Didnt really read any of that because its meaningless because i think i know what you imply:
You imply because there are many bronze players who play less there must be some higher up players who play more in order to cancel that out (i mean they actually do but ok) and you think, they should be rewarded with so much mmr, that it cancels out the mmr difference ?
If you mean that, then no. Because time investment compared to achieved skill is not invariant. Meaning its important how good you already are. If you arent good at something at first its important to get some time in. You will improve much. But same time spent will not grant you same improvement if you are much better. For example in your first 1000 matches in sc2 you will for example go from 2000 mmr to 3000 mmr. Thats 1k difference. But same 1000 games for a 6000 mmr grandmaster would mean maybe from 6000 mmr to 6100 mmr meaning 100 mmr improvement
This is called learning curve. Look up at: www´.valamis. com/hub/learning-curve
There are so many pictures. You will get it. Im sure of it.
To sum this up: no, when the higher ranked players are canceling out the activity of the lower leagues, it does NOT mean that they will also cancel out the mmr difference. This is what i mean by saying i could make every bronze player instantly gold in 1 hour (like +500 mmr). But you certainly wont improve from 4500 mmr to 5000 mmr in 1 hour. Btw on same website i linked there is also explained that time invested is not everything. There are dozens and dozens of other factors that are important if you want to improve at something. Time invested is just only 1 factor.
Yes, what does that mean? You tell me. And afterwards prove it.
Also you need to provide proof that they actually play more to a significant amount (because canceling out a bunch of silver and bronze guys doesnt take a lot of effort collectively) and actually achieve the same. And even if you can do it you still have the argument to defeat of the learning curve. Because diminishing returns is a thing
Depending on the skill level of course. Sometimes terran might be harder, sometimes protoss might be harder, sometimes zerg might be harder. We cannot prove it or know it. We only can speculate.
Also because of the disparity between pro scene (where it should be balanced) and below that skill level we cannot make generalizations. Something you say i do like everytime but it is actually you who does it. Meaning you are saying “terran is harder”. In what terms? Where? When? For all time, doesnt matter the balance? On which skill level?
This is just such a lame and generic statement. Without proof or any logical argument.
Btw just anectodical: Serral is the best player. Serral is known for not putting as much time into sc2 compared to other pros. Interesting point, huh? Maybe activity is not the only thing worth noting?
You say this like its a random thing instead of something that a team spent the better part of a decade working towards. Like, go ahead and argue they weren’t successful all you want, but trying to appeal to “well obviously there has to be a hardest one!” is going to be dead on arrival.
I can not believe that I missed that point, when this thread finally got the first 1000 replies. I hope that one day this thread will have more replies than Dragunblader’s thread views, I believe in you guys!
They balance for the top. Not for all skill levels.
If you think they’ve succeeded in this, then you must be 100% okay with Protoss not winning any Premier tournaments this whole year? I’m going to assume you think that’s not right…
I would argue that because lower leagues aren’t the focus of balance, that means that it is justified and reasonable to only look the top half of the game when drawing a conclusion, and completely disregard the bottom half.
This is not actually relevant argumentation. Do you understand this? It is not contradictory to hold two opinions that can be manipulated to look like they’re opposed.
Understand that you do the same thing to Sentry’s evidence. Why should they bother? Because they are trying to convince you of something.
The reason Sentry says X isn’t proof is because it isn’t convincing or because it relies on some axiom that Sentry doesn’t believe in, so you need to demonstrate why there’s truth in that underlying assumption or create lack of faith in the conviction that led to the things that Sentry does believe in via argumentation.
Indeed, evidence is not proof of an argument. It is supportive of an argument by nature, and people will definitely agree that with enough of it, evidence becomes a proof by itself.
