[G] Zerg Tears - Page 15

On August 06 2010 12:53 Endymion wrote:
So what exactly is the point of this post? Are you complaining about Zergs crying about imbalance, or just saying that they have absolutely no balance or validity? Or maybe your just saying that IdrA cries a lot?

On August 07 2010 05:22 kGold wrote:
The only defense could be that while there are fewer Zerg players than the other races on Korea, there are more BETTER Zerg players per capita of Zerg players in Korea vs. the other races.

I can believe it because Zerg is the hardest race to play so the beginner-intermediate players will show more of a tendency to stay away from Zerg.

On August 07 2010 06:17 kajeus wrote:

Ok, here's the data that is directly relevant to YOUR hypothesis..

On August 07 2010 05:48 Xapti wrote:
Didn't find this very funny. It'd be better if it wasn't insulting the legitimacy of ZvT problems so much.
I wondered the same things. It feels really disrespectful and/or ignorant to zerg players.

On August 07 2010 03:12 Rah wrote:


I'm pointing out that zergs are making excuses for losses that are their own fault. And they're jumping on the imba bandwagon to save their egos. Simple as that. You make the game less fun for yourself by blaming imbalance rather than trying to get good at your race. It doesn't upset me at all, so there's no complaining involved here, just sharing my brilliant insight, trying to help some people who obviously need to step off the wagon and think about things straight for a change. Chill out and enjoy the game, rather than raging about a patch that isn't going to come until there's concrete data on Blizzard's end, not just raging zergs. Take the feedback however you want. I'm done getting trolled. =p

On August 07 2010 06:17 kajeus wrote:

Ok, here's the data that is directly relevant to YOUR hypothesis:

4,992 of 81,112 zergs worldwide are diamond players. That's 6.15%.

6,144 of 137,942 terrans worldwide are diamond players. That's 4.5%.

7,420 of 140,812 protoss worldwide are diamond players. That's 5.3%.

So, at first glance, there is mild support for what you're saying -- but these numbers are pretty similar.

On August 07 2010 06:17 kajeus wrote:

Ok, here's the data that is directly relevant to YOUR hypothesis:

4,992 of 81,112 zergs worldwide are diamond players. That's 6.15%.

6,144 of 137,942 terrans worldwide are diamond players. That's 4.5%.

7,420 of 140,812 protoss worldwide are diamond players. That's 5.3%.

So, at first glance, there is mild support for what you're saying -- but these numbers are pretty similar.

Now, there are 6.15% of zergs worldwide in diamond. Isn't 5% the expected amount? Then there are 1.15% (933) more zergs in diamond worldwide than we would expect. What if we pretend those 933 zergs were in lower leagues and reassign their spots? In other words, what if we adjust for the hypothesized higher skill level of zerg players? If there are 4,992 zergs in diamond worldwide, and there are 933 more zergs than we'd expect, then there are 4,059 zergs in diamond. This, of course, is about 5% of the total number of zergs. If we take the unexpected zergs and put them in lower leagues and assume that those 933 diamond spots are taken up by terran players (because only 4.5% of all terrans are in diamond, but that doesn't matter), then zergs, at 4,059, take up 19.74% of 20,564 total diamond players. This is very close to what we'd expect, given the overall distribution. 20.54% of all players worldwide are zerg.

In other words, there is a HIGHER proportion of all zerg players who make it to diamond than the expected level of 5%. If we assume that this is because there are more good zerg players than bad zerg players (rather than that zerg is OP), then we should move the "unexpected" diamond zergs down to lower leagues, reassign those 933 free spots, and recalculate. This leaves us with 19.44% of all diamond spots being occupied by zerg players. This is very close to what we'd expect, given that 20.54% of all players worldwide are zerg.

But really, if zerg is underpowered and they still have such a solid footing in diamond despite their small numbers, that's amazing! Either there are no glaring balance issues or good zerg players are just really fucking good.

On August 07 2010 06:29 Logo wrote:


The problem with statistical analysis like this is it's not actually based on any sort of anything. If you aren't going to use some actual methods of statistical analysis with math to back it up, just don't even bother.

For example you don't even account for the fact that Zerg is a smaller sample size so there's a higher chance that the result will deviate from the expected value. For all we know all three values are within an acceptable deviation from the expected value.

What? Getting to diamond /= balance. I am a diamond zerg because platinum players are much worse, not because zerg is on an equal footing to the other races. When I look at those numbers what I see is that players at lower leagues cant even play the race because its so unforgiving and the majority of zerg players are players who are willing to stick with the race and try and figure things out and get better.

On August 07 2010 06:46 kajeus wrote:

Do you want me to do a t-test or something? I mean, I could... or you could. If you accept everything up to the point of demanding one t-test on the difference between 4223 (expected diamond zerg population) and 4059 (skill-adjusted diamond zerg population), then I'm doing ok.

I'd like to do a simple binomial test on this difference to see the probability of that difference having popped up by chance. But I gotta read back over an old paper and remember how to do that. And I don't have time for that right now. D:

So... I'll try to later. Or you could do it!

((By the way, on your point about ZvT, Dustin Browder has said that high-level ZvT is 50/50.))

On August 07 2010 06:52 Logo wrote:


Everything is 50/50 with good matchmaking regardless of balance =/. Also browder said that back in early/mid July.

And no that's not really the only problem I have with the analysis. I mean the numbers aren't even valuable numbers to datamine.

Simply put the data needed to statistically determine any sort of racial imbalance is not available to us as players. Your time would be better spent statistically analyzing tournament results.

On August 07 2010 06:55 kajeus wrote:
Actually, I'd say perceived tournament outcomes CAUSED this perception that TvZ is so imbalanced. People watch qxc turtle Sheth through three waves of ultras and call imba. Later, IdrA destroying everyone in KotB is completely ignored when Silver beats IdrA 2-0. So people are dumb about tournament results, imo. That's the opposite of science.

On August 07 2010 04:49 kajeus wrote:

My response is way late, but I guess that's what I get for having other stuff to do.

http://sc2ranks.com/stats

Of all players on Korean servers: 8.56% Random, 39.21% Protoss, 34.51% Terran, 17.73% Zerg
Diamond league as a whole: 9.74% Random, 36.11% Protoss, 29.87% Terran, 24.28% Zerg.

LOOK at that gigantic gap. Now, % for each race of only Korean diamond players would be ideal, but oh well.

Look at the percentage that plays zerg in each region: 20.35% NA, 21.13% Europe, 17.73% Korea, 24.20% Taiwan, 20.46% SE Asia, 21.71% Russia, 17.53% Latin America.

Now imagine any reasonable weighted average of those numbers. Around 21% maybe? Less? HOWEVER, what percentage of all diamond players are zerg? 24.28%!! That is not only CLOSE to what would be expected, but ABOVE what would be expected.

((Terrans are 36% of the top 50 in Korea, btw... Zergs are 24% -- way MORE than the percentage who play the race in all of Korea))

On August 07 2010 02:44 TLOBrian wrote:


Too busy locking the threads from zerg players talking about how Ts are overpowered.

Please lock this thread Mods!

On August 07 2010 08:12 Half wrote:


Read your post carefully three times then draw a conclusion from the data you presented.

I trust it will not support your conclusion.

You just basically showed its easier to get into Diamond league as zerg, but it is less popular among players overall.