|
On December 11 2013 21:57 qotsager wrote:
you mean the skill ceiling, right? because the skill required to play chess is pretty low, it takes a bit to be good at it though.
and i don't think so. i don't think any player is close to playing perfectly. so give it some time.
i have no idea what player does what after winning, some probably take it a bit easier after winning something, but your drive to win is still there after one big victory.
how is the fog of war random? it's doing the exact same thing every time. i'm not sure i get your point on that one. if you mean the "coinflippieness" of, say, PvP, top level protoss still get insane winrates, for example parting, currently at a 71.93% winratio in pvp on TLPD.
last point i don't think we can really say anything about that, since we dont really now much about the exact training schedule the teams have. we only know they all play a crapload of starcraft.
so i personally have no idea, but i don't consider it a problem, either. (btw i think that discussion came up before)
there is nothing worse for the excitement of a sport than one team/athlete dominating it all. what you want is probably 4 or 5 players at the absolute top, developing rivalries, but i don't think that having a few more competing players will hurt.
maybe starcraft 2 needs some time to find that true bonjwa (tho Jaedong will totally dominate everyone next year), maybe it's not meant to be?
noob question here: how long did it take brood warto have those legends distinguish themselves from the rest?
Partings Winrate is so high because he coinflips. When I am struggling with a matchup, I try to learn off the best. For Pvp I studied Parting because of his win/ratio and I see that he favors coinflips rather then solid by mostly going blink all in. This is why CombatEX was able to take a game off parting because he coinflipped with blink all in and got blind countered. This also goes for top pvpers such as Oz and Dear. I try to do same builds they do on ladder but sometimes it doesnt workout. There is also JD who had 80 % winrate in zvz but managed to get 2-0ed by an NA mid master(NrGQuasar).
There is just way too much randomness that there's too many things to account for. For example; Scarlett beating Bomber was completely random at the end. If Bomber were to be aware of the burrowwd banelings, which is almost impossible, he would have won but the banelings hit and he lost. There's also way more factors then just randomness but that is just the main reason for me.
|
The difference in win rates in SC2 compared to BW are a couple of percent for the top players at most and they are not particularly unpredictable compared to other games. The skill ceiling is so far away from what anyone has achieved or will ever achieve it essentially doesn't matter. Depth of micro however is a slightly different thing and might make the difference to bring win rates in line with BW all by themselves.
|
Northern Ireland26688 Posts
On December 12 2013 06:34 Qwyn wrote:
Oh my god I rarely say this but this really is just an excuse to "remake the game," sort of thread. Thinking about it, have you ever even considered:
1. That the tournament structure of SC2 makes it hard for players to maintain consistent long term results;
2. That the kind of player capable of DOMINATING the scene really is THAT RARE?
Seriously, holy shit.
Another thing I would also agree with is yes, access to shittons of competitive VODs does make a progamer's builds less secure. Of course this should be offset by mechanical difficulty, but with some races or strategies this is not always the case...
- NVM, OP is just compiling what bunches of people are saying, lol. Still a bit sad, though -_-.
I've seen numerous refutations of this unpredictability before. It's a trojan horse to complain about all aspects of SC2.
In addition, the comparison with BW is a bit, off to me. What tournaments for the top Koreans were there apart from OSL/MSL and Proleague + the yearly WCG?
Their equivalents exist nowadays, but they're not essentially the [i]only/i] tournaments. Tons of weekend events, run by different organisations, many of which are overseas etc has an impact in terms of this. In BW, you made big cash by being the best and playing in the premiere tournaments, in SC2, you can (especially with foreign backing) go abroad consistently and make cash, at the expense perhaps of preparing you properly for the likes of the GSL
|
Northern Ireland26688 Posts
On December 12 2013 09:34 Rickyvalle21 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2013 21:57 qotsager wrote:
you mean the skill ceiling, right? because the skill required to play chess is pretty low, it takes a bit to be good at it though.
and i don't think so. i don't think any player is close to playing perfectly. so give it some time.
i have no idea what player does what after winning, some probably take it a bit easier after winning something, but your drive to win is still there after one big victory.
how is the fog of war random? it's doing the exact same thing every time. i'm not sure i get your point on that one. if you mean the "coinflippieness" of, say, PvP, top level protoss still get insane winrates, for example parting, currently at a 71.93% winratio in pvp on TLPD.
