That was my question. Why, on earth, could the MMR be that low? And that low that consistently, for that many years. Every attempt you’ve had to explain it either came back with variables that served to prove my hypothesis that Terran was more difficult, or were completely subjective variables that could never be proven.
Yeah but thats a subjective question.
I mean there were some objective facts, like for example design or that terran is the tutorial/campaign race and that its objectively the most familiar/similiar to other rts factions (because of design) or that terran is the most popular race and therefore random race selection is not given. But yes, indeed, the conclusions for the point at hand cant be proven by the metrics at hand.
But because of those mentioned points almost no one is actually questioning why the difference of terran mmr is this big. Especially after we have established that its just because of the terran distribution of bronze and silver. Most guys would just shrug and say hey those guys in bronze and silver are noobs, who cares, they have literally 0 clue about what they are doing or about sc2 in general.
2 Likes
Ya’ll still on this?
1 Like
It’s like those games where one player is floating the structures and the other guy has nothing left that can attack air. The fight will continue until we go a few minutes without anyone mining, producing, or killing…
1 Like
Let’s go over all of Kelthar’s posts in the thread, okay? Because I want you to realize that you say this but it, again, didn’t happen.
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
33
Alright, so that’s all 36 posts.
Did you notice how NONE OF THEM mentioned being newer? I sure did.
You know how I knew this was going to be the result? Because I actually paid attention to the thread and what people said.
You know who did talk about new players?
Me! I did that. Except I wasn’t actually talking about new players.
That’s the point that was being made in posts starting at 340:
I mentioned new players as a part of an argument - your argument with Kelthar included, particularly,
Which people were upset by because you asserted something that didn’t happen. Just like how you’ve been asserting statements about other things that have no evidence (unsupported data are not evidence).
And as we can see from this post, you’re just making things up without thinking about it.
4 Likes
Because People Who Are Bad have an increased probability of playing Terran for numerous reasons that have been stated, repeatedly, namely:
They function the way that many RTS have at least one faction function, therefore, it is very likely to be very familiar.
Supporting this, the reason many RTS have a faction that works that way is because it is intuitive for new players.
People like things that are familiar when they are learning a new game.
The Zerg and Protoss campaigns give you a Zerg/Protoss that is very dramatically different from their ladder races, which is not true of Terran’s. So a story player will naturally be most comfortable with Terran, too.
The in-game tutorials available for Terran are better at doing their job because of where the different nuances of the races are (ex. Overlord spreading isn’t something that any tutorial mentions).
Terran, as a race, has more mechanics that are ‘qol’-esque like range and heal beam/SCV repair; and it has a focus on defensive tools (bunkers / tanks), which are things that both new and weak players find attractive while they focus on “uh, how does this game work” like beats.
Terran, as a race, has a very high intrinsic ‘hype’ to its micro due to the explosive amount of additional benefit it gives: This makes people want to play it, because they want that feeling of out-skilling their opponent.
3 Likes
Didn’t read all that, but maybe you’re right, maybe he said it on another thread. It was still only a 2 or so weeks ago.
Why would being familiar make it more popular amongst bad players specifically? It would likely make it popular amongst ALL players.
BUT that’s not even the issue. Maybe this is a rational argument (I won’t say it’s fully fleshed out, but there’s certainly some good points you made). What I’ve been asking is what makes these players “bad?”
First, it was that they must be “newer.” Proved that wrong. Then it was, “they must be casual and play fewer games.” Proved that wrong. So, all other factors being even (no, other factors are never even), we should at least be able to agree that what data we do have points to Terran being more difficult.
If it didn’t, why on earth would they have pointed to those explanations to begin with?
You can definitely make the case that our data is incomplete (Or rather, you don’t have to). But stating a metric and then instantly discounting its validity once the results are unfavorable to your point is textbook goal-posting.
Yes. But my experience with all friends has been that a player who is weak will not switch races - therefore, as rank climbs, the influence of “it’s familiar” declines.
Not relevant.
That’s the whole point you’re missing.
It doesn’t suggest this, so we can’t agree because that’s what you want it to say but it’s not what it says.
3 Likes
Anecdotal.
WHAT?! How is it not relevant? Making claims and then proving them is exactly what science even is. How on earth can you have a conversation once you use “I’ve decided I’m right and no longer need to prove my claims.”
“Why is there an MMR disparity?”
“Terran players are all just bad.”
How do you know they’re bad?
Doesn’t matter. I know this one guy…
Like, wow. You were relatively reasonable at the start, but I see you just jumped off the deep end with the others.
An anecdote is not fallacious. It is likely to not be statistically significant, but these are different qualities. A hundred people is not a significant sample of the SC2 players, but it’s what I have so it’s what I’ll use.
Because you’re asking a measurement on how they are bad, in what ways they are bad, in what capacity can one measure bad-ness.
What I’m saying is that “Bronze players are bad” doesn’t really care about why or how those players are bad.
