|
Poland3769 Posts
On January 23 2014 20:00 Fjodorov wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 19:51 nimdil wrote:On January 10 2014 11:55 CutTheEnemy wrote:
On EU, 24% of masters players are terran now compared with 35% and 38% for zerg and protoss. How can he say its balanced considering this? His appeal to win percentages within leagues is highly misleading.
He's also been speaking for years as though he's ignorant of our main complaint- its isn't balance per se, its how hard and stressful it is to play terran and win. We know terrans can win once they go pro, but most of us aren't capable of sustaining the serious damage to our personal relationships, grades, hands and paychecks it takes in order to play the race competitively. How is Masters indicator of balance? The difference in population of each race doesnt come close to justifying that there are only 24% terran in masters and even less in GM. Doesnt it seem more likely that there is a balance problem than that the terran population is just worse at the game than zerg/toss?
Not really. The balanced game is when you have comparable win ratios at the top of the competition - not on all levels. Masters is a skill level representing progamers in hiatus, talented and active amateurs and active top casters. As long as nothing is hugely broken in Masters, I'm OK with that. What I'm worried about is balance at the very top - like among top 100 players in the world.
|
On January 23 2014 21:51 SeXyBaCk wrote:
Anyone who refuses to see that TvP is completely broken now is delusional. Pro-league means nothing. I can't remember the last time a terran even remotely won a set easily against protoss. Winning usually involves 3 pronged attacking and a protoss walking their colossus or templars into a small unit of bio and losing the game due to poor control. Whenever there's army clashing terran dies.
This has simply happened because one by one every terran timing has been nerfed out of the game. What do you want to achieve playing TvP these days? What are you going for? What's the aim? Deny a third? Deny a 4th? Get to lategame ghost viking? What? 2-2 pushes? None of it remotely works. All it is now is surviving whatever massive attack protoss throws at you and then stay in the game hoping protoss will somehow mess up their control and throw away their aoe damage.
I don't think TvZ has been played enough yet post mine nerf to call it balanced. There seems to be way more mech play because the mines feel close to useless against mutas these days, as well as the hits vs bane ling feel completely random. Zerg have figured out mines, and even if the nerf was undone I think they could still handle them and results would be the same.
Now I understand balance team addressing mines, at times they felt devestating and change a game within 1 second. Why TvP hasn't been addressed in 2 years of protoss dominating the matchup is utterly beyond me.
Someone tell me if were to bet money on starcraft between pro players, would anyone right now bet on the terran when up against the protoss if you knew nothing about the players? Are you putting your money on the protoss or the terran? Be honest.
That is not balance. It's not even remotely close. 95% will honestly put their money on the protoss.
Oh but DK nerfed the mine for entertainment purposes. He wanted to see the tank more, saying tanks and mines is more fun for the spectator than just mines. Its hilarious if you think about it, but dont spend to much time thinking about it becasue in the end you will want to bash your head against a wall.
|
On January 23 2014 21:58 nimdil wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 20:00 Fjodorov wrote:On January 23 2014 19:51 nimdil wrote:On January 10 2014 11:55 CutTheEnemy wrote:
On EU, 24% of masters players are terran now compared with 35% and 38% for zerg and protoss. How can he say its balanced considering this? His appeal to win percentages within leagues is highly misleading.
He's also been speaking for years as though he's ignorant of our main complaint- its isn't balance per se, its how hard and stressful it is to play terran and win. We know terrans can win once they go pro, but most of us aren't capable of sustaining the serious damage to our personal relationships, grades, hands and paychecks it takes in order to play the race competitively. How is Masters indicator of balance? The difference in population of each race doesnt come close to justifying that there are only 24% terran in masters and even less in GM. Doesnt it seem more likely that there is a balance problem than that the terran population is just worse at the game than zerg/toss? Not really. The balanced game is when you have comparable win ratios at the top of the competition - not on all levels. Masters is a skill level representing progamers in hiatus, talented and active amateurs and active top casters. As long as nothing is hugely broken in Masters, I'm OK with that. What I'm worried about is balance at the very top - like among top 100 players in the world.