By the way, the guy you are chatting to is a 5800 mmr terran player. You’re being trolled. He once begged me to 1v1 him because I hid on a barcode account and would post screenshots of my wins. They used to deny that I was grandmaster. At the end of HotS I switched to a named account, wrecked him and his buddies each 3-0, ended up 11-0 or whatever, and then went back to a barcode. It was easy, too. My mmr wasn’t in his range because I am not a tryhard. I play on occasion. I just googled some builds and gave them a go and it 3-0’d him. One was a roach bane. I just amoved into his natural and he died. Thanks to his mmr I ended up rank 38 in GM. It got me wondering what would happen if I went at it hard. I mean I clapped a 5800 terran 3 times in a row because I googled some builds. The sky is the limit. I shot up to 6300 mmr and got bored. Didn’t play for a week. Came back and bombed back down to my usual 5500. Now I dab on gm noobz with swarm hosts because they are the worst units in the game and still net 5200. It’s frankly a meaningless number because you don’t know the scale parameter. You have to know the standard deviation of the population. I suspect 5200 now is better than 5500 from 7 years ago. It’s not that I’ve gotten better, in fact I am worse now than ever, it’s just that there was a huge drop in difficulty around the time covid hit. I suspect “long covid” had a disproportionate effect on SC2 skills. It’s like the talent pool dove off a cliff. Anyway that’s how I know who you are talking to. My 300 iq can spot the same posting style from lightyears away. It’s the same pattern recognition that makes sc2 so boring for me. Frankly if Elon gets a mars base setup I going to say adios to earth. I want off this flipping planet, lmao. After mars, I am headed for Europa. I just want as far away from civilization as possible. I will take my robotics and computers and AI projects with me. You know, once robotics are totally self-sustaining. We’re getting there. You can buy machines that build machines. Europa here we come!
I don’t even mind the idea of living in an ice bunker. Women gotta paint the walls a new color every year and put out new decorations for every season. I could legit live in an ice bunker 100 miles under Europa’s surface and I’d finally have peace. No more L&G’s to harangue you. If they try to come out here they wouldn’t even make the journey. Can’t ezmode the sc ladder so definitely can’t thread the needle between life and death on Europa. Transcendence. That’s what will happen when mankind colonizes mars.
Really, the only thing holding us back is fusion or a kugelblitz. There’s talk that the next particle collider may make a black hole and if so then the first kugelblitz will be born shortly thereafter. Fusion is a matter of material science. They have too many energy losses in the coils and to stop that they need a room temp super conductor. But they need something even harder to achieve, they need a 3D printable super conductor. It’s likely that the first viable fusion reactor will be AI designed, and the shape will be bazaar and nobody will know how it works, and that’s why it has to be 3d printed. That’s where Neuralink comes in. After getting the brain chip implanted, you can code your own AIs to enhance your own intelligence. Finally, we can understand the fusion reactors that have taken us to Europa.
once microsoft takes over the wheel for sc2 they need to give out massive amounts of money for free to all those protoss pros to hopefully close the wage gap.
True. Parting didn’t even bother to participate in the GSL qualifiers whereas soO, TY and ForGG all play in ASL and GSL. Terran is still 100k short before it’s second in earnings. Anyone else hyped for a SoO GSL win?
I assumed they played less. They dont play less overall but bronze players do play less than silver league players and so on. Meaning those guys in bronze evidently dont put as much work in meaning its ok that they are placed there.
Meaning my point of view is still correct. To this day you havent presented any logical argument against my point of view. But keep in mind: we dont have proof for anything. We cannot know anything for certain. We just have evidence, that could support our point of view.
And while i have strong proof of concepts for my point of view and also a lot of evidence, you dont have any of these at all. Your whole point of view is: avg mmr of terran is lower based on this data and this means terran is harder. This isnt convincing at all. This is just a very lame generalization
… 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?
Meanwhile you throw out terms like “variance” which is just a measure like standard deviation. It measures the average distance between data points. For instance: a sample population of 3 players has 3000 MMR, 3100 MMR, and 3200 MMR. The Standard deviation is 100, the variance is the (standard deviation)^2 or 10000.
Meanwhile, there’s still unaccounted for added activity that’s going unrewarded.
Wow you read a book and finally understood what i was saying.
Is that supposed to be a counter argument for anything?
Because its not. I used variance to explain to you that seniority doesnt mean ALL terrans have played more. They might as a whole population because of seniority but that doesnt mean that they cannot have the most amount of newbies or people that dont really play at all.
And terran has the most amount of people that barely play at all. That is now factual.
Yes, idk why i never looked at this stat. But now we know. Those people in bronze dont put the work in. Who cares?
Learning curve maybe? Do you expect that a few extra games will do the trick? I even linked you a website with a lot of pictures and there was even a summary at the end telling you that putting in time is not the only important measurement and wont get you to the best of the best. Because there are many other things as: coaching, watching replays and analysing them, watching pro scene, trying to understand the game etc etc. For example both of you, wheasy and you, didnt know about akrij and how easy it is to abuse it. I showcased it pretty much by going 4.5k on 2 accounts and even beat a 5.1k mmr player.
Meaning how did i get good with terran? i didnt invest any time in it, i just used a build that someone else invented and because it was so easy and so good i got top 4% of the players with it in no time.
