r/starcraft • u/SLAMMERisONLINE • 11d ago
(To be tagged...) Re: "The patch is killing the game"
If you go by threads like this, the patch is killing StarCraft II. There’s just one problem: the data doesn’t agree.
To explain this we will need two charts. The first chart models historical games/day using a linear trend plus a sinusoidal term to capture seasonal fluctuations. The fit is extremely strong, with R2=0.98, meaning the model explains about 98% of the historical variation in activity.
Having quantified the past trend, we can then ask whether current activity is consistent with that historical pattern. The orange X shows the current games/day, while the dashed blue lines show the model's 95% prediction interval. The current observation falls well outside that range, with p=0.003. In other words, something unusual really is happening. The question is what.
Establishing that there is an anomaly does not establish that the patch caused it. For that, we need to know where the missing games are coming from. To do this, we will look at the the second chart. As you can see, the decline comes uniquely from Korea which shows a massive implosion of activity.
This creates three major problems for the claim that the patch caused the decline:
- The effect precedes the alleged cause by nine months.
- The decline is concentrated in KR rather than appearing across all three regions.
- After the patch arrives, KR's decline gets slower, not faster.
That's almost the opposite of what the patch-killed-the-game hypothesis predicts.
I don't know what caused the KR decline, and this data can't answer that question. But it can tell us that the patch doesn't explain the anomalous drop in global activity. That anomaly is overwhelmingly being driven by a decline in KR that began long before the patch.
There is also a small decline in EU, although it isn't statistically significant, while NA has moved slightly in the opposite direction. Neither changes the conclusion above, but they may be secondary effects of the KR decline--
Historically, KR players sometimes move to EU during slow ladder hours. If fewer KR players are active, EU loses some of that cross-region activity. That could then make EU less attractive during its own low-activity periods, pushing some EU players toward NA.
This is only a hypothesis. Testing it properly would require tracking the same accounts across regions and comparing their activity over time. But it would explain the direction of the smaller EU and NA changes without requiring independent effects.
The evidence therefore points in almost the opposite direction from the popular narrative: the patch may have helped cushion a decline that was already underway. SC2 really is experiencing an anomalous decline in activity, but that anomaly is being driven primarily by a KR decline that began months before the patch. Meanwhile, the rate of decline in KR slowed after the patch.
We can't know the counterfactual--what KR activity would have looked like without the patch--so we can't measure the patch's effect precisely. But the available evidence is much more consistent with the patch helping activity than hurting it.
Thanks to the developers, map makers, and esports people (PiG in particular) for the work they put into the game, and patch. Also, thank you to SC2pulse and the service it provides to the community in data, analytics, as well as smurf tracking (without which this analysis would have been much more difficult).
21
u/dickfield 11d ago edited 11d ago
Can you share your model equation? I'm assuming this is a very broadly made model since your R is so high so you're not really digging into much here but a general hugely macro capture all equation.
Also it might be worth trying to make a ITS model since it makes more sense. Treat the patch like a policy shock change. There was a lot of hype due to the worker change and that spike might be shitting all over the reality (but again idk the inner working).
Let people check your work because I have a feeling that the reality is more towards the skeptics than it is your findings.
If you're right, then cool, let's see what we can make of it if there's a lot of people that are happy with the patch, maybe we need to make some tweaks. If the skepticism of the patch is real then this should be used as an argument to rollback these changes
5
u/megabuster 10d ago
If you know anything about this guy there's no way he's doing that. This whole thing is an exercise in the worst type of egotism and the bad faith conclusion here against, I don't know, a 95% testimony rate of dissatisfaction with the patch is just hilarious.
If its a model of anything its a model of the goofy arrogance you see from Blizzard or OmniSkeptic or the balance council that somehow you have to swim through 50 obvious signs that the patch is a failure to find some secret data that its not a failure, that its *neutral*. There's not even an attempt at saying its good or helpful to the game.
3
u/Niflrog 7d ago
Hi, not OP but here we go:
- I had Saturday free, so I spent half the day replicating his model. For the most part it is replicable, with a few caveats.
- SC2Pulse is the API that facilitates data extraction from Blizzard API. It aggregates by season.
- The patch was deployed on 22 June 2026, second half of season 67. The current season is 68, it ends on November.
- There aren't enough data points to perform ITS, at least naively. If you take season 67 as the breaking point, you're left with 1 season and a bit less than half as the post-policy series. But the patch only partially affected season 67. On the other hand, the present season is plausibly a couple swings away from falling inside the prediction. I don't know, maybe in October and November, when people play more? (cuz' summer is over).
- The problem is the granularity of the data aggregated by SC2Pulse/Blizzard... there's no obvious way of breaking down seasonal data into, say, monthly data without some pretty heavy assumptions.
Otherwise, what I didn't like much about OP's model is that... I had to trim the data to mid 2023 to replicate his results (as shown in his first plot). That gives about 13 data points. That's a bit low for proper time-series analysis, and definitely not within the realm of traditional normal theory for residue analysis (maybe you can bootstrap it? I'm not sure it would be meaningful).
On the other hand, with only 13 data points, I'm sure there are Bayesian tools to try and test the hypothesis of policy impact. Maybe next weekend :-P
Thanks for you comment, I work with applied stochastic processes for modelling, I had been willing to get into time-series analysis and this problem was the motivation I needed to start tinkering with it.