The representation issue of terran follows the same trend all the way up to your "100 best players in the world". So there you go.
|
On January 23 2014 21:58 nimdil wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 20:00 Fjodorov wrote:On January 23 2014 19:51 nimdil wrote:On January 10 2014 11:55 CutTheEnemy wrote:
On EU, 24% of masters players are terran now compared with 35% and 38% for zerg and protoss. How can he say its balanced considering this? His appeal to win percentages within leagues is highly misleading.
He's also been speaking for years as though he's ignorant of our main complaint- its isn't balance per se, its how hard and stressful it is to play terran and win. We know terrans can win once they go pro, but most of us aren't capable of sustaining the serious damage to our personal relationships, grades, hands and paychecks it takes in order to play the race competitively. How is Masters indicator of balance? The difference in population of each race doesnt come close to justifying that there are only 24% terran in masters and even less in GM. Doesnt it seem more likely that there is a balance problem than that the terran population is just worse at the game than zerg/toss? Not really. The balanced game is when you have comparable win ratios at the top of the competition - not on all levels. Masters is a skill level representing progamers in hiatus, talented and active amateurs and active top casters. As long as nothing is hugely broken in Masters, I'm OK with that. What I'm worried about is balance at the very top - like among top 100 players in the world.
The problem is that with only 100 players, you cannot make any statistical significant statements about the balance, because you cannot assume that the skill is distributed evenly amongst all three races.
|
3 terrans in code s 
but i don't have to worry maru got this . one can fucking dream :D
|
On January 23 2014 20:39 hfsrj wrote:I know it's rude to auto-quote, but I'd like to have some comments on this : Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 04:55 hfsrj wrote:
Btw I don't know if they noticed that most way to "correct for skill" actually hide the imbalance, especially if the most powerfull race is more represented than the two other.
It's quite easy to show : let's say it's 25%A, 25%B, 50%C, for the sake of the argument. If C is favored, and you are A, you loose most of your games versus C, for equal skill (say 100% for simplicity, the argument is still valid for lower). Then you proceed to loose 50% of your games against A and B (same skill). You therefore lost 75% of your games, and your MMR (perceived skill) goes down untill you reach 50% win ratio, i.e. your perceived skill is lower than actual skill.
Things are more complicated in truth, but the statistics still apply. If they count skill by MMR, the figure they show are erroneous. This phenomena exist if C is not overrepresented, but it is obviously smaller, and much harder to correct for. Anyone knows how the skill correction is made ? It's a bit hard not to be biased in doing it, so I'd really like to know more. I'm a physicist and quite comfortable with statistics, btw, and I think it'd be nice in this topic to have more arguments than "small sample size" and "corrected win percentage", that are actually not very informative.
+ Show Spoiler +Basically you are trying to say that skill cannot properly be measured if the game is imbalanced right ? Why do you need such a demonstration to say something that obvious ?
I mean yes, an imbalanced game will not be representative of each player's skill, it will by definition be biased by the imbalance between races...
edit: nvm, I think I got your point. In other words you meant that if the race that is your worst match-up has a bigger population from the start (more people make an account with this race), you will somewhat be unfavored as you will tend to lose more than those whose worst m-u is a less representated race. Did I get it correctly ?
If yes, well sorry, I have no idea if/how this is corrected.
|
On January 23 2014 22:23 goody153 wrote:3 terrans in code s but i don't have to worry maru got this . one can fucking dream :D
Maru hope <3
|
United States1072 Posts
David Kim's Thought on Balance: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Terrans HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
In more serious terms the we have a possibility of having 16 out of 32 players in Code S will be protoss. Also its a strong possibility that we will only have 3 Terrans possibly a 4th if Ryung makes it out of the group. This is really hilarious because even with this small group of players you can see the trend that we have seen for a while in GM Protoss about 50% Zerg about 30% and Terran about 20% so the statement " You can't base balance off of race distribution is a bunch of garbage because that entails that Terrans don't try enough or that Terrans as a whole are just nowhere near the caliber of Protoss players.....When Tier 3 Protoss players can defeat Tier 1 1/2 - Tier 1 Terran players and make it look ez.
