… When you say that Terrans deserve more MMR- which is the thread title, a significant part of what you’ve been on about, and what wheasy has been repeatedly saying- that’s about balance. If a given player has X rank, switches races, and in the tiniest amount of games gets to X+400 rank, that means they’re - sort of definitionally - being hampered by the first race being weak.
Here, let’s give you some quotes to demonstrate that that’s part of your point:
I’m not going to go through the rest of the middle - It’s quite tiring; honestly, and I think this demonstrates that this has been a central theme.
I specifically asked this and you didn’t say “no”, and this was after you had elaborated so I can only presume you do not disagree with this analysis of it.
The basic point is as thus: There’s an axiom you believe:
And that idea is not something that we view in the same light as you do.
Specifically, in my case, the fact that Terran MMR is on mean average lower than Protoss or Zerg MMR does not carry value, it has no merit besides being a fun statistical fact about the game data. This is because there are a ridiculous number of bad Terran players - as is evidenced by the fact they are in Bronze and Silver.
These objectively bad players are probably quite casual players, and they are players who have meaningfully lacking multiple fundamental skills like being unable to macro and/or micro, being unable to follow a build order, being unable to reliably use the correct control group of units when split - if they even split / have more than two unit groups! We assume this because of how rapidly players get themselves out of the low metal leagues when dedicated.
Okay, so it doesn’t make much sense that Terran would have this disproportionate number of the game’s bad players. Logically speaking, there’s three races, so the distribution of players should be relatively equal, right?
But that’s not how that works. Terran is the most popular to new players. It’s the race that works the most like the way most RTS factions work, which is done because it’s comparatively intuitive for people. It’s the race whose campaign has the tightest gameplay, which has multiple things that tend that particularly appeal to players trying to find their footing like its defensive mechanics and wall construction, which features Relateable Humans, etc.
No matter what or how many parts of the system a player does not yet understand, Terran appeals to them because it has many things that make it more comfortable.
As players improve in skill, they will value comfort less. That’s the thing that makes people do challenge runs, after all. They have big skill and want to show it off, and the only way to do that is to remove comforts.
So, players who are bad are more likely to pick Terran. That doesn’t mean that Terrans are worse in any way; it means only that Bronze players are bad and there’s a high number of Bronze Terrans. A Grandmaster Terran is GM because they’re just that good at the game.
Unless you’re going to now goalpost what I believe the middle 400-odd posts of the thread were about, in which case there’s actually no point in attempting communication.
If that isn’t the case, and you are asserting you have been misinterpreted, I’m going to go back to how you kept misreading what got said when four people explained it in different wording in various lengths, both about why dividing the playerbase by its MMR is not an invalid method of data analysis, and why “Terrans are inferior” is not equivalent to “Bad players pick Terran”.
How can I give you information that I have that demonstrates why I do not believe your point if, multiple times, you either don’t read it or choose to not process the words that have been given to you?
Basically, it means that we’re still at a total impasse because you won’t actually think critically about the words you glance over.
Secondarily, you continue doing the thing that only bad people do and start name calling people, insulting random features you have chosen about their character (“mr split by mmr”), being sexist (“annoying girl”, your gaslighting assertion) and using diminutive language (“little one”, “kiddo”, “sweetheart”), and bringing up your successful life* -
These are things that generally rub people the wrong way - and you know it does so - but aren’t actually comments that tend to be against policy rules and thus don’t tend to be banworthy.
Unfortunately for you, these are not insulting nor do they particularly succeed at demonstrating that you’re some kind of Tough Guy - it’s an Internet tough guy-ism. Congratulations. You are on the internet, not in person, so you can’t effectively throw mud or punches***.
*
*And, particularly for this one, usually most of the people who do this don’t actually have the cool life they’re talking about because if they did they probably wouldn’t be as stupid as they constantly demonstrate by choosing to bring it up. For example, if you can really start and run a successful business to retire, your intelligence** and knowledge are enough that you probably don’t need to read even fifty posts to realize “Ah, debating here is pointless”. I’m a stubborn git and I rationally knew I should have stopped trying back in December.****
** IQ scores are not intelligence. Myers-Briggs personality tests are also shams. Please stop using them. If your brain exists you should know these things.]
*** of course if you could punch me; you probably would. I’m asserting this because you’re exactly like all the ones that did punch me. *****
Lapsing into these behavioural patterns are ones that indicate that you should stop being part of the conversation. Either you have nothing left to say, or you are at a strict impasse with the other people involved and no amount of wording will be convincing.
These are not things you should fall back on as debate tactics, because they don’t actually represent debating intellectually nor with faith.
This is also the basic content of the earlier post where I just cussed at you earlier, in this post -
Why did I do it that way? It’s really clean and simple and you can’t misinterpret it.
This is because the basis of communication is getting someone else to understand you, which means that you need to be clear about what you are saying.
That’s the entire basis of points that got said close to the head of this whole affair:
This bullet point is actually the problem. Terran has more unskilled players.
That does not mean “Terrans [generically] are worse”, it means that “Bad players are more likely to pick Terran”.
Which, as has been harped on somehow not enough times, is a very different takeaway; and yet, six hundred posts ago and still continuing;
Anyway, we’re nine hundred posts past this:
And multiple topics past this:
And we’re still here. At these quotes. It really hurts. Except now, I see two active trolls instead of two stubborn mules; and one in particular is just the worst vile-spewing sort that makes me long for a block button.
Unfortunately, I’m sure this post didn’t get actually given thought, the same way the other ones didn’t get processed at all. So why am I making this post?
***** Because of shared stupidity.