| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Brutaxilos
United States2633 Posts
On November 14 2021 08:14 feardragon wrote: No there is no hope for Protoss. If you do the research there is a swedish Zerg named hOpe and a Korean Terran named HOpe. Be the change you want to see. Good to note that Terran also has a Future too. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3541 Posts
| ||
|
NinjaNight
428 Posts
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this. From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too. No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible. There are plenty of extremely skilled protoss players just like the other 2 races. It just doesn't work like that, overall skill levels of the players averages out pretty closely between each race. And if it did work like that it would probably be because that race is the weakest, cause there needs to be a strong force pulling the good players away from choosing that race. As a former protoss main for years I think if the opponent really knows what they're doing and looking for it should be too easy for them to sniff out what the protoss is doing and counter it versus most builds. And protoss is very inflexible you have to commit to a build and it takes forever to transition out of it if you can at all, I guess that's because the units/tech are extra expensive and slow to build. So the opponent has tons of opportunity to counter you, zerg is super adaptable and can transition to whatever at will with sufficient funds, terran is way more flexible and uncommitted etc... I think toss is too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to mess up their reaction to what you're doing. EDIT: Noticed the guy above me after posting this, I completely agree. It's very hard to be consistent as a protoss, why is that? It's because as I said it's too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to not understand what you're doing, if they do it's too easy to shut down your play. | ||
|
xelnaga_empire
627 Posts
On November 15 2021 15:40 NinjaNight wrote: No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible. Why is EU GM, about 50% Protoss then? If EU players across all races are equally skilled, you would expect 1/3 to be Terran, 1/3 to be Zerg, and 1/3 to be Protoss. Mind you, EU GM was quite balanced before the last patch. After the last patch, the number of Protoss players getting into EU GM increased, while Terran and Zerg players making it into EU GM decreased. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
On November 15 2021 15:40 NinjaNight wrote: No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible. There are plenty of extremely skilled protoss players just like the other 2 races. It just doesn't work like that, overall skill levels of the players averages out pretty closely between each race. And if it did work like that it would probably be because that race is the weakest, cause there needs to be a strong force pulling the good players away from choosing that race. As a former protoss main for years I think if the opponent really knows what they're doing and looking for it should be too easy for them to sniff out what the protoss is doing and counter it versus most builds. And protoss is very inflexible you have to commit to a build and it takes forever to transition out of it if you can at all, I guess that's because the units/tech are extra expensive and slow to build. So the opponent has tons of opportunity to counter you, zerg is super adaptable and can transition to whatever at will with sufficient funds, terran is way more flexible and uncommitted etc... I think toss is too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to mess up their reaction to what you're doing. EDIT: Noticed the guy above me after posting this, I completely agree. It's very hard to be consistent as a protoss, why is that? It's because as I said it's too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to not understand what you're doing, if they do it's too easy to shut down your play. There's nothing wrong with the idea that the top 7-8 players in terms of skill just happen not to have picked a particular race. It is possible. There's also nothing wrong with the idea that there is a balance issue with this race. Here we're dealing with people who pretend to believe that it's bad luck if protoss just don't win that often, which is obviously silly. This is the non-starter option. In a thread about hope for protoss in the future, it doesn't really matter if it's option A or option B, in both cases there is not very much hope, and my advice for myself and any other people rooting for protoss is to not watch a ton of Starcraft as you're not going to have a good experience. If it was option C there would be no reason to stop watching. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16086 Posts
On November 15 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote: There's nothing wrong with the idea that the top 7-8 players in terms of skill just happen not to have picked a particular race. It is possible. There's also nothing wrong with the idea that there is a balance issue with this race. Here we're dealing with people who pretend to believe that it's bad luck if protoss just don't win that often, which is obviously silly. This is the non-starter option. In a thread about hope for protoss in the future, it doesn't really matter if it's option A or option B, in both cases there is not very much hope, and my advice for myself and any other people rooting for protoss is to not watch a ton of Starcraft as you're not going to have a good experience. If it was option C there would be no reason to stop watching. It has been said multiple times by now and you continue to ignore that point / change the subject. PROTOSS WINS PLENTY OF TOURNAMENTS WITH ALL TOP PLAYERS ATTENDING. they just don't win the ones with the highest stakes / prizepool. But given they are played on the same balance patch and with the same player pool, the logical conclusion is that their players just have bad luck in "tier 1" tournaments or some kind of mental problem. Unless you think Zergs and Terrans take it easy in tier 2 tournaments or throw their games so Protoss doesn't get buffed. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