BUT HEY If you remove the skill from the players Protoss only wins 51% of the time.... ( What does that even mean... in automation 3000 they threw unit comps in and said GO?)
User was warned for this post
|
On January 23 2014 20:39 hfsrj wrote:I know it's rude to auto-quote, but I'd like to have some comments on this : Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 04:55 hfsrj wrote:
Btw I don't know if they noticed that most way to "correct for skill" actually hide the imbalance, especially if the most powerfull race is more represented than the two other.
It's quite easy to show : let's say it's 25%A, 25%B, 50%C, for the sake of the argument. If C is favored, and you are A, you loose most of your games versus C, for equal skill (say 100% for simplicity, the argument is still valid for lower). Then you proceed to loose 50% of your games against A and B (same skill). You therefore lost 75% of your games, and your MMR (perceived skill) goes down untill you reach 50% win ratio, i.e. your perceived skill is lower than actual skill.
Things are more complicated in truth, but the statistics still apply. If they count skill by MMR, the figure they show are erroneous. This phenomena exist if C is not overrepresented, but it is obviously smaller, and much harder to correct for. Anyone knows how the skill correction is made ? It's a bit hard not to be biased in doing it, so I'd really like to know more. I'm a physicist and quite comfortable with statistics, btw, and I think it'd be nice in this topic to have more arguments than "small sample size" and "corrected win percentage", that are actually not very informative.
'skill correction' is total bullshit. There are no way to do so unless you get external data about skill. (like, dunno, you take all players involved and force them to play 10k random race games :D. Or you take data from a time the game was supposed balanced, and hope players skill stays similar -- witch is false)
So it's just some random forgery to obtain wanted results. That means strictly nothing, except they take us for idiots. DK can now go on a politician career lol :D
|
On January 23 2014 21:59 Fjodorov wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 21:51 SeXyBaCk wrote:
Anyone who refuses to see that TvP is completely broken now is delusional. Pro-league means nothing. I can't remember the last time a terran even remotely won a set easily against protoss. Winning usually involves 3 pronged attacking and a protoss walking their colossus or templars into a small unit of bio and losing the game due to poor control. Whenever there's army clashing terran dies.
This has simply happened because one by one every terran timing has been nerfed out of the game. What do you want to achieve playing TvP these days? What are you going for? What's the aim? Deny a third? Deny a 4th? Get to lategame ghost viking? What? 2-2 pushes? None of it remotely works. All it is now is surviving whatever massive attack protoss throws at you and then stay in the game hoping protoss will somehow mess up their control and throw away their aoe damage.
I don't think TvZ has been played enough yet post mine nerf to call it balanced. There seems to be way more mech play because the mines feel close to useless against mutas these days, as well as the hits vs bane ling feel completely random. Zerg have figured out mines, and even if the nerf was undone I think they could still handle them and results would be the same.
Now I understand balance team addressing mines, at times they felt devestating and change a game within 1 second. Why TvP hasn't been addressed in 2 years of protoss dominating the matchup is utterly beyond me.
Someone tell me if were to bet money on starcraft between pro players, would anyone right now bet on the terran when up against the protoss if you knew nothing about the players? Are you putting your money on the protoss or the terran? Be honest.