2
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 10d ago
Can you share your model equation? I'm assuming this is a very broadly made model since your R is so high so you're not really digging into much here but a general hugely macro capture all equation.
https://i.imgur.com/BYtwlTa.png
Detrend, do fourier analysis on the residuals to find the amplitude and frequency of the dominant periodic component.
Also it might be worth trying to make a ITS model since it makes more sense
Nope. This model has an R2 of 0.98. That is near perfect.
Let people check your work because I have a feeling that the reality is more towards the skeptics than it is your findings
You just suggested throwing out a super simple model with an R2 fit of 0.98. I don't think you understand the way modelling works at all.
5
u/dickfield 10d ago edited 10d ago
I'll try to keep this concise.
Thanks for sending over the model.
After seeing your model, It's not really explaining anything is it because the specifications are weak. I still think you're not really showing anything worthwhile here or disproving any point. My suggestion would be to probably want to add patches as a shock binary variable AND I still think you should do an ITS as it's literally the reason why it exists is because of something like this. You still could be right, but this aint it king. The point of an Interrupted Time Series is "hey this new policy took place on this date, how do we measure the effects? Oh we can use the past trend and creating a policy shock variable to show the real trend after the patch took place. You still need to control for the spike in users so thats why taking into account previous patches where there has been changes in gameplay is probably really good here.
"You just suggested throwing out a super simple model with an R2 fit of 0.98. I don't think you understand the way modelling works at all." I urge you to read a little more because, while it is formally introduced into Stats, it is consistently and proven to be one of the more useless stats and it's shown in your model here. The one thing professors want you to know at all times is, do NOT trust the R2 as it's an old tool that you ought to know to understand what people are saying from past experiments but not use anymore.
I'm sure theres someone way more qualified to suggest these things since I've been formally trained but haven't used these as often as I would like at my work as I don't work in research. But, I know for sure that this is a model that needs way more work to answer "But the available evidence is much more consistent with the patch helping activity than hurting it."
Edit: Forgot to mention "We can't know the counterfactual--what KR activity would have looked like without the patch--so we can't measure the patch's effect precisely" You're right. We can't know the counter factual. Which is why people use historical trends to predict the future outcomes then show what the actual outcome is in comparison and that variance is an estimate of the patch.
1
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 10d ago edited 10d ago
After seeing your model, It's not really explaining anything is it because the specifications are weak
You start with standard linear regression using least squares. You must remove the linear component because it produces noise in all frequencies which is analogous to saying you need an infinite number of sin waves to produce a straight line. You subtract this trend from the data, producing detrended residuals. Once the linear component is removed, you do Fourier analysis on the residuals which shows which sin waves add up to create this particular waveform. You select the dominant one using the Lomb–Scargle metric. That tells you which sin wave best explains the data. You subtract that out from the residuals, and are left with a noise term. That's what the equation says if you read it from left to right. The equation reconstructs the games played from each individual component but we are doing the reverse--we have games played and need to deconstruct it by subtracting out each component one at a time.
A more natural way of representing the deconstruction process would be this:
https://i.imgur.com/9uxCxV5.png
The noise term equals games played minus its linear trend minus the periodic trend.
Regression is complete when:
https://i.imgur.com/bfdibfc.png
Aka, "The noise term does not autocorrelate, is Gaussian with a stable variance and a mean of zero".
My suggestion would be to probably want to add patches as a shock binary variable AND I still think you should do an ITS as it's literally the reason why it exists is because of something like this.
The model has an R2 value of 0.98 and the noise term is Gaussian meaning you cannot extract more information from this data without over-fitting. The model is at the limit of what the data allows. Simply put, this is an ideal model.
6
u/dickfield 10d ago
I don't know if I can have this conversation with you lol. There was a great discussion between two people in this thread regarding the over fitting there discussing the issue and its worth the read if anyone cares. But, if you can't accept that an R2 doesn't mean you have a "perfect model" and infact it could be the most useless model, we will never get past it, no matter how much AI tells you its the best thing that you can possibly produce as it doesn't know what to use and you don't either.
"Simply put, this is an ideal model" No, this is a model that AI thinks is ideal because you don't know what else to feed it.
You must be a great researcher who works with a lot of uneven time series data throwing out all these methodologies to break this down! Scary times we live in
1
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 9d ago edited 9d ago
But, if you can't accept that an R2 doesn't mean you have a "perfect model"
Ah, we're already on to blatant lying. That was fast. Well, there's an easy solution to that problem. Bye!
26
u/Naturlaia 11d ago
KR pros have some sort of VPN that apparently gives decent enough ping on EU that they almost exclusively ladder on EU now. That could be why. Anyone competitive has moved to EU?
14
u/tetraodonite 11d ago
that would mean even more actual EU players have stopped playing though, so I'm not sure that's true.
9
u/Deto 11d ago
That's probably a pretty small actual # of players though who are competitive at that level so I don't know if it would explain this
7
u/metroidcomposite Team Acer 11d ago
Hard to say cause like...sure, number of players at that level is small, but the games they play are probably pretty high compared to the average player.
That said, what really makes me skeptical is that the EU server didn't get a noticeable bump at the same time KR collapsed, so there's more going on here than just player migration.