last point i don't think we can really say anything about that, since we dont really now much about the exact training schedule the teams have. we only know they all play a crapload of starcraft.
so i personally have no idea, but i don't consider it a problem, either. (btw i think that discussion came up before)
there is nothing worse for the excitement of a sport than one team/athlete dominating it all. what you want is probably 4 or 5 players at the absolute top, developing rivalries, but i don't think that having a few more competing players will hurt.
maybe starcraft 2 needs some time to find that true bonjwa (tho Jaedong will totally dominate everyone next year), maybe it's not meant to be?
noob question here: how long did it take brood warto have those legends distinguish themselves from the rest? Partings Winrate is so high because he coinflips. When I am struggling with a matchup, I try to learn off the best. For Pvp I studied Parting because of his win/ratio and I see that he favors coinflips rather then solid by mostly going blink all in. This is why CombatEX was able to take a game off parting because he coinflipped with blink all in and got blind countered. This also goes for top pvpers such as Oz and Dear. I try to do same builds they do on ladder but sometimes it doesnt workout. There is also JD who had 80 % winrate in zvz but managed to get 2-0ed by an NA mid master(NrGQuasar). There is just way too much randomness that there's too many things to account for. For example; Scarlett beating Bomber was completely random at the end. If Bomber were to be aware of the burrowwd banelings, which is almost impossible, he would have won but the banelings hit and he lost. There's also way more factors then just randomness but that is just the main reason for me.
If you are coinflipping, how do you get a winrate appreciably above 50%?
|
Demuslim was streaming a few minutes ago. He watched the replay after beating a zerg, following the zerg's perspective.
First, he lost an army because he was looking away for one second doing a drop. Banelings got it. Oops!
Second, which ended the game, the zerg wasn't able to see the terran army, saw a few units starting to poke a hatchery, went in to defend with mutalisks and lost 17 mutalisks in about 2 seconds to a thor volley and 2 widow mines. Then the entire terran army ran in.
GG.
Any people ask why the game is volatile? Sure, its a matter of skill to deal with these things but is it not a little perverse that so many games come down to less than a second of gameplay? In cases like this, even if you're Flash or Jaedong or MC, its still impossible to play perfectly enough to avoid these scenarios, so in a sense is it not slightly random how a game will end?
All three of those players commonly lose huge numbers of units to some 1-second oversight. And god help the rest of us.
|
On December 12 2013 09:59 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 09:34 Rickyvalle21 wrote:On December 11 2013 21:57 qotsager wrote:
you mean the skill ceiling, right? because the skill required to play chess is pretty low, it takes a bit to be good at it though.
and i don't think so. i don't think any player is close to playing perfectly. so give it some time.
i have no idea what player does what after winning, some probably take it a bit easier after winning something, but your drive to win is still there after one big victory.
how is the fog of war random? it's doing the exact same thing every time. i'm not sure i get your point on that one. if you mean the "coinflippieness" of, say, PvP, top level protoss still get insane winrates, for example parting, currently at a 71.93% winratio in pvp on TLPD.
last point i don't think we can really say anything about that, since we dont really now much about the exact training schedule the teams have. we only know they all play a crapload of starcraft.
so i personally have no idea, but i don't consider it a problem, either. (btw i think that discussion came up before)
there is nothing worse for the excitement of a sport than one team/athlete dominating it all. what you want is probably 4 or 5 players at the absolute top, developing rivalries, but i don't think that having a few more competing players will hurt.
maybe starcraft 2 needs some time to find that true bonjwa (tho Jaedong will totally dominate everyone next year), maybe it's not meant to be?
noob question here: how long did it take brood warto have those legends distinguish themselves from the rest? Partings Winrate is so high because he coinflips. When I am struggling with a matchup, I try to learn off the best. For Pvp I studied Parting because of his win/ratio and I see that he favors coinflips rather then solid by mostly going blink all in. This is why CombatEX was able to take a game off parting because he coinflipped with blink all in and got blind countered. This also goes for top pvpers such as Oz and Dear. I try to do same builds they do on ladder but sometimes it doesnt workout. There is also JD who had 80 % winrate in zvz but managed to get 2-0ed by an NA mid master(NrGQuasar). There is just way too much randomness that there's too many things to account for. For example; Scarlett beating Bomber was completely random at the end. If Bomber were to be aware of the burrowwd banelings, which is almost impossible, he would have won but the banelings hit and he lost. There's also way more factors then just randomness but that is just the main reason for me. If you are coinflipping, how do you get a winrate appreciably above 50%?
