be from "Pro vs Pro" stats alone. Of course it remains to find out how big this influence really is. At least that's one approach to explain why aligulac (and other big statistics) never really has any outliers. the same can be said for foreign tournaments, where players like Hyun Jaedong Taeja Leenock dominate everyone else, and it seems more rare for a lot of the top korean protoss to attend. Edit: sorry, stupid argument, because it's mathematically equal... So yeah, it's just probably just like that: the more tournaments you take, the closer the stats go to 50:50 regardless of balance. Unless all of the taken tournaments are on "the same skilllevel". It's closer to 50% but also more reliable in terms of trends. For example if you look on oldd TLPD graph: http://imgur.com/a/5uKDQ if you look at korena graph you can't really drwa any conlsuions from it. Aligulac graph on other hand show trends really well, especially by looking at TvZ historically it really shows how matchup changed in time. Yeah, but what do trends do for us? In the end we want the raw numbers and want to know whether a matchup is really close to 52:48 (ergo balanced), or if it is 60:40 (ergo imbalanced). You just have to change criteria of balnace. 60% is not realistic for that much data, i consider anything over 55% heavily favoured,(like TvZ early WoL or ZvT late WoL), early TvZ and late ZvT were 35/65 dude.
TvZ based on 50-300 games per matchup monthly in first few months. Past that when number of games became bigger no matchup was at ever 60%.
|
I really want to see a Ladder winrate vs tournament winrate comparison.
I feel like PvZ on ladder favors Z where in tourneys favors P.
But I guess it would be blizzards problem to release that info
|
Hmm... I dig the look of the international statistics. I wouldn't worry too much about the zergs being destroyed in the korean statistics. Not only is it a small sample size, it is taken from the very best of the best players over a very short period. That kind of sample selection is only going to show which race is dominating the meta-game right now, and we don't get a chance to see the pendulum swing the other way.
I'm not going to worry until we get about 3 months in a row of zergs getting abused in korea. And I play z.
|
On August 01 2013 17:48 Elite_ wrote:Before more Zerg whining, please look at the July Premier Tournament results: IEM Shanghai - 1st  Revival DreamHack Valencia - 1st HyuN, 2nd Jaedong, 3rd Goswser. Definitely reflected in these graphs.
It's so annoying when people bring up tournament finalists as a reliable statistic. Ofc more zergs will win tournaments, since there are more zerg players. Also, tournament winners is a pretty bad statistic overall since the sample size is so incredible low, and it doesn't factor in tournament participants, structure, or how any of the other games during the tournament played out.
|
The hardest thing about interpreting statistics like this is that it doesn't tell the whole story. Savior had success in broodwar zvt when pretty much no one else was winning and terran seemed extreme imba. If you are a zerg or random player, the ZvT matchup FEELS imbalanced/too easy for Terran. I will be honest that my zerg is not my most skilled race and that Terran is my best, but it's more than just that, it takes zero skill to plant mines, stim and split vs banes which is pretty much 90% of the matchup right now.
In a way, the matchup is imba becuase Z can't even tech to hive safely vs a strong terran before 4 bases but once Z does secure 4 base and can go hive while defending with mutas, zerglings, banelings, the ultralisk switch afterwards feels just as imbalanced. The matchup is currently balanced for the highest levels of play, which means zergs like me who die to any amount of drops + frontal mine pushes are going to get mad as fuck every single game we play in the matchup. Seriously, it might not be imba but mines are a shitty fucking unit to play against and i wish that they were like in bw where they go away after shooting.. even if we gave them to free with hellions, then that's much better. but the way mines are currently designed is breaking the game at a casual level and forcing specific styles at a pro level. I think it's time to address the widow mine with balance changes, i play as R at about 1k masters and have played Terran since wings of liberty.
|
On August 05 2013 02:07 c0sm0naut wrote:
The hardest thing about interpreting statistics like this is that it doesn't tell the whole story. If you are a zerg or random player, the ZvT matchup FEELS imbalanced/too easy for Terran. I will be honest that my zerg is not my most skilled race and that Terran is my best, but it's more than just that, it takes zero skill to plant mines, stim and split vs banes which is pretty much 90% of the matchup right now.
In a way, the matchup is imba becuase Z can't even tech to hive safely vs a strong terran before 4 bases but once Z does secure 4 base and can go hive while defending with mutas, zerglings, banelings, the ultralisk switch afterwards feels just as imbalanced. The matchup is currently balanced for the highest levels of play, which means zergs like me who die to any amount of drops + frontal mine pushes are going to get mad as fuck every single game we play in the matchup. Seriously, it might not be imba but mines are a shitty fucking unit to play against and i wish that they were like in bw where they go away after shooting.. even if we gave them to free with hellions, then that's much better. but the way mines are currently designed is breaking the game at a casual level and forcing specific styles at a pro level. I think it's time to address the widow mine with balance changes, i play as R at about 1k masters and have played Terran since wings of liberty.
Did i read it correctly that it takes zero skill to split vs banes?
|
On August 05 2013 02:10 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2013 02:07 c0sm0naut wrote:
The hardest thing about interpreting statistics like this is that it doesn't tell the whole story. If you are a zerg or random player, the ZvT matchup FEELS imbalanced/too easy for Terran. I will be honest that my zerg is not my most skilled race and that Terran is my best, but it's more than just that, it takes zero skill to plant mines, stim and split vs banes which is pretty much 90% of the matchup right now.
In a way, the matchup is imba becuase Z can't even tech to hive safely vs a strong terran before 4 bases but once Z does secure 4 base and can go hive while defending with mutas, zerglings, banelings, the ultralisk switch afterwards feels just as imbalanced. The matchup is currently balanced for the highest levels of play, which means zergs like me who die to any amount of drops + frontal mine pushes are going to get mad as fuck every single game we play in the matchup. Seriously, it might not be imba but mines are a shitty fucking unit to play against and i wish that they were like in bw where they go away after shooting.. even if we gave them to free with hellions, then that's much better. but the way mines are currently designed is breaking the game at a casual level and forcing specific styles at a pro level. I think it's time to address the widow mine with balance changes, i play as R at about 1k masters and have played Terran since wings of liberty. Did i read it correctly that it takes zero skill to split vs banes?
yes, ive been playing terran since launch of wol and random since launch of hots, stimming and clicking the patrol key away from banelings does not take much skill. maybe zero is the wrong word, but when plat level micro is the crux of terran play in the matchup we have a problem
|
On August 05 2013 02:10 keglu wrote:
Did i read it correctly that it takes zero skill to split vs banes?
Didn't you know that all Terrans were suddenly granted Automaton 2000 micro in HotS?
|
As protoss suffers the most by being figured out I am more than okay having protoss a bit favored as they will probably go down in winrates soon as their new timings and plays get figured out
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