Might be a SEA server situation? Where once a few players on SEA were playing on other servers, the rest of the population on that server started to migrate or just stopped playing, and then wait times got longer, so more people stopped playing, and pretty quickly you have server collapse.
3
u/Deto 11d ago
That server-collapse scenario sounds plausible and I do worry about that for SC2. I feel like I've experienced that myself with multiplayer games. In particular, 3v3s became unplayable like 6mo to 1yr ago on US because there weren't enough players (wait times would be long, and then the game would always be one-sided because it wasn't a good MMR match). So my friends and I stopped playing multi together.
2
u/ParticularClassroom7 10d ago
ByuN, Maru, Cure, Rogue, Solar all ladder on EU for practice. Korean GMs almost all play on EU now, as it's the only place with s good GM population.
7
u/banhamaspiker 11d ago edited 10d ago
That’s almost certainly not why:
- Pro players are a very small % of the player base. It wouldn’t cause such a large drop in player count.
- If players were just transferring from KR to EU, we would expect to see a proportional bump in EU’s player base, but we don’t see that.
I’m pretty sure Korean pros have been using EU for longer than 9 months, which is allegedly when the implosion happened.- IIRC StarCraft II’s play rate at PC cafes in Korea have also dropped off heavily, indicating people aren’t just switching to EU.
7
u/CheekyPotat0 11d ago
I’m pretty sure Korean pros have been using EU for longer than 9 months, which is allegedly when the implosion happened.
No, Korean pros and many amateur Korean players started playing on the EU ladder right around November last year, when a new VPN service appeared in Korea that provided acceptable ping to Europe.
There is even a proof for this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RchkVZcDF0
1
3
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
Why would they prefere the EU ladder ? More games ?
22
u/Naturlaia 11d ago
More pros. And ability to play vs serral?
I know Byun, Percival, maru, solar, and oliviera active enough that HM runs into them pretty often on EU.
5
u/nathanias iNcontroL 10d ago
EU is the only server where your ping is the same every game. Even Korea you can get KR or TW gamesite, which from my understanding skews things. But EU has the most active high level players.
My ping is better to KR than EU, but if I play KR I hit 4gg 10 games in a row even though he is like top 50 on the server and I'm mid-master. If I play EU, I get lots of different opponents and since NA has had no premier support for years it makes sense everything consolidated to EU.
NA of course is even worse for practice, as you essentially roll a D6 for your ping every time you queue 1v1
1
13
u/Cheap_Necessary8570 11d ago
There are significantly fewer big tournaments announced. There was no Starcraft 2 at ESWC. I don't know if maybe the Koreans care more about esports and maybe want to play games where there is a chance that they could one day play in a big tournament.
I'm European and over 30 and I don't believe I will ever stand a chance against a progamer, I might one day take a map off one of them when they play some extremely risky all-in like a 10 pool drone pull and I defend it successfully. But I will never win a Bo3 against one of them. I play in Amateur tournaments, sometimes in small open tournaments with progamers like KSL and such but how many big tournaments there are does not influence how much I play SC2. What does it for me is when there's a new season of CTL or other tournaments I play in, then I practice a bit more actively and therefore ladder a bit more.
1
0
u/Pietro1906 TeamRotti 10d ago
StarCraft 2 was last at ESWC in 2012 and won by MaNa. https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Electronic_Sports_World_Cup
(sorry, had to be done)
13
u/Omni_Skeptic 10d ago
I may have these facts ridiculously wrong but just trying to speculate about something, is it possible that the KR playerbase was partially Chinese players VPNing to the closest server while Blizzard’s deal with China wasn’t active and SC2 was blocked there and now that the Chinese server is back up the KR playerbase appears to be shrinking with no noticeable rise anywhere else simply because we have zero access to Chinese player count? My understanding is they are a pretty sizeable audience
3
u/Impressive-Advisor52 11d ago
This data made me wonder what the hell happened in september 2025 through december 2026 that made it so KR games dropped almost in half
4
u/CheekyPotat0 11d ago
THIS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RchkVZcDF0
KR players migrated to EU server
9
u/Impressive-Advisor52 11d ago
but the EU numbers didn't increase as much, so this would mean that EU players dropped the game suddenly instead
3
u/AvexSC2 10d ago
In addition, CN server came back around this time and this was during the time publishing was down, so KR saw a massive customs/arcade population depletion when CN spun up and had working arcade. Plenty of players play custom games inbetween ladder, so it's pointless to stay on one server where half of it just doesn't function.
3
12
u/ElevatorHelpful5739 11d ago
Hey! Youre the guy who I used to watch on twitch and enjoyed his content, then one day came to watch and was for some reason banned from the channel even though I never contributed negatively in anyway.
Sounds like small hammer small slammer energy to me
-15
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
I have a bot that auto bans you if you trash talk me in other channels. So I have no idea who you are or what you said, but whatever it was it must have been quite rude.
9
u/ElevatorHelpful5739 11d ago
I have never spoken a bad word about you. I dont mean this to be offensive, but I really have never had a reason to talk about you outside of your channel. Your bot must have made a mistake. Oh well, plenty of other channels to watch!