He doesn't account for proper scouting or star sense.
|
On December 11 2013 21:48 sMi.SyMPhOnY wrote:
Rather than just stating the retarded mechanics and unit synergies that are present in the game, i'll share some insight. 95% of match ups in Starcraft 2 resemble rock paper scissor more than Brood War.
#sadtimes
User was warned for this post
This is more likely to be the truth. Ofc this truth is the result of mechanics and unit synergies.
The warning is more about damaging SC2 scene than being a false statement. TL lives on SC2 scene, not truth.
|
On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times.
Sorry, what are these stats of? Your personal best? or are they of the current #1? I have a 79% win rate on matches voted on this season and am pretty sure I was well over 70% last season as well. I've missed about 16 votes (about 15% of the total votes) so I'm in 57th place at present. I've found it pretty easy to predict winners for SC2. Sure, there are upsets but it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The players at the top are fairly evenly matched so it's very difficult for any one person to win everything unless he enjoys a massive advantage over just about everyone else. If your odds of winning a best of 3 are 80% and you need to win 5 best of 3s to win a tournament (e.g.) even in that circumstance, which nearly never arises (unless a top tier Korean is in an all foreign tournament, without Scarlett or Naniwa) you would only have a 33% chance of winning the tournament, so I don't know how any one could look at 10 or so tournaments and say whether SC2 results are inconsistent. You need to look at the data over a period of years IMO. The fact that I and others can reliably and correctly select who will win a match far better than 50% implies that there is a fair amount of consistency in SC2.
|
To truly be comparable in format to a sport like Tennis you'd have to lengthen the set and repeat maps.
For example instead of a best of 7 on 7 different maps; you would have 7 sets that are each a best of 5 on each of 7 maps.
This would allow for a maximum of 35 games to determine a single matchup, you'd get way more consistent results, some top guys would have 90%+ win rates in all matchups. A player like JD would have some ridiculous 99% ZvZ win rate in full matches. Foreigners would never win anything unless they practiced to get the stamina of top Koreans. Some players like MC would straight outlast people because he's grinded through so many tournaments he doesn't fatigue as fast.
A single finals match would last a full day XD
An easy real world comparison is College basketball vs. NBA, where even though the gap in talent in College teams is far greater than the NBA, you can't predict who will win march madness, ever (Single elimination). But its pretty rare in the NBA that the heavy favorite loses (see Miami Heat, LA Lakers in the early 2000's, Bulls in 90's, Boston before that, etc.). A single finals series in the NBA is played out over weeks, in SC2 its played out in a couple hours.
|
On December 12 2013 09:59 Wombat_NI wrote:
If you are coinflipping, how do you get a winrate appreciably above 50%?
If you are coinflipping, it doesn't mean you will always go 50/50.
For example I flip a coin 8 times and luckily get tails 6 times which is 75%. This is a bad analagy but just in general. There's still other factors like Pvp is more of rock paper scissors then 50 50 and other things like micro.
Hell I'm only high master and I once beat Hyun on ladder with 7 gate 1 gas all in on ohana a year and beat tslragnarok with proxy 2 gate vs hatch first in playhem awhile back. I am nowhere near there skill level and I manage to beat them. If I were to play them again then I am be certain that I would lose
|
On December 12 2013 07:04 MrCon wrote:
I don't think sc2 results are that unpredictable and I don't think it's a fair assessment to say they are.
Actually in dota, top teams have the same winrate as top sc2 players (around 70%).
When flash was dominating, he had 70% winrate I think, perhaps 75% at best. When MVP dominated he has the same winrate. Except Flash had 3 tourneys a year to play in and never traveled, it's a lot easier to be stable in those conditions (that + being a genius).
different conditions. for example flashs competition was the most competetive esport of all time by far, mvp had a bunch of bteamers and new proffesionals.
