I saw your first version of the post. 34 edits has to be a forum record. Impressive. Mass lings don’t really work because simcities and walls are lings cryptonite. So while certain protoss armies are absolutely wrecked by mass ling plays, it’s difficult to end games with them. Toss always has the time needed to get out splash. Any kind of splash will obliterate mass zergling play. He can add on colossus, storm, archons, even disruptors can work. At that point your army transforms into wasted supply. The lings are useless except to counter-attack.
1 Like
Protoss is losing in tournaments. If you’re having issues with Protoss, it’s skill.
1 Like
Factually incorrect. Toss win the most tournaments, aka 43% of them.
Not the biggest ones. Of course it’s gonna win more in the small tournaments, just like it has more presentation in GM. From my side, it seems to be a skill issue. It’s just easier to play but near the skill cap it’s underpowered against the top players of Zerg and Terran.
1 Like
Listen kid if you have to exclude data to make your point then you’re admitting the data doesn’t support your point. It’s a self defeating argument. The way a proper scientific inquiry would handle this is that all the tournament names, prize pools, etc, would be “blinded” so that the researchers have no clue what tournament is which. The reason they do this is to specifically prevent the researchers from picking data to support their conclusion. The moment you start saying “but but but MUH PREMIERS!” you’ve lost all credibility to talk on the subject.
Should I also include any tournaments I arrange with my friends? Some data is always excluded.
Ironically that’s more valid than premier outcomes. Any data point sigma 3 or greater would be struck by researchers as an outlier. Premier tournaments are won by players sigma 4 and 5. They are the definition of outliers and they would be deleted from the data set by any competent researcher, period. You want to measure the correlation between balance and performance. Outliers by definition do not follow balance trends. That’s why they are outliers.
You’re right. They don’t win most tournaments. They win the non-premier ones. The conclusion is the same: more skill, even if extreme, lets you win against them.
Incorrect. There are too few premier tournaments to establish how frequently toss win them. It’s just a fact. Let’s say we flip a coin, but we only flip it once. It lands on heads. Your conclusion: tails has a 0% chance to win. Anyone with a brain knows that’s obviously not accurate. You can’t expect perfectly equal outcomes in such a small sample. To get to the actual probability of tails, you’d need to flip it closer to 200 times.
In the case of premier events, we have a 3 sided die. How many times do we need to get it to properly represent the odds of winning? If we had 100 premier tournaments, there would be a 9% chance toss would win exactly 33 of them. Even with 100 tournaments you still wouldn’t know their exact win-rate. This year, we’ve had 5. It’s totally unreasonable to expect perfect representation in premier victors, period.
1 Like
Especially because there is a fair bit of luck in SC2, I believe.
1 Like
The outliers are a bigger issue. Using a monte carlo model I predicted Serral had an 80% chance to win the last IEM, and he did. Balance does not predict premier tournament outcomes, the participant list does. If Serral is there, zerg wins. If serral is not there but maru is, terran wins. Balance has nothing to do with it. It’s all luck & the participant list, but mainly the participant list.
They are not the same coin. It’s like saying some tennis techniques are better because they let beginners win and most players are beginners so conclusion: that technique is better. The conclusion should be “they’re better against beginner players”.
Regarding the small sample pool of premier tournaments, they also haven’t won a premier tournament in 2023. Is the sample pool small? Not for my purpose which is to state that Protoss CAN be defeated with enough skill.
Oh boy he doesn’t understand basic probability theory.
Yet they won 8 of 19 major tournaments aka 42%. That strongly indicates there just aren’t enough premier tournaments for everyone to win one. When you flip a coin only once, you can’t have both heads and tails win. When you only have 10 tournaments, you can’t expect every race to win 3 of them.
My point still stand: they can be defeated and they have been defeated consistently in the last two years in premier tournaments. Conclusion: even the top Protoss players can be defeated. It’s a skill issue.
1 Like
Hypothetical scenario:
Protoss: win 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 games.
Zerg: wins 1.
Your conclusion: Protoss “can” be beaten, it’s a skill issue!
Your argument is absurd. The game should be balanced as equal win-rate for equal skill and equal effort. Two players of equal skill and playing equally as hard will each win 50% of the time. That’s balance. Any other standard is absurd.
Currently, two players of equal skill results in toss winning 70% of the time and zerg winning 30%. If it’s fine for protoss to have an advantage this large, because protoss can still technically be beaten (or whatever justification you use), then why not buff zerg to where zerg is the one with a 70% win-rate? You said yourself it’s fine for a race to have an advantage like that because technically they can still be beaten. So let’s buff zerg. Your argument is self defeating. No matter how you frame this, the conclusion is that zerg needs buffs. It’s just a fact of reality.
It doesn’t’ matter what happens at the bottom. The champions of the top tournaments are all non-protoss. Is this balanced? No it’s not. Protoss seems UP at the top skill bracket and OP and the lower brackets. Is it a skill issue if you’re losing to Protoss? YES!
I remember a game where Ragnarok cheesed it by attacking the zealot in the wall with drones (he drone drilled to get the surround lol)
h - - - ttps://youtu.be/c0B8In4tHM0?si=Q85Mj4IbH9NU-ZsB
At 33:44 you can see the drone drill.
To quote you, “it doesn’t matter what happens at the bottom”, so you can’t object to the idea of buffing Zerg. Remember, it doesn’t matter!
Please save time and place 
arguments straight into the trash can 
Check this out dude. 5200 terran player. I 'd on him so flipping hard, twice in a row, he cries maphacks:
https://i.imgur.com/m3Cksqm.png
70% ZvT win-rate this season, 65% ZvZ. My ZvP is 50% roflmao 
1 Like
Rofl. Did you rush him?