(If anyone wants that bet it's available for anyone) | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16086 Posts
you continue to ignore that point / change the subject | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it? | ||
Poopi
France13017 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly. Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it? That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:33 Poopi wrote: That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void. You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do? That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. Maybe less if Maru isn't there so let's say 30%. It is an immensely profitable bet. | ||
|
Drfilip
Sweden592 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly. Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it? People ignoring a bet that was proposed in an attempt to prove a point is not proving the point. There are a number of explanation as to why that is, including, but not limited to, the way you proposed the bet made it seem like a personal bet initially making any subsequent proposal seem a bit odd; people genuinly don't want to bet, period; and the discussion is disrupted by your persistent proposals making people dislike them because of that. Your arguments are heard, they have been confronted and alternative arguments have been made. You do not show that you have listened and accommodated those argument. This thread is discussing with arguments. You are reducing yourself to "wanna bet that I can ignore what you wrote and pester you with a nonsensical bet?" It's as if you want to be treated as a lesser intellectual and then make yourself a victim. Confront the arguments instead of ignoring/minimizing them! We are not trying to gaslight you. It may seem that way because, as Chairozard tried in 2 separate messages, YOU are the one not showing that you are acknowledging the arguments. If you ignore the arguments, they will be rephrased. This is probably why you feel gaslighted. | ||
|
Poopi
France13017 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:38 Nebuchad wrote: You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do? That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet. Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16086 Posts
So I don't see the point of this bet and how it proves any point. That you don't have any arguments except offering this weird bet over and over is pretty telling I think. Also I don't think Protoss have 33% to win especially with Zest going to military and Trap seemingly having mental problems in higher stakes tournaments. I could theoretically take the bet as 10-1 odds are still pretty good but I won't because I don't bet and because I don't see how taking or not taking the bet proves any point. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:39 Drfilip wrote: People ignoring a bet that was proposed in an attempt to prove a point is not proving the point. There are a number of explanation as to why that is, including, but not limited to, the way you proposed the bet made it seem like a personal bet initially making any subsequent proposal seem a bit odd; people genuinly don't want to bet, period; and the discussion is disrupted by your persistent proposals making people dislike them because of that. Your arguments are heard, they have been confronted and alternative arguments have been made. You do not show that you have listened and accommodated those argument. This thread is discussing with arguments. You are reducing yourself to "wanna bet that I can ignore what you wrote and pester you with a nonsensical bet?" It's as if you want to be treated as a lesser intellectual and then make yourself a victim. Confront the arguments instead of ignoring/minimizing them! We are not trying to gaslight you. It may seem that way because, as Chairozard tried in 2 separate messages, YOU are the one not showing that you are acknowledging the arguments. If you ignore the arguments, they will be rephrased. This is probably why you feel gaslighted. Sorry I might need to be a little clearer: I think people are lying about what they believe. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:41 Poopi wrote: Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap. This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting. When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran. | ||
|
Poopi
France13017 Posts
On November 15 2021 20:51 Nebuchad wrote: This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting. When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran. Well I guess I have to give you an example then  .Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01% - 1000 * 99.9% = 100100 / 100 = 1001 edit: Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value. Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet? | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12515 Posts
On November 15 2021 21:12 Poopi wrote: Well I guess I have to give you an example then .Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01 - 1000 * 99.9 = 100100. Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value. Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet? I take the bet both times. | ||
|
dbRic1203
Germany2655 Posts
On November 15 2021 21:12 Poopi wrote: Well I guess I have to give you an example then .Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01 - 1000 * 99.9 = 100100. Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value. Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet? Your calculations are wrong. You said the probabilities are 0.01% and 99.99%, but you calculated with 1% and 99%. The correct expected value would be 20 000 000 * 0.0001 - 1000 * 0.9999 = 1000.10 | ||
|
Poopi
France13017 Posts
On November 15 2021 21:33 dbRic1203 wrote: Your calculations are wrong. You said the probabilities are 0.01% and 99.99%, but you calculated with 1% and 99%. The correct expected value would be 20 000 000 * 0.0001 - 1000 * 0.9999 = 1000.10 Yes it is 0.0001 and 0.999 (not 0.9999) so it is 1001, thanks for pointing it out, edited the original post | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Monday Night Weeklies
GSL
OSC
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
IntoTheTV X SOOP
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
