Premise: Having 25% GM and 28% Master representation == “ridiculously overrepresented”
Conclusion: Having lower representation & lower winrates != underpowered.
Is that correct?
Aside from the absurd premise that under representation in lower leagues = over representation in higher leagues, the fundamental thing that disproves your theory is the clear race switching that is happening. It is highly correlated with win-rate and is obviously caused by balance.
Zerg is underpowered. Zergs are demoted en masse where they pile up in lower leagues. Out of frustration, they switch races. The historical league representation proves this quite clearly.
This recreates all the observations, including your objections about Zerg’s under-representation in lower leagues. And yes, it is under-representation in lower leagues and NOT over-representation in higher leagues.
You know when they let youtubers control youtube rewind and it was the most negatively received ever? Yeah, the same will happen when you give battlnet forums posters control of game design…
The distribution alone doesn’t tell you anything. The whole reason there’s an issue with Protoss is because of the changes in distributions and winrates after patches.
About the racial representation per league, I’d like to highlight that to present some races having more or less than 33% as respectively over or under-represented is a biased way of interpreting such data. And that because there aren’t a total of 33% or players for each race in the whole ladder.
For example, is there is was a total average of 20% of Zerg players among the whole ladder, they would be under-represented only in the leagues where they are under those 20%. And so the analysis or one race’s representation should be done by using global proportion of each race as reference (and not a theoretical 33%).
And so, the global proportions of races on the whole ladder are :
26,5% of Zerg.
31% of Protoss.
34% of terrans.
Taking those as reference :
Zerg
are over-represented (> 26%) in masters, diamond and platinum ;
and under-represented in low leagues (BSG).
Protoss
would be over-represented (> 31%) in GM, masters, gold and silver. I’d use caution interpreting the GMs ratio however, because one only needs to play 10 games/weeks not to get demoted, so the amount of smurfs might quite significantly bias the ratios in those extremely small leagues (200 players only per region).
and under-represented in bronze and diamond.
Terrans
would be over-represented (> 34%) only in low-leagues (bronze & silver).
and would be currently under-represented from platinum to GM, but with that tendency improving towards equilibrium since masters and above.
As for November’s winrates at the near-top of the ladder (Aligulac), I’ll take the liberty to quote Ichuma :
So
Close to balance for high level TvZ (with the previous month winrate being slightly Z favored with 48.5%).
Slightly Terran favored for TvP ; but the previous months were slightly Protoss favored to close to balance (51 and 50.2%), so it’s hard to interpret if we’re just oscillating around a balanced state or not.
Still quite Zerg favored regarding PvZ, with the previous months being around 48 and 47% as well.
From there, my take on it would be that the balance would seem to differ on the whole ladder compared to it’s top ; with Protoss faring quite well in high leagues whereas they seem to struggle more at a professional level. The Zerg also fare reasonably well in high league, but still continue benefiting from match-ups either close to balance or in their favor at top level. And regarding terrans, we’ve got a dichotomy, with a remarkable amount of players struggling to get out from the lowest leagues ; while it start improving with masters, and finally allows for very decent performances for their progamers.
Obviously not what I said (Zerg is 26.5% of the population, however, so 28% is more than fair). But I wouldn’t expect much more from someone at your intellectual level to do anything other than tiredly attempt to misinterpret my arguments
Units that is made from reactor. Now cost 10 gas each. And all unit made from tech lab is 25 gas less. Optoss unit now have half hp. And cost half as much. Balance be solved!
Hey Nonsense- , how have your been ! I see you didn’t change in the least !
As for balance inducing race switches, the populations of Z and P tend to evolve in opposite directions (just see the yellow and violet curves in my previous post, it’s remarkable), so it’s quite likely some players go from one boat to another depending on the wind. However, that phenomenon doesn’t change in the least the necessity to correlate a race over or under representation to its global representation. So your claim doesn’t contradicts mine.
grammatically-wise the sentence you wrote is incorrect. Thus it currently has no meaning ; and could have several interpretations depending on the leniency of the reader regarding prepositions or conjunctions.
Mathematically the fact two variables aren’t independent doesn’t means one can’t be deduced from the other.
Now, if you wish to answer in understandable english, I suggest you leave Brian alone, and lean more towards some brains instead.
Looks like Zerg was overrepresented during the dark ages of the imba times, and now that they have been nerfed to a fair level the far inferior zerg player has taken it’s rightful place in diamond where it belonged all along. Zerg players are just worse.
Incorrect. It is the only non biased way of interpreting the data.
Your theory is in blatant contradiction of the facts established in the original post. Players change their race as a product of balance. A race that is under-powered will be played less most especially at the lower leagues. Following your logic this race is “over-represented” in higher leagues even in scenarios when they are the least represented race in the higher leagues. That’s absurd.
No that is blatantly false because balance affects the global proportion and this is a PROVEN FACT as established in the original post (did you even read it?). A better predictor would be what proportion of new players select each race when they first start playing. That number can be found in platinum league, which is the “average” league that new players start out in by default. That number is:
29.6 / 30.4 / 30.27
Aka perfectly balanced as we would expect from an IID random process. Players select Zerg/Terran/Protoss at roughly the same rates and they quickly race-switch from Zerg due to heavy losses (due to the underpoweredness of the race) that nuke their own personal ladder experience, providing heavy incentive to race switch.
This is the ONLY theory that explains all the facts.
BigTurkey just body bagged another forum troll. Lmao.
In the OP I showed a HUGE shift in Protoss/Zerg representation that can be NOTHING EXCEPT RACE SWITCHING. If race selection is a purely IID random process the probability that tens of thousands of players could all switch race from Z to P, right after a balance patch, is 0.0%.
The balance of the game heavily influences race selection, PERIOD.
Because complete noobs, immediately after installing SC2 they do not play the game…no way.
They begin reading this forum and especially the Self-Appointed GOD, AKA. BatZ the Troll. After being informed that P is OP and Z and T are UP (BatZ delusion)…they …still play T and Z (due to a form of obscure masochism).
Somebody bag this troll and tell Trump to use for wall-building.
You shouldn’t do these write ups if you don’t understand the concept yourself.
There is no argument for races to be represented proportional to their overall percentage on ladder. Races are more or less popular at different levels and equating that with balance makes NO SENSE. Thinking that Terran is 42% in bronze because of balance is straight up ridiculous.
The only thing that matters is how much percentages change and not what their current representation is alone.
, how have your been ! I see you didn’t change in the least ! 
can not competition against…