On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times.
its not close at all and different conditions too so cant straight up compare it anyway
On December 12 2013 09:47 _SpiRaL_ wrote:
The difference in win rates in SC2 compared to BW are a couple of percent for the top players at most and they are not particularly unpredictable compared to other games. The skill ceiling is so far away from what anyone has achieved or will ever achieve it essentially doesn't matter. Depth of micro however is a slightly different thing and might make the difference to bring win rates in line with BW all by themselves.
how far away you are from a skill ceiling always matters. and obviously for something gfluid and not turnbased its impossible to reach the absolute ceiling as it would require making actions completely simultaniously
|
On December 12 2013 10:49 The_Darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. Sorry, what are these stats of? Your personal best? or are they of the current #1? I have a 79% win rate on matches voted on this season and am pretty sure I was well over 70% last season as well. I've missed about 16 votes (about 15% of the total votes) so I'm in 57th place at present. I've found it pretty easy to predict winners for SC2. Sure, there are upsets but it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The players at the top are fairly evenly matched so it's very difficult for any one person to win everything unless he enjoys a massive advantage over just about everyone else. If your odds of winning a best of 3 are 80% and you need to win 5 best of 3s to win a tournament (e.g.) even in that circumstance, which nearly never arises (unless a top tier Korean is in an all foreign tournament, without Scarlett or Naniwa) you would only have a 33% chance of winning the tournament, so I don't know how any one could look at 10 or so tournaments and say whether SC2 results are inconsistent. You need to look at the data over a period of years IMO. The fact that I and others can reliably and correctly select who will win a match far better than 50% implies that there is a fair amount of consistency in SC2.
They are the #1 ranks of each game. You couldve easily checked instead of asking. I didn't seek out the person with the best rates, just the #1 person.
On December 12 2013 11:50 Veroleg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 07:04 MrCon wrote:
I don't think sc2 results are that unpredictable and I don't think it's a fair assessment to say they are.
Actually in dota, top teams have the same winrate as top sc2 players (around 70%).
When flash was dominating, he had 70% winrate I think, perhaps 75% at best. When MVP dominated he has the same winrate. Except Flash had 3 tourneys a year to play in and never traveled, it's a lot easier to be stable in those conditions (that + being a genius). different conditions. for example flashs competition was the most competetive esport of all time by far, mvp had a bunch of bteamers and new proffesionals. Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. its not close at all and different conditions too so cant straight up compare it anyway Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 09:47 _SpiRaL_ wrote:
The difference in win rates in SC2 compared to BW are a couple of percent for the top players at most and they are not particularly unpredictable compared to other games. The skill ceiling is so far away from what anyone has achieved or will ever achieve it essentially doesn't matter. Depth of micro however is a slightly different thing and might make the difference to bring win rates in line with BW all by themselves. how far away you are from a skill ceiling always matters. and obviously for something gfluid and not turnbased its impossible to reach the absolute ceiling as it would require making actions completely simultaniously
A 7% difference is pretty damned close in gambling.
Also, in regards to flash's competition vs mvp's competition: No. The level of competition was the same. People played SC2 worse, but that is because everybody was figuring it out along with patches, map changes, and new meta discoveries.
|
On December 12 2013 14:24 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 10:49 The_Darkness wrote:On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. Sorry, what are these stats of? Your personal best? or are they of the current #1? I have a 79% win rate on matches voted on this season and am pretty sure I was well over 70% last season as well. I've missed about 16 votes (about 15% of the total votes) so I'm in 57th place at present. I've found it pretty easy to predict winners for SC2. Sure, there are upsets but it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The players at the top are fairly evenly matched so it's very difficult for any one person to win everything unless he enjoys a massive advantage over just about everyone else. If your odds of winning a best of 3 are 80% and you need to win 5 best of 3s to win a tournament (e.g.) even in that circumstance, which nearly never arises (unless a top tier Korean is in an all foreign tournament, without Scarlett or Naniwa) you would only have a 33% chance of winning the tournament, so I don't know how any one could look at 10 or so tournaments and say whether SC2 results are inconsistent. You need to look at the data over a period of years IMO. The fact that I and others can reliably and correctly select who will win a match far better than 50% implies that there is a fair amount of consistency in SC2. They are the #1 ranks of each game. You couldve easily checked instead of asking. I didn't seek out the person with the best rates, just the #1 person. Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 11:50 Veroleg wrote:On December 12 2013 07:04 MrCon wrote:
I don't think sc2 results are that unpredictable and I don't think it's a fair assessment to say they are.
