|
Big thanks to Arcalious that built SC2 Player Finder http://www.sc2pf.com/ as I am again able to run the stats I did a couple times during the beta on the race-specific population of the worldwide top SC2 players.
You can find the results over here : https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AvtPWMS53wIgdGNINlVjQXZfc1NIVGxTV2czamVESHc&hl=fr&authkey=CKy89ogO
(again, I used google documents for practical reasons)
Please note that so far, the number of players being displayed is limited to 10 000 players, and that the sorting by region feature is not yet implemented. As soon as that's available, I will run the stats for all 7 regions...well, until I get bored or there's a consensus that it's useless.
So far, here's what I've noted (besides captain obvious observations):
- Much closer race distribution than during the beta for the top20.
- Terran still dominates the pool in the top50-200 range.
- Total race distribution is very similar to the beta (less randoms, difference almost all goes to protoss)
- Winrates and games played for Top20 Terrans is far worse than Protoxons (Day[9]-style) and Zergs, while the discrepancy almost disappear as soon as Top50. My own opinion on this : it's caused only by the 3 best win rates in the top20, IdrA's sick 88.9%, HuK's 79.6% and KiWiKaKi's slumping 75.7%.
These observations lead me to think that - in the current state of game experience/knowledge - SC2 seems rather balanced at the top level, but the huge number of Terrans at the "sub-top" level indicates that the race is easier to win with vs non-Top opponents. Despite win rates being similar, there's roughly 50% more Terrans in those ranking levels (Top50-200) than the near-total diamond population, there as to be a reason for that.
Actually, when you think about it, the fact that the win rates are almost the same at, say, the Top50 is perfectly normal : the players with the better win rates would rank higher (and inversely) than just the Top50 given that they play enough games and since the average number of games played at Top20 and Top50 is exactly the same for Terrans, it's just that there is a lot more Terrans able to reach the "Top 50 level of win rate" compared to protoxons or zergs. The observation is almost the same for the Top100, with an average number of games played slightly lower.
It is possible that such a discrepancy is caused by a greater number of skilled Terrans? If skill in SC2 is a correlation of the number of games played, it is highly unlikely, unless the skilled Terrans are (magically) able to find equally good practice partners that don't perform well in ladder (or do not put up the volume of games)!
|
On August 04 2010 09:00 Tamerlane wrote:Big thanks to the guy (I don't even know his nickname!) that built SC2 Player Finder http://www.sc2pf.com/ as I am again able to run the stats I did a couple times during the beta on the race-specific population of the worldwide top SC2 players.
That would be me. Arcalious. I will add a filter by region before I go to bed.
Nice job processing the data. Let me know if you need anything else.
|
On August 04 2010 12:49 Arcalious wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2010 09:00 Tamerlane wrote:Big thanks to the guy (I don't even know his nickname!) that built SC2 Player Finder http://www.sc2pf.com/ as I am again able to run the stats I did a couple times during the beta on the race-specific population of the worldwide top SC2 players. That would be me. Arcalious. I will add a filter by region before I go to bed. Nice job processing the data. Let me know if you need anything else.
you sir are a hero
|
Nice job though people like Idra are obviously a large influence on the stats when the sample size gets low.
|
Canada3139 Posts
^
Well done, a player search would be nice though^^
|
On August 04 2010 13:15 NuKedUFirst wrote:
^
Well done, a player search would be nice though^^
You talking to me or Tamerline?
If me, then... I'll be adding Player search soon. Just added filtering by region and I'll be adding filtering by race tomorrow. Also need to build indexes for both searches to make them faster. Right now the best way to player search is set the page size to 15000, then use ctrl-f to find the players you want.
|
Do you guys think its bad to have the identifier (the 3 digit number) available freely to anyone? Do the top players get harassed by randoms all day long? Lol
|
The skill cap for terran is a lot lower than it is for protos and zerg. Zerg having the highest skill cap and the highest skill bar.
|
On August 04 2010 16:24 Disposition wrote:
Do you guys think its bad to have the identifier (the 3 digit number) available freely to anyone? Do the top players get harassed by randoms all day long? Lol
Well, I bet that one of the reasons for smurfing by top players in previous installments was to avoid being harassed, now that it is no longer possible, I guess that some of them are getting some level of harassment with which they would have to deal anyway.
And since you can add players by simply browsing the various ladders or looking at match history, having the character code available to everyone doesn't change things so much...
|
Just nobody tell Blizzard that Zerg have the best win ratios at the highest levels, or we may have 3 food Hydras *shudders*
anyway, thanks for the info!
|
Well done thans. Always nice to find stuff like this
|
All the top 100 are smart and picking terran.
|
On August 04 2010 21:35 ghettohobbit2 wrote:
Just nobody tell Blizzard that Zerg have the best win ratios at the highest levels, or we may have 3 food Hydras *shudders*
anyway, thanks for the info!
remove IdrA and that win rate would pretty much equalize 
|
On August 04 2010 17:53 Looc wrote:
The skill cap for terran is a lot lower than it is for protos and zerg. Zerg having the highest skill cap and the highest skill bar.
Dude, if you look at the stats it says the exact opposite of what you are saying!
Ill explain; among the best players there are most terrans, which means if you are really good at sc2 terran is favored and thus have the higher skillcap...
|
Woops. Meant to edit this post, not make a new one.
M'bad D:
We now return you to our regularly-scheduled posts.
|
I don't think there is enough context to start talking about skill caps. This is all raw data, and it's all very interesting, but the game is still in its infancy. We won't be able to apply a lot of this data to anything meaningful until after the game is out and there are people with wins/losses in the thousands. And even then, there are a lot of factors to take into account before we start saying things like "most of the best players play Terran; therefore Terran must have a higher skill cap."
Again, it's very good to have access to this data and it's definitely very interesting. But it's important to remember that correlation does not necessarily imply causation.
One of the main reasons I didn't immediately dismiss the main post is that he used phrases like "these observations lead me to think that," or "It is possible that," or "The observation is" rather than things like "this means that" or "therefore we can conclude that" or anything of that nature.
Tamerlane clearly realizes that his findings are just raw data, and can only really be used to formulate hypotheses.
And to me, that just makes it much more respectable.
Good for you, Tamerlane, for being systematic and using the scientific process to avoid coming to false conclusions 
|
On August 06 2010 06:39 Seltsam wrote:
I don't think there is enough context to start talking about skill caps. This is all raw data, and it's all very interesting, but the game is still in its infancy. We won't be able to apply a lot of this data to anything meaningful until after the game is out and there are people with wins/losses in the thousands. And even then, there are a lot of factors to take into account before we start saying things like "most of the best players play Terran; therefore Terran must have a higher skill cap."
Again, it's very good to have access to this data and it's definitely very interesting. But it's important to remember that correlation does not necessarily imply causation.
I was just pointing out what the statistics actually said.
I agree with you that the statistics validity is questionable in many ways. Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