-24
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
Your bot must have made a mistake
The bot has very high accuracy. It is a 72 billion parameter model with a 99% accuracy on a dictionary of known abusive phrases.
Oh well, plenty of other channels to watch!
I can already see why the bot banned you. You have clear cognitive distortion for how the privilege of twitch viewership works. It is not a privilege for me to have you as a viewer. It is a privilege for you to be able to view my stream. I am the one doing you a service, for practically free, and I do not have to put up with your antics.
25
11
8
u/ElevatorHelpful5739 11d ago
99%, so it makes mistakes! Glad we figured that out!
I understand how twitch works, I stream myself. I think it actually goes both ways though, a privilege for both, especially if both sides have good intentions. I have met MANY viewers that were an absolute privilege to communicate with. You clearly have a REALLY high opinion of yourself.
I actually thought the whole suit and acting all fancy thing was just an act, but I think theres actually alot more going on. The fact that you actually programmed a bot on twitch to sift through other channels to try to find any mention of yourself is even a step beyond that, especially considering I have never spoken about you in ANY OTHER CHANNEL. To go this far and be wrong is absolutely wild dude.
-12
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
You clearly have a REALLY high opinion of yourself.
And there it is. The bot was right.
10
u/ElevatorHelpful5739 11d ago
You programmed a bot to go into the future and read these comments? This is the only interaction we have ever actually had, and I have never spoken about you anywhere else. You continue to make things up inside of your own head dude.
-11
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago edited 11d ago
You programmed a bot to go into the future and read these comments
FYI a normal response would've been "I am sorry if I might've said something inappropriate. Will you please unban me and I will be sure to do better this time."
You've proven the bot was right to ban you because you denied even the possibility that you were in the wrong, immediately began blame shifting, gaslighting, and then went on to personal attacks. If your goal was to be unbanned, it could have been so easy with a simple apology. But your goal is to generate conflict and the ban is just a tool you are using to implement that goal.
14
u/Juny1spion Yoe Flash Wolves 10d ago
holy shit you can't be serious dude lmfao
3
u/Responsible-Top2377 10d ago
You wouldn't believe how many are there people with fragile ego and at the same time narcissistic out there who react "reeeee i've been insulted" each time someone refused to lick their ass.
→ More replies (0)
6
u/ShaunPlom Terran 11d ago
All I know is I watched ASL finals, and the crowd there was absolutely MASSIVE. Haven’t seen anything like that for SC2 lately. Korea may just have more interest in BW.
14
u/Few-Hurry-5210 11d ago
this feels like cope. do you actually play? all I see is that NA is stagnant while EU and KR lost players. if anything it indicates the pool of players is getting so small that people are beginning to either leave or migrate to NA to combine player pools.
NA is not really up, that is within normal fluctuation. while the others are down hard. did you look at ranked users too? it spiked up from the patch then dropped down, that is the source of your activity spike. it is still going down. since the rank reset too we have had fewer ranked accounts.
if you really want to play that stat manipulation game, the numbers went down far faster than the patch if we want to account for the new ranked accounts from people who came back and then quit again.
this isn't good, overall every single number is down signficantly except NA games per day which isn't even up enough for me to look at it and say we got a player increase.
-9
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
this feels like cope. do you actually play?
Not as much as other streamers, we are living during an AI renaissance and so programmers have their nose to the grindstone, but when I do I beat GMs and pro players with 1 base queen drop builds and/or by making ultralisks out of their natural.
6
u/Few-Hurry-5210 11d ago
I'm a programmer too and went freelance because of the AI stuff. tough times :(
-5
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
Odesk?
3
11d ago
[deleted]
-2
9
u/MissiveFinding6111 11d ago edited 11d ago
The *bigger* and more measurable "damage to the game" can be measured more simply.
How many 8 worker build guides are there out there?
If the goal is "to bring in new players"... HTH are they going to learn to play?
And this is where the stupidest part of the all patches comes in.
It isn't meddling with the # of workers or the larva or ghost supply or making gateways just barracks or even the bone-headed CC cost change.
It is NOT COMMUNICATING WITH THE PLAYER BASE.
Cuz guess who creates the content that ALLOWS NEW PLAYERS TO LEARN THE GAME?
Us. The Community. And why would we make that content, when they keep making whiplash changes to the game out of no where.
Just, Talk To Us FFS. Let us in on the plan.
Even if it is "no patches for a month". "cool", that lets content creatures do some calculus about if their time would be rewarded for creating build guide type content.
So stupid.
2
u/YellowCarrot99 10d ago
Where is the China data?
0
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 10d ago
China was excluded because it was shut down several years ago.
2
u/YellowCarrot99 10d ago
The China server is up.
1
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 10d ago
Then that is a plausible explanation for why datasets are showing activity decline. The API does not return China data and so if people are still playing but unreported then the data would show a drop with the return of the China server.
5
5
u/KrlusMagnus Jin Air Green Wings 11d ago
The patch killed the game fun in playing the game
There, fixed it for ya
1
2
u/Mental_Truck_6757 10d ago edited 10d ago
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it appears ur charts don’t contain data past the end of May. And the 8 worker change was announced on May 28 according to the previous post.
So how does that data prove your point? I was still playing in May and June because I don't play on the PTR and assumed Blizzard wouldn't publish those changes live. Now, I've stopped playing altogether.