Actually in dota, top teams have the same winrate as top sc2 players (around 70%).
When flash was dominating, he had 70% winrate I think, perhaps 75% at best. When MVP dominated he has the same winrate. Except Flash had 3 tourneys a year to play in and never traveled, it's a lot easier to be stable in those conditions (that + being a genius). different conditions. for example flashs competition was the most competetive esport of all time by far, mvp had a bunch of bteamers and new proffesionals. On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. its not close at all and different conditions too so cant straight up compare it anyway On December 12 2013 09:47 _SpiRaL_ wrote:
The difference in win rates in SC2 compared to BW are a couple of percent for the top players at most and they are not particularly unpredictable compared to other games. The skill ceiling is so far away from what anyone has achieved or will ever achieve it essentially doesn't matter. Depth of micro however is a slightly different thing and might make the difference to bring win rates in line with BW all by themselves. how far away you are from a skill ceiling always matters. and obviously for something gfluid and not turnbased its impossible to reach the absolute ceiling as it would require making actions completely simultaniously A 7% difference is pretty damned close in gambling. Also, in regards to flash's competition vs mvp's competition: No. The level of competition was the same. People played SC2 worse, but that is because everybody was figuring it out along with patches, map changes, and new meta discoveries.
72-79 is a 10% increase. and the cap is 100, so the difference is better represented as 25%. and how is the difference between 72 and 79% small anywhere, ESPECIALLY in gambling i would have thought?
and yes, like you said, the competetion wasnt the same, which is part of the reason the difference isnt even bigger because of the much larger variance in sc2
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
Oh wow Veroleg is back I didn't notice
|
United States7483 Posts
On December 12 2013 09:59 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 09:34 Rickyvalle21 wrote:On December 11 2013 21:57 qotsager wrote:
you mean the skill ceiling, right? because the skill required to play chess is pretty low, it takes a bit to be good at it though.
and i don't think so. i don't think any player is close to playing perfectly. so give it some time.
i have no idea what player does what after winning, some probably take it a bit easier after winning something, but your drive to win is still there after one big victory.
how is the fog of war random? it's doing the exact same thing every time. i'm not sure i get your point on that one. if you mean the "coinflippieness" of, say, PvP, top level protoss still get insane winrates, for example parting, currently at a 71.93% winratio in pvp on TLPD.
last point i don't think we can really say anything about that, since we dont really now much about the exact training schedule the teams have. we only know they all play a crapload of starcraft.
so i personally have no idea, but i don't consider it a problem, either. (btw i think that discussion came up before)
there is nothing worse for the excitement of a sport than one team/athlete dominating it all. what you want is probably 4 or 5 players at the absolute top, developing rivalries, but i don't think that having a few more competing players will hurt.
maybe starcraft 2 needs some time to find that true bonjwa (tho Jaedong will totally dominate everyone next year), maybe it's not meant to be?
noob question here: how long did it take brood warto have those legends distinguish themselves from the rest? Partings Winrate is so high because he coinflips. When I am struggling with a matchup, I try to learn off the best. For Pvp I studied Parting because of his win/ratio and I see that he favors coinflips rather then solid by mostly going blink all in. This is why CombatEX was able to take a game off parting because he coinflipped with blink all in and got blind countered. This also goes for top pvpers such as Oz and Dear. I try to do same builds they do on ladder but sometimes it doesnt workout. There is also JD who had 80 % winrate in zvz but managed to get 2-0ed by an NA mid master(NrGQuasar). There is just way too much randomness that there's too many things to account for. For example; Scarlett beating Bomber was completely random at the end. If Bomber were to be aware of the burrowwd banelings, which is almost impossible, he would have won but the banelings hit and he lost. There's also way more factors then just randomness but that is just the main reason for me. If you are coinflipping, how do you get a winrate appreciably above 50%?