That is not balance. It's not even remotely close. 95% will honestly put their money on the protoss. Oh but DK nerfed the mine for entertainment purposes. He wanted to see the tank more, saying tanks and mines is more fun for the spectator than just mines. Its hilarious if you think about it, but dont spend to much time thinking about it becasue in the end you will want to bash your head against a wall.
and buffed the tank and the merged the air & mech upgrades in the same patch and it has been a huge success in TvZ, as we are currently seeing bio and mech being played and the matchup looking quite balanced.
|
On January 23 2014 23:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 21:59 Fjodorov wrote:On January 23 2014 21:51 SeXyBaCk wrote:
Anyone who refuses to see that TvP is completely broken now is delusional. Pro-league means nothing. I can't remember the last time a terran even remotely won a set easily against protoss. Winning usually involves 3 pronged attacking and a protoss walking their colossus or templars into a small unit of bio and losing the game due to poor control. Whenever there's army clashing terran dies.
This has simply happened because one by one every terran timing has been nerfed out of the game. What do you want to achieve playing TvP these days? What are you going for? What's the aim? Deny a third? Deny a 4th? Get to lategame ghost viking? What? 2-2 pushes? None of it remotely works. All it is now is surviving whatever massive attack protoss throws at you and then stay in the game hoping protoss will somehow mess up their control and throw away their aoe damage.
I don't think TvZ has been played enough yet post mine nerf to call it balanced. There seems to be way more mech play because the mines feel close to useless against mutas these days, as well as the hits vs bane ling feel completely random. Zerg have figured out mines, and even if the nerf was undone I think they could still handle them and results would be the same.
Now I understand balance team addressing mines, at times they felt devestating and change a game within 1 second. Why TvP hasn't been addressed in 2 years of protoss dominating the matchup is utterly beyond me.
Someone tell me if were to bet money on starcraft between pro players, would anyone right now bet on the terran when up against the protoss if you knew nothing about the players? Are you putting your money on the protoss or the terran? Be honest.
That is not balance. It's not even remotely close. 95% will honestly put their money on the protoss. Oh but DK nerfed the mine for entertainment purposes. He wanted to see the tank more, saying tanks and mines is more fun for the spectator than just mines. Its hilarious if you think about it, but dont spend to much time thinking about it becasue in the end you will want to bash your head against a wall. and buffed the tank and the merged the air & mech upgrades in the same patch and it has been a huge success in TvZ, as we are currently seeing bio and mech being played and the matchup looking quite balanced.
I'd say that the MU is currently in flux. There's more mech being played, and it's still catching people off guard (pretty much every mech v Z I see has the Z go for melee upgrade into muta, into OHSHITITSMECH!. And then they narrowly lose. Some zerg also scouted mech and went for a roach drop into losing all roaches to a single repaired thor, into gg. The reaper expand into cloak banshee into fast thors mech opening has been popular for just over a week, so the next 2 weeks should tell us if it's viable or not.
|
United States1072 Posts
TvZ bio is in the pooper but Mech isn't doing half bad. For instance the game for PL the other day where Zerg stayed on 2-2 MLB and still won against Bio 3-3 with more bases better mining just so happened that Zerg just rolled him with #s even though Terran kept getting free bases because of bad multi-tasking.....
I don't know i'm tired of the rollercoaster of ridiculous things in this game with balance .... Terran gets tools to use ppl start losing to it so David kim nerfs the bejesus out of it..... Even though the other races have some serious things to use and now that protoss is using it they are dominating just as the rest of us called....
|
I played Zerg when Zerg was completely undersubscribed. As the patch-Zerg era approached I switched to Protoss, but this was a time when Zerg was favored in all matchups. I don't like that Protoss is so prevalent simply because people say it is easy to play. I'm getting lumped in with the Protoss players that are there because they are looking for an easy win.
I'm almost to 1000 wins as Protoss; maybe it is time to switch to Terran?