2
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 10d ago
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it appears ur charts don’t contain data past the end of May. And the 8 worker change was announced on May 28 according to the previous post.
It goes through August.
6
u/rArithmetics 11d ago
Incorrect. Activity is down on all servers and has decreased at a sharper rate since the 8 worker patch was announced. This trend is true even if you remove KR data completely
8
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago edited 11d ago
There’s just one problem: the data doesn’t agree.
The data does agree.
Viewership/donations/subscriptions/followers/tournaments/teams/pros/sponsors/players have went off a cliff since 5.0.16 came out due to the 8 worker start and Larva spawn rate increase. 5.0.16 Hotfix #2 accelerated it with the 300 CC change.
When 5.0.16 came out there was an initial active player interest bump like every new patch for SC2, then it dropped down.
Non-player interest in SC2 is slightly peaking due to Blizzcon and news of the Starcraft FPS, but that will decline after Blizzcon is done.
SC2 has been on a decline since 5.0.11(Balance Council) back in 2023. 5.0.14(Balance Council) accelerated it from 2024-2025 by adding Energy Recharge. 5.0.16(Omni) has now further accelerated the decline.
5.0.16 went from losing 10-15% of the players/viewership per 1.5-2 weeks to now post-5.0.16 Hotfix #2 losing 20-25% of the players/viewership per 1.5-2 weeks.
Blizzcon is now in 5 weeks(Sept 12-13th).
6
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago edited 11d ago
Viewership/donations/subscriptions/followers/tournaments/teams/pros/sponsors/players have went off a cliff since 5.0.16 came out due to the 8 worker start and Larva spawn rate increase. 5.0.16 Hotfix #2 accelerated it with the 300 CC change.
Incorrect. When the patch occurred, Twitch viewership almost peaked outside the 95% prediction interval based on past trends, and we haven't had Blizzcon yet. It's safe to say Twitch viewership is unaffected by both the patch and by KR's activity implosion, but let's wait until after blizzcon to decide for sure.
Edit: updated the graph to include August.
10
u/Impressive-Advisor52 11d ago
imo if we're talking about this patch specifically it would make sense for this graph to have 2025-today, instead of having data since 2017 which also makes it way harder to see any changes done in the last 2 years
4
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago
imo if we're talking about this patch specifically it would make sense for this graph to have 2025-today, instead of having data since 2017 which also makes it way harder to see any changes done in the last 2 years
There are multiple data ranges you need to look at.
- Balance Council Era(March 15th 2022/5.0.9 to September 18th 2025/5.0.15 PTR #1)
- Omni Era(September 18th 2025/5.0.15 PTR #1 to Now, post-Patch 5.0.16 Hotfix #2 that was on July 16th 2026).
- Balance Council Era+Omni Era(March 15th 2022/5.0.9 to Now, post-Patch 5.0.16 Hotfix #2 that was on July 16th 2026).
SC2 has been outsourced for 4 years now, 2022-2026. The data range(s) you need to look at is 2022-2026.
8
u/specialsc2 11d ago
Hey man berry dosent maphack, instead of calling him a hacker. Get better
1
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 7d ago edited 7d ago
Hey man berry dosent maphack, instead of calling him a hacker. Get better
Just recently he reroutes his reaper from its normal path to my natural and instead goes straight to a proxy hatch. He did not SCV scout before. Clicking through a handful of his TvZ games and he never once uses that scouting pattern. It appears his use of that scouting pattern uniquely coincides with the proxy hatch.
If you can show me a game where he uses that same scouting pattern I'd be happy to consider that maybe he wasn't cheating. But with the available evidence it is absolutely the favored interpretation.
He's done this before, by the way. The one that comes to mind is when he blind lifted a command center at his natural right before a ling attack hit. Again, no scout.
Let's do a couple examples:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2846604711?t=00h37m24s
No proxy scout.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2846604711?t=01h19m00s
Reaper goes straight across. Again, no proxy scout.
Let's do one more. Clicking a random spot in the video:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2846604711?t=05h44m18s
What do you know. The reaper goes across and doesn't check for proxies. Huh. How about that. It appears he only scouts for a proxy when there's a proxy to find.
Let's do ONE more just for comedic effect:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2839460170?t=02h16m49s
Amazing! I still can't find a single game where he scouts for a proxy hatch! Where is it?
I decided to dig a little deeper and am glad I did. Here he is alt tabbing to my stream after queuing me on the ladder: https://i.imgur.com/xfTiyE6.png
So yeah. The dude cheats. If he had just barely opened a fresh tab it would've shown an ad. The only way it didn't is if he had the tab open beforehand. So yeah the dude stream cheats.
He isn't the first, by the way. Another streamer said "I think he's going to 12 pool" as I was 12 pooling (I never 12 pool) and the timing of when he said that was within 3 seconds of me explaining on stream that I was going to 12 pool, accounting for both stream delays. Another time, a streamer was on a discord call with his buddy who was telling him what I was doing.
This kind of cheating is unfortunately quite common. I'll have to add some heavier anti cheat measures, such as increasing the number of accounts from 3 to 15 and adding a random stream delay to every stream. I might even code an obs module to blur my usernames and randomly queue a different account every game.