Coin flipping isn't a perfect comparison, as it implies a build is a 50/50 chance. Often, a particular all-in is more like 60-40 or 70-30 given the trend of playstyles, map architecture, or player tendencies.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 12 2013 15:14 Veroleg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 14:24 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 10:49 The_Darkness wrote:On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. Sorry, what are these stats of? Your personal best? or are they of the current #1? I have a 79% win rate on matches voted on this season and am pretty sure I was well over 70% last season as well. I've missed about 16 votes (about 15% of the total votes) so I'm in 57th place at present. I've found it pretty easy to predict winners for SC2. Sure, there are upsets but it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The players at the top are fairly evenly matched so it's very difficult for any one person to win everything unless he enjoys a massive advantage over just about everyone else. If your odds of winning a best of 3 are 80% and you need to win 5 best of 3s to win a tournament (e.g.) even in that circumstance, which nearly never arises (unless a top tier Korean is in an all foreign tournament, without Scarlett or Naniwa) you would only have a 33% chance of winning the tournament, so I don't know how any one could look at 10 or so tournaments and say whether SC2 results are inconsistent. You need to look at the data over a period of years IMO. The fact that I and others can reliably and correctly select who will win a match far better than 50% implies that there is a fair amount of consistency in SC2. They are the #1 ranks of each game. You couldve easily checked instead of asking. I didn't seek out the person with the best rates, just the #1 person. On December 12 2013 11:50 Veroleg wrote:On December 12 2013 07:04 MrCon wrote:
I don't think sc2 results are that unpredictable and I don't think it's a fair assessment to say they are.
Actually in dota, top teams have the same winrate as top sc2 players (around 70%).
When flash was dominating, he had 70% winrate I think, perhaps 75% at best. When MVP dominated he has the same winrate. Except Flash had 3 tourneys a year to play in and never traveled, it's a lot easier to be stable in those conditions (that + being a genius). different conditions. for example flashs competition was the most competetive esport of all time by far, mvp had a bunch of bteamers and new proffesionals. On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. its not close at all and different conditions too so cant straight up compare it anyway On December 12 2013 09:47 _SpiRaL_ wrote:
The difference in win rates in SC2 compared to BW are a couple of percent for the top players at most and they are not particularly unpredictable compared to other games. The skill ceiling is so far away from what anyone has achieved or will ever achieve it essentially doesn't matter. Depth of micro however is a slightly different thing and might make the difference to bring win rates in line with BW all by themselves. how far away you are from a skill ceiling always matters. and obviously for something gfluid and not turnbased its impossible to reach the absolute ceiling as it would require making actions completely simultaniously A 7% difference is pretty damned close in gambling. Also, in regards to flash's competition vs mvp's competition: No. The level of competition was the same. People played SC2 worse, but that is because everybody was figuring it out along with patches, map changes, and new meta discoveries. 72-79 is a 10% increase. and the cap is 100, so the difference is better represented as 25%. and how is the difference between 72 and 79% small anywhere, ESPECIALLY in gambling i would have thought? and yes, like you said, the competetion wasnt the same, which is part of the reason the difference isnt even bigger because of the much larger variance in sc2
What do you think of the BW variance that saw most OSL champions, bonjwa or not, eliminated in the ro16 of the following season?
|
More tournaments than BW -> more winners -> more perceived unpredictability.
|
On December 11 2013 22:00 lichter wrote:
You are comparing SC2 to singles sports with tournament structures different from SC2. The tournaments in SC2 are more akin to Basketball playoffs or the Champions League. If you look at the list of champions from those tournaments you'll see that it's actually not that random. It is a ridiculous comparison.
If you look at the winrates between the best teams within sports with similar tournament structures and the best players in SC2 you will also see that they compare favorably.
I think what is missing here, is the winrates of Flash from the BW era. Comparing Flash in BW to MVP in WOL is a much more telling comparison.
On December 12 2013 15:31 bduddy wrote:
More tournaments than BW -> more winners -> more perceived unpredictability.
This would indeed be true if the top BW players had roughly the same winrate as the top SC2 players today.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 12 2013 15:39 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2013 22:00 lichter wrote:
You are comparing SC2 to singles sports with tournament structures different from SC2. The tournaments in SC2 are more akin to Basketball playoffs or the Champions League. If you look at the list of champions from those tournaments you'll see that it's actually not that random. It is a ridiculous comparison.
If you look at the winrates between the best teams within sports with similar tournament structures and the best players in SC2 you will also see that they compare favorably. I think what is missing here, is the winrates of Flash from the BW era. Comparing Flash in BW to MVP in WOL is a much more telling comparison. Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 15:31 bduddy wrote:
More tournaments than BW -> more winners -> more perceived unpredictability. This would indeed be true if the top BW players had roughly the same winrate as the top SC2 players today.
