|
On December 19 2013 22:10 dreamseller wrote:
in most walks of life even the most mathematically challenged individual throws around statistics as if they know their significance. unfortunately this thread is no exception.
without giving a 4th year unit summary in statistics, can i just underline the most important point about the aligulac data which was made by another poster above; the sample size being so much larger for protoss games, which would at first glance suggest an enormous imbalance towards protoss. the order of difference in the protoss games is no small amount! statistically it is humongous and should be the focus of discussion and hypothesis when it comes to the game balance.
so then, the question should be, why do we have such a huge supply of protoss?
is it really credible to believe that it is simply because the terran players are worse at the game to such a massive degree? remember we are talking about under-representation to the degree of HUNDREDS with such a small sample, so if it was the case, as some posters suggest in this thread, that it is terran playing the game incorrectly, the degree to which this is happening would be truly extraordinary, bizarre even, considering how quickly other terrans can copy successful styles.
Well I think everyone can agree that Protoss is much easier mechanically. But is it the Protoss players' fault that most of our units don't scale with micro anywhere near as well as Terrans'? A Terran with great multi-tasking and micro is godlike compared to a Terran with average multi-tasking and micro, but a Protoss with great multi-tasking and micro is only slightly better than a Protoss with average multi-tasking and micro.
Strategically though, I don't think that Protoss is any easier or stronger than Terran.
|
On December 18 2013 05:34 Plansix wrote:
I knew we were going to the mini novel from Hider once I challenged his logic. Of course his logic boils down to "it makes sense for me and the way i see this data. Therefor, Protoss players are worse than than other players." Spinning the numbers to favor your argument is so well used in every form of politics and by anyone pushing their own agenda. Yet we give it so much weight here on TL, when most of them come from a data mining site. Numbers are find, but they don't provide proof of anything beyond the number of players and who won.
Rather than focus on how many Protoss are in GM or who has a 3.5% lead in the win rate, we should focus on real discussion, like early game scouting for Terran. I have always said that more scouting is good and if Terran need more, thy should get it.
Not sure if you know how stupid you sound, or you are just trolling...
Hider's "mini-novel" does not boil down to "it makes sense for me and the way I see this data..." it makes sense because it is logically correct. It doesn't take much brain power to see this.
Let me try to explain it to you: Imagine if the warhound got put back into the game and Terran just started dominating toss left and right. Imagine we look at the effect it would have on diamond and masters level players. All of a sudden their TvP win rate goes to 80-90% across the board. What would the effect be? Would they keep that same w/r forever? No. They would keep that w/r until their mmr got to the point that not only are the protoss they're playing against so much better than them that they can't always win, even with the imbalance, but their TvZ w/r, which is much less affected by the imbalanced warhound, drops low enough that their overall w/r settles around 50% (as the ladder is designed to make happen). By the end of it, these terran players' mmr would be much higher than their equally skilled protoss counterparts and would likely have received a promotion to reflect that. This is why looking at M/GM racial distribution is a valid balance concern.
The only explanation for there being so many more protoss in GM than terran, aside from imbalance, would be that:
1) The average terran player is less skilled than the average protoss player, or
2) The numbers are actually just reflecting the racial distribution of all players (ie. there are twice as many protoss players than there are terran overall, therefore we should expect there to be twice as many protoss players in GM than terran... as well as in every other league).
Obviously, while there are slightly more protoss players overall, this does not come close to explaining the GM distribution imbalance. Therefore, unless you contend that the average terran player is simply less skilled than the average protoss player (which you're more than welcome to argue) there must be some imbalance in the way the game plays out currently.
Now, due to this being an RTS, we must always account for the meta game. It could in fact be the case that terran just still haven't found the solution to dealing with the current iteration of protoss. I personally think that more hellbat usage in the late game could help, but getting to that late game in an even position with the protoss seems to be easier said than done these days due to the relative safety of greedy protoss and the extremely powerful early game threats they pose to the terran player in the early game (the terran must play safe, while the protoss can largely dictate the pace of the game).
If you still think this logic only "makes sense for me and the way i see this data" then I apologize, but I have neither the time, nor the crayons to explain it to you.
|
Jim 2-0 Soulkey, nuff said.
|
On December 21 2013 06:01 painkilla wrote:
Jim 2-0 Soulkey, nuff said. What point is this supposed to be making?
|
On December 21 2013 04:08 Kiarip wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2013 22:10 dreamseller wrote:
in most walks of life even the most mathematically challenged individual throws around statistics as if they know their significance. unfortunately this thread is no exception.
without giving a 4th year unit summary in statistics, can i just underline the most important point about the aligulac data which was made by another poster above; the sample size being so much larger for protoss games, which would at first glance suggest an enormous imbalance towards protoss. the order of difference in the protoss games is no small amount! statistically it is humongous and should be the focus of discussion and hypothesis when it comes to the game balance.
so then, the question should be, why do we have such a huge supply of protoss?
is it really credible to believe that it is simply because the terran players are worse at the game to such a massive degree? remember we are talking about under-representation to the degree of HUNDREDS with such a small sample, so if it was the case, as some posters suggest in this thread, that it is terran playing the game incorrectly, the degree to which this is happening would be truly extraordinary, bizarre even, considering how quickly other terrans can copy successful styles. Well I think everyone can agree that Protoss is much easier mechanically. But is it the Protoss players' fault that most of our units don't scale with micro anywhere near as well as Terrans'? A Terran with great multi-tasking and micro is godlike compared to a Terran with average multi-tasking and micro, but a Protoss with great multi-tasking and micro is only slightly better than a Protoss with average multi-tasking and micro. Strategically though, I don't think that Protoss is any easier or stronger than Terran.
Back in WoL, patchzerg was a common derogatory term used to describe zerg players who found a sudden jump in success after some pretty hefty zerg buffs(people were saying Scarlett was a patchzerg). It was difficult to distinguish which zerg player was truly amazing and who was just enjoying a disproportionate level of success because snoozelord/infestor was so incredibly strong.
I feel protoss is kind of in a similar position now, it's hard to tell whether someone just got really good or if protoss got really good. Especially vs terran, it always looks more or less the same. It should be noted that protoss gameplay in HotS is far more dynamic and varied than zerg was in mid-late WoL, so even if protoss is very strong, it's definitely harder to play than BL/infestor with 3-3 IT and instant fungals was.
No one is blaming the players, their only job is to win with whatever tools they have available, if that means blink stalker all in or two hour swarm host turtle every game, so be it. The blame lies squarely on Blizzard.
|
On December 21 2013 06:03 RampancyTW wrote:What point is this supposed to be making?
That China is totally OP and KR needs a buff (I think).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