The same way that you can have a conversation while constantly strawmanning what other people are saying instead of actually thinking about it?
Which is to say, not.
Fortunately, I’m not deciding I’m right, I’m trying to point out why people disagree with you.
Nobody is saying this, has said this, or will say this in seriousness.
Every time you suggest or imply someone has said this it makes me anti-care about anything you could have to say.
Just like how you decided sex and/or gender has any relevance! It doesn’t. It just serves to make you look bad and you should shove off because bringing it up stupidly automatically makes you lose?
The secret you’re missing here is that I had to read two hundred stupid posts by you.
Shockingly, I don’t like stupid people and become progressively more abrasive and unable to be “reasonable” when people ignore valid points, make things up, argue poorly, don’t read, etc.
4 Likes
You literally said you didn’t have to prove your claims.
How on earth could making a claim and asking for proof NOT be relevant, man. Think.
It’s fine to disagree. Come up with a reason you disagree, then post the data that allowed you to arrive at that conclusion. Once I ask you to provide evidence for a claim and you tell me it’s irrelevant, there’s no long a point in discussion.
What valid points? The only data any of you have come up with in years was to stratify the data we already had, then yell "see, all the the Terran players are bad. That’s not remotely a conclusion you can draw based upon that.
The crux of scientific discussion is disagreement. I’m all for it. Once people decide that no data matters (specifically when they, themselves asked for the data), I being to lose my patience.
And by the way, you stratify data to look at it uniformly and closely, not to just draw broad generalizations like “they’re all just bad” out of a hat and be done with it.
Somehow its Not OK to say that there are 8k people in silver or Bronze who Just suck more but it is ok to say that based on the Data terran is Just Harder(meaning the Other races are Just easier). You know…a broad generalization…
4 Likes
I did not say this. Did you not read what I said?
The same way that you can have a conversation while constantly strawmanning what other people are saying instead of actually thinking about it?
Every time you suggest or imply someone has said this it makes me anti-care about anything you could have to say.
This is you, engaging in these behaviors again.
I do not think “Bronze players are bad” is a claim that requires any degree of proof. To no small extent, it is the definition and function of leagues at large to indicate that the player’s overall skill level.
Additionally, for this matter and this subsequent one:
This was not what you said. You said
What makes these players bad
and my reply was
What makes them bad is not relevant
From my point of view, you then changed your mind about what you had said.
I did not need any additional data that has not been to arrive at my conclusions.
I also don’t have any idea what argument you’re asking me for my reasoning on.
To a first approximation, most things that have been said in this thread by each side.
This isn’t true, but ok, if you say so.
This isn’t what happened, and is you continuing to do the things that prompted me to have said these:
The same way that you can have a conversation while constantly strawmanning what other people are saying instead of actually thinking about it?
Every time you suggest or imply someone has said this it makes me anti-care about anything you could have to say.
In the real context, yes, it was a reasonable conclusion. More specifically, because the actual conclusion was
An overwhelming number of players who are bad coincidentally play Terran
which is a reasonable conclusion to draw from the actual given argument that the average rank of Terran players dramatically changes when you cut off the top or bottom, which should not happen if the population actually distributes skill evenly across races.
The same way that you can have a conversation while constantly strawmanning what other people are saying instead of actually thinking about it?
Every time you suggest or imply someone has said this it makes me anti-care about anything you could have to say.
Oh look you did it a third time!
1 Like
You are quite literally the only person who keeps saying this!
Nobody, not one of them has said “all the terran players are bad.” What has been said is that “low league players are bad.”
The fact that you feel a need to quantify “what bad is” is entirely irrelevant to the point that low league players, regardless of race, are bad.
But since you insist: poor macro and macro cycles, lack of map awareness, little to no micro, weird or generally terrible compositions, poor decision making, are just a few of the various things that make bad players bad.
Again, none of these are limited to the terrans specifically. That has never ever been the argument, but its an argument you keep trying to strawman.
4 Likes
Then don’t care. I’m not going to beat you up if you stop responding.
And you’re using the same strawman as them. I never once said that Terran Bronze players weren’t bad. I said they were ever so slightly less bad than their Bronze Zerg and Protoss counterparts.
And based on their distribution in bottom 50% they are actually Not worse than their zerg or protoss counterparts. There are Just simply more terrans in those leagues. This is literally it.
3 Likes
Yes, that’s how MMR works. Thank you. As you get more MMR you are promoted, as you have less you are demoted. Please explain more about the world Captain “I split people by MMR and then they had the same MMR…”
Okay, why do you think this? Data or vibes are both fine.
You have had this explained to you and continue to strawman it. Why?
4 Likes
You are literally the only one who makes fun of it while the Others actually know what i was saying with that. Kinda cringe.
It was explained to you multiple Times by multiple people.
Maybe you should Stop.
Exactly. So how exactly does that Link to terran being Harder ? And also you Dodged the Thing about it being a generalization.
2 Likes