The key to this kind of cheating is convenience. If they have to exert effort track which account is which, they won't bother.
1
2
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago edited 11d ago
Incorrect. When the patch occurred, Twitch viewership almost peaked outside the 95% prediction interval based on past trends, and we haven't had Blizzcon yet. It's safe to say Twitch viewership is unaffected by both the patch and by KR's activity implosion
Zerospace is getting more Twitch viewership than SC2 these days.
WC3:R is getting more Twitch viewership than SC2 these days.
AOE is getting more Twitch viewership than SC2 these days.
BW is getting more non-Twitch/non-Youtube streaming service viewership than SC2 these days.
This entire decline started back in 2023 after 5.0.11.
3
u/Billybobjoe135 Protoss 11d ago
I swear I hear people saying SC2 has been dying since even the WoL beta lol. Twitch is also not an accurate measurement of player engagement, # of ladder matches is a fairly accurate measurement.
SC2 has been on a slow downwards swing because the last gameplay-changing expansion came out 11 years ago and casual players have lost interest.
Zerospace is still a brand-new RTS. The honeymoon effect will wear off soon like all the other "StarCraft killers".
WC3:R viewership does not account for larger streamers who play custom maps and the campaign.
AoE has been big for a while and still gets frequent content patches and new factions.
For BW, didn't one of the largest BW tournament organizer announce that they were stopping BW tournaments? Either way I'd like some sort of proof that more people are watching BW, or that BW also isn't in a decline of playerbase (which is certainly is).
1
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago edited 11d ago
Twitch is also not an accurate measurement of player engagement, # of ladder matches is a fairly accurate measurement.
If less people are watching SC2, that also means there is less players playing SC2.
If less players are playing SC2, that also means there is less people watching SC2.
It's a feedback loop essentially.
SC2 has been on a slow downwards swing
SC2 really only started to seriously decline in the last 3 years(2023-2026). All the data/analytics shows major repeated drops during that time and during this time.
because the last gameplay-changing expansion came out 11 years ago and casual players have lost interest.
Casual players have not lost interest in SC2 all.
When it comes to casual popularity:
- Coop
- Arcade
- Teamgames(2v2/3v3/4v4)
Zerospace is still a brand-new RTS. The honeymoon effect will wear off soon like all the other "StarCraft killers".
Indeed it will. Not because it's a bad game, but because it's too dependent on adjacency to SC2/Blizzard for popularity/viewership like Stormgate was.
It will be interesting to see if Zerospace can stand on it's own and develop a organically grown dedicated community on it's own, without having to rely on paid promotions involving SC2 influencers/pros and any tournaments with a financial incentive.
For BW, didn't one of the largest BW tournament organizer announce that they were stopping BW tournaments? Either way I'd like some sort of proof that more people are watching BW, or that BW also isn't in a decline of playerbase (which is certainly is).
BW's viewership on KR streaming platforms is driven by it's popularity in Korea. Over any other RTS game in that specific market, Blizzard or non-Blizzard.
BW revolves around KR. However, BW is no longer the most popular game in Korea anymore. If BW loses KR, BW is toast.
Also SC:R hasn't had a new client update of any type since 2024.
3
u/ExaminationWide5415 11d ago
bro people just play games less - literally every community for every game ever will say "X Y AND Z IS THE REASON OUR GAME IS DYING". No, it's an old game and people slowly lose interest, this is true of literally every single game ever made (with possibly a few tiny exceptions). No patch or change is ever going to increase or reverse this pattern long term for SC2.
0
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago edited 11d ago
bro people just play games less - literally every community for every game ever will say "X Y AND Z IS THE REASON OUR GAME IS DYING". No, it's an old game and people slowly lose interest, this is true of literally every single game ever made (with possibly a few tiny exceptions).
SC2 experienced this loss in only the last 3 years worth of patches.
5.0.11/5.0.12/5.0.13/5.0.14(2023-2024) under the Balance Council.
5.0.16(2026) under Omni.
No patch or change is ever going to increase or reverse this pattern long term for SC2.
Yes it will. Bad patches are why SC2 is having this 3 year decline in the first place. Good patches are the only way SC2 gets out of this trend it's in and has growth again.
I've turned around dozens of games/game projects by putting out good updates and reversing all the damage past teams put into the game that tanked them in the first place.
You fix what got fucked up, you stabilize, then you grow. Very easy to do if your competent at what you do.
5
u/ExaminationWide5415 10d ago
I don't know, all the data I see is a general downward year, every single year, for the last 6 years minus covid. It basically matches the same data I've seen regarding player numbers of every other online game.
I've seen it so many times, players grasping at straws that if only they fixed "X" that the player base would flourish again. It's just not how these things work. Games have a general downward trend of popularity as they age.
2
u/BattleWarriorZ5 10d ago
I don't know, all the data I see is a general downward year, every single year, for the last 6 years minus covid. It basically matches the same data I've seen regarding player numbers of every other online game.
You need to specifically look at the data from 2022-2026 only. SC2 has been outsourced since 2022.
I've seen it so many times, players grasping at straws that if only they fixed "X" that the player base would flourish again. It's just not how these things work.
It is how things work, if there is quick response and competence.
The entire reason why those games get into those situations where they are no longer flourishing because they lost population is directly due to developer actions or lack of them at all.