In this case, though, Protoss is rolling the dice in PvP and PvZ but playing a solid game is definitely P-favored in PvT. I've been between 55-60% win rate in PvT through solid macro play there for 2, maybe 3, seasons. The unit composition is a known thing in PvT, so I don't have the opportunity to choose the wrong army composition and just straight lose like I do in the other matches.
|
United States1072 Posts
Well thats the huge problem right now is that Protoss has Overlapping unit design that counters itself, its an extremely strange way it interacts with in itself.... #1 thing that would be leaps and bounds toward balancing the game would be only allowing certain units to be warped in ..... Then cutting back on the 1 A units and giving micro options to Protoss to make it a more complex and solid race as oppose to coin flippy vs itself which is really retarded to see....
|
On January 23 2014 23:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2014 21:59 Fjodorov wrote:On January 23 2014 21:51 SeXyBaCk wrote:
Anyone who refuses to see that TvP is completely broken now is delusional. Pro-league means nothing. I can't remember the last time a terran even remotely won a set easily against protoss. Winning usually involves 3 pronged attacking and a protoss walking their colossus or templars into a small unit of bio and losing the game due to poor control. Whenever there's army clashing terran dies.
This has simply happened because one by one every terran timing has been nerfed out of the game. What do you want to achieve playing TvP these days? What are you going for? What's the aim? Deny a third? Deny a 4th? Get to lategame ghost viking? What? 2-2 pushes? None of it remotely works. All it is now is surviving whatever massive attack protoss throws at you and then stay in the game hoping protoss will somehow mess up their control and throw away their aoe damage.
I don't think TvZ has been played enough yet post mine nerf to call it balanced. There seems to be way more mech play because the mines feel close to useless against mutas these days, as well as the hits vs bane ling feel completely random. Zerg have figured out mines, and even if the nerf was undone I think they could still handle them and results would be the same.
Now I understand balance team addressing mines, at times they felt devestating and change a game within 1 second. Why TvP hasn't been addressed in 2 years of protoss dominating the matchup is utterly beyond me.
Someone tell me if were to bet money on starcraft between pro players, would anyone right now bet on the terran when up against the protoss if you knew nothing about the players? Are you putting your money on the protoss or the terran? Be honest.
That is not balance. It's not even remotely close. 95% will honestly put their money on the protoss. Oh but DK nerfed the mine for entertainment purposes. He wanted to see the tank more, saying tanks and mines is more fun for the spectator than just mines. Its hilarious if you think about it, but dont spend to much time thinking about it becasue in the end you will want to bash your head against a wall. and buffed the tank and the merged the air & mech upgrades in the same patch and it has been a huge success in TvZ, as we are currently seeing bio and mech being played and the matchup looking quite balanced.
I totally agree that TvZ is seeing great variety post-mine nerf, everything from pure mech to varied bio/mech compositions. Really interesting to see which way the meta develops.
However the bio supported by mines styles seems almost obsolete now, which is kinda sad too. It was kinda annoying when it was the only option for terran but it was still a really cool and micro intensive style for both sides.
|
On January 23 2014 21:51 SeXyBaCk wrote:That is not balance. It's not even remotely close. 95% will honestly put their money on the protoss.
like me! on marathonbet they have an e-sport section and they gave me so much money because they made innovation a huge favorite against zest.. every PvT i saw made me put my money on P and i won every time 
it is obvious that PvT is broken, stats are showing it (win rate, number of T players in PL or other tournaments etc.)... but we cant change it, even here on TLnet people are banned if they "whine" about reality. If there is no support of this big community, and commentators, players or coaches then we can't do anything.
|
Russian Federation125 Posts
|
Incorrect, the same no-name was beaten by Cure 2-1.
Final stats in TvP, 4-9.
|
Russian Federation125 Posts
On January 23 2014 23:40 Ghanburighan wrote:Incorrect, the same no-name was beaten by Cure 2-1. Final stats in TvP, 4-9.
I havn't noticed this sorry. By the way Cure is the only terran who won hit TvP bo3 in Code A GSL
|
The majority of the PvT were against SOS and Rain..... I hear those two are pretty great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