You also have to keep in mind that in SC2, it's not difficult at all to play twice as many games on average as a top BW pro. Maintaining a high win rate in between travel across the globe and dozens upon dozens of Bo1s, Bo3s, Bo5s and what have you, that's really difficult and I don't think we can compare it to BW fairly.
|
On December 12 2013 15:14 Veroleg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2013 14:24 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 10:49 The_Darkness wrote:On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. Sorry, what are these stats of? Your personal best? or are they of the current #1? I have a 79% win rate on matches voted on this season and am pretty sure I was well over 70% last season as well. I've missed about 16 votes (about 15% of the total votes) so I'm in 57th place at present. I've found it pretty easy to predict winners for SC2. Sure, there are upsets but it's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. The players at the top are fairly evenly matched so it's very difficult for any one person to win everything unless he enjoys a massive advantage over just about everyone else. If your odds of winning a best of 3 are 80% and you need to win 5 best of 3s to win a tournament (e.g.) even in that circumstance, which nearly never arises (unless a top tier Korean is in an all foreign tournament, without Scarlett or Naniwa) you would only have a 33% chance of winning the tournament, so I don't know how any one could look at 10 or so tournaments and say whether SC2 results are inconsistent. You need to look at the data over a period of years IMO. The fact that I and others can reliably and correctly select who will win a match far better than 50% implies that there is a fair amount of consistency in SC2. They are the #1 ranks of each game. You couldve easily checked instead of asking. I didn't seek out the person with the best rates, just the #1 person. On December 12 2013 11:50 Veroleg wrote:On December 12 2013 07:04 MrCon wrote:
I don't think sc2 results are that unpredictable and I don't think it's a fair assessment to say they are.
Actually in dota, top teams have the same winrate as top sc2 players (around 70%).
When flash was dominating, he had 70% winrate I think, perhaps 75% at best. When MVP dominated he has the same winrate. Except Flash had 3 tourneys a year to play in and never traveled, it's a lot easier to be stable in those conditions (that + being a genius). different conditions. for example flashs competition was the most competetive esport of all time by far, mvp had a bunch of bteamers and new proffesionals. On December 12 2013 05:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On December 12 2013 05:40 Arco wrote:
Nearly won a Liquibet Season in BW but couldn't get close in SC2 despite having some good predictions once in a while. Game design is responsible for the inconsistency. The more skilled player doesn't win nearly enough. Faulty game design and probably some balance issues are the reasons for this. #1 for SC2 liquibet: 170/237 71.7% #1 for BW liquibet: 356/452 78.7% That is relatively close, especially when you consider that (AFAIK) there havent been any meta shifts in BW in recent times. its not close at all and different conditions too so cant straight up compare it anyway On December 12 2013 09:47 _SpiRaL_ wrote:
The difference in win rates in SC2 compared to BW are a couple of percent for the top players at most and they are not particularly unpredictable compared to other games. The skill ceiling is so far away from what anyone has achieved or will ever achieve it essentially doesn't matter. Depth of micro however is a slightly different thing and might make the difference to bring win rates in line with BW all by themselves. how far away you are from a skill ceiling always matters. and obviously for something gfluid and not turnbased its impossible to reach the absolute ceiling as it would require making actions completely simultaniously A 7% difference is pretty damned close in gambling. Also, in regards to flash's competition vs mvp's competition: No. The level of competition was the same. People played SC2 worse, but that is because everybody was figuring it out along with patches, map changes, and new meta discoveries. 72-79 is a 10% increase. and the cap is 100, so the difference is better represented as 25%. and how is the difference between 72 and 79% small anywhere, ESPECIALLY in gambling i would have thought? and yes, like you said, the competetion wasnt the same, which is part of the reason the difference isnt even bigger because of the much larger variance in sc2
I said difference, which means subtraction. Had I said 7% lower or 7% higher or 7% increase you would be right as that is 9.7%. I dont quite follow how 25% is a better representation. That is like ignoring the other 71% that is possible. It is like saying the difference between a 99% and a 100% is 100%.
And I don't know true gambling values, but given the concept that a single bad week of picks (and that they are picks, each of which relying on a bit of luck) can completely tarnish your record it is pretty even. Also, as others have said there exist better rates out there, I just picked the top one for each in points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