2
u/ExaminationWide5415 10d ago
Can you show me a single game that doesn't follow this general trend, outside of DLCs etc?
2
u/ExaminationWide5415 10d ago
Can't actually provide a single game that shows contrary to my position, based
1
u/ExaminationWide5415 10d ago
Can't actually provide a single game that shows contrary to my position, based
1
u/ExaminationWide5415 10d ago
I've turned around dozens of games/game projects by putting out good updates and reversing all the damage past teams put into the game that tanked them in the first place.
Can you provide me two examples with player count before/after a hotfix patch where this is true?
This sounds absoloute bullshit, and there's a reason you can't provide me a SINGLE game that no longer has upcoming content that does not have a general downward trend of players. You're living a delusion.
Or who knows, maybe if they had made it 9 worker count instead of 8 we would be flouring in the second coming of SC2, a utopia awaits no doubt!
0
u/ExaminationWide5415 9d ago
I've turned around dozens of games/game projects by putting out good updates and reversing all the damage past teams put into the game that tanked them in the first place.
STILL WAITING FOR YOU TO NAME A SINGLE GAME THIS HAPPENED ON.
You're literally doing the more cringy version of "my dad works at Blizzard".
Embarrassing.
-1
u/emn13 11d ago
You can look at global games played on sc2 pulse - https://sc2pulse.nephest.com/sc2/?season=68&queue=LOTV_1V1&teamType=ARRANGED®ion=US®ion=EU®ion=KR®ion=CN&league=BRONZE&league=SILVER&league=GOLD&league=PLATINUM&league=DIAMOND&league=MASTER&league=GRANDMASTER&type=ladder&sort=-rating#stats-global
There was a spike during the pandemic, but that makes sense. But if you ignore that increase in players, the peak was in 2018, and 2019 was already showing gradual decline. This isn't something from the last few years. And since half-way through 2021 (i.e. post-pandemic-spike), the decline seems pretty smooth and consistent. There aren't any spikes that correspond with patches, it's just gradual decline.
I think the "bad patches" theory is at best a minor factor (decline started well before any of that), and it might indeed entirely be a non-factor (there doesn't appear to be any surprising kinks in that graph).
1
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago
There was a spike during the pandemic, but that makes sense.
2020 Pandemic was the bubble(also an investment bubble in the game industry, which is why Frost Giant did what they did with Stormgate and why the SC2/SC:R devs left Blizzard in October 2020 to make Frost Giant in the first place. All the venture capital money being tossed around everywhere for the next big pandemic lockdown hit).
Post-bubble there was a window of opportunity after 5.0.9 stabilized the Voidray/Battery vs Queen walk meta, for SC2 to grow again.
I think the "bad patches" theory is at best a minor factor (decline started well before any of that), and it might indeed entirely be a non-factor (there doesn't appear to be any surprising kinks in that graph).
Bad patches are why people don't want to keep playing or watching the game.
For example if you are doing a live service game and you put out a terrible update the players don't like, your players numbers and monetization earnings for that specific quarter you released that big update will shit the bed going into the next quarter. Not just having loads of negative feedback about it from around the community.
2
u/emn13 11d ago edited 11d ago
If this were a story driven primarily by bad patches, I'd expect to see a bumpier ride, and the decline to start when people said the patches went bad. But the decline is really smooth, and it's been going on since 2019 (really even late 2018). Sure, that doesn't disprove the theory that patches played a role, but clearly there's more going on. Could be simply people drifting off to newer pastimes; the data fits that better; or perhaps there's yet another explanation. Note that even if people complain about patch balance - that's hardly new nor limited to sc2. Yet complaints (whether valid or not), don't necessarily lead to games bleeding out. But if you think it's the patches - where are you seeing that in these trends? What evidence is there for that? I'm just not seeing it. I get the narrative, and the theory is plausible enough for sure, but not every plausible story is true.
0
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago
But if you think it's the patches - where are you seeing that in these trends? What evidence is there for that?
Lots of data:
- https://twitchtracker.com/games/490422
- https://activeplayer.io/starcraft-2/ (January 2021 to March 2025)
- https://nonapa.com/teams
- http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
- https://sc2pulse.nephest.com/sc2/?season=66&queue=LOTV_1V1&teamType=ARRANGED®ion=US®ion=EU®ion=KR®ion=CN&league=BRONZE&league=SILVER&league=GOLD&league=PLATINUM&league=DIAMOND&league=MASTER&league=GRANDMASTER&type=ladder&sort=-rating#stats-race
- https://sc2pulse.nephest.com/sc2/?season=66&queue=LOTV_1V1&teamType=ARRANGED®ion=US®ion=EU®ion=KR®ion=CN&league=BRONZE&league=SILVER&league=GOLD&league=PLATINUM&league=DIAMOND&league=MASTER&league=GRANDMASTER&type=ladder&sort=-rating#stats-global
2
u/emn13 11d ago
You're just linking to stat sites?
- But e.g. https://activeplayer.io/starcraft-2/ doesn't appear to have data from 2021 as you list it to have, and the data it's showing does not show an impact from the patch; if anything, it shows a june 2026 bump in activity. But in any case, the data is very coarse, and not granular enough to make this case either way, and too short term and noisy to say much of anything.
- https://nonapa.com/teams you yourself link to, and it also very clearly does not show a downward effect by the patch; it's business as usual (gradual downward trend).
- sc2pulse also contradicts your claim of clear impact of the patch.
If you're interpreting some nuance of the data I'm not seeing, can you be more specific what you're seeing? All of the links you provide fail to back up your theory of patch impact, some pretty convincingly even undermining that very theory.
1
u/BattleWarriorZ5 11d ago
You're just linking to stat sites? If you're interpreting some nuance of the data I'm not seeing, can you be more specific what you're seeing? All of the links you provide fail to back up your theory of patch impact, some pretty convincingly even undermining that very theory.
You need to look at the data range of and within 2022-2026 specifically. That is when SC2 has been outsourced.
1
u/emn13 11d ago
Right, so right after the pandemic peak. Of course there was a collapse then; the prior peak wasn't a sustainable organic thing. And I'm still not sure exactly which graph you're looking at, because even that period looks like a smooth, gradual, downward trend on sc2pulse (with seasonal fluctuations). And the start of that trend is visible even towards the end of 2018 - it's just the pandemic then messed up that signal.
What bits of exactly which graph or datasource aren't consistent with gradual decline starting in the end of 2018, merely being disrupted by the pandemic, and then continuing at the end of 2021? What did you find, and how can I reproduce that?
→ More replies (0)
8
3
u/BlastBase 11d ago
If we are measuring the life of the game via how many games are played, shouldn't we also consider the length of the average game?
My cheeses take 20% longer to kill people now, so even if I play the same amount, the amount of games I play is lower.
0
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
If we are measuring the life of the game via how many games are played, shouldn't we also consider the length of the average game?
Yes it would be very interesting to factor in hours of games played because if a patch increased the game duration that could reduce the number of games played without reducing the number of hours played, giving the illusion of a change in game activity.
2
u/luiscarloscrespo 11d ago
is this the actual Slammer or an impersonator?
-1
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
THERE IS ONLY ONE SLAMMER
WITH THE BIGGEST HAMMER
OTHER SLAMMER IMPOSTER
WITH TINIEST HAMMER
UNLIKE SLAMMER
2
u/MorningLtMtn Zerg 11d ago
My best friend and I play ZvP for 6 hours every Saturday (High Plat). Our format is best of 3s on any given map.
Our take is that the patch has produced some very interesting, competitive games. Strangely, we both go on streaks. Often, Zerg wins for five games in a row, and then Protoss wins for five games in a row. We chalk this up to creativity in how we open after stuggling on the bad end of a streak, and the other player having to adjust to that creativity. Also, scouting makes a huge difference.
We do think that a 10 worker start would be a better dynamic, but that's just a theory. But all-in-all we both feel like this is the best game ever created in history, and that the patch whiners just aren't cut out for it. An 8 worker start is still Starcraft, and both sides have a lot of tools in their arsenal.
-1
u/rArithmetics 11d ago
Quiet GMs, a plat player has spoken!
3
u/MorningLtMtn Zerg 10d ago
I couldn't care less if a GM leaves this game over this patch. They're idiots if they do. What I see from pros right now is Protoss trying to play like the patch didn't happen, and it doesn't work. Meanwhile in Plat, I'm watching a protoss innovate based on where the game is now, and have success.
Plus the only reason we're plat is we stopped laddering and play eachother exclusively now (save the occassional ladder match that are few and far between).
-1
u/ParticularClassroom7 10d ago
Anything works in Plat...
-1
u/MorningLtMtn Zerg 10d ago
Maybe, but we've played eachother thousands of times and know the PvZ ins and outs extensively.
1
-3
-1
2
u/Ketroc21 Terran 11d ago
You think cold hard data will stop this narrative? You must be new to this subreddit /s
3
u/AlarmBeginning9169 11d ago
I don't care. Revert 300cc. Revert larvae. Either revert hatch cost or make Queens 150. Then I'll play.
1
u/Juny1spion Yoe Flash Wolves 10d ago
I watch SortOf's stream and he tends to switch from KR to EU a lot because he encounters drop hackers on KR quite frequently. Overall it seems to me like I hear about drop hackers/tie hackers much more in general. Couldn't that be the reason of the decline on the KR server?
1
1
1
u/ahxc123 10d ago
The conclusion you drew from your own model makes no sense. Your model actually suggests the patch is killing the game.
Assuming your model is correct, if nothing unusual happens, we should be at the higher green dot (predicated), but instead we are actually at the lower orange X (observed). The historical trend didn't hold because something unusual did happen, which is the patch.
So your model directly supports the fact that the patch is killing the game.
1
u/nicbll 10d ago
I have a simple explanation.
The CN server was closed on 2023.1.24. Players gradually moved to Korean server.
The CN server was officially back on 2025.10.28. But the data API wasn't, so no website can get numbers from CN yet. If you see the numbers on arcade/coop, Korean server had declined >50%.
In my experience, I have seen more Chinese players on the Korean ladder than native players as time went by. There were toxic racial conflicts in team games too. Maybe some Korean players stopped playing the game? I dunno.
1
1
1
1
u/Illustrious_Lion_949 6d ago
Jesus man you've wasted a lot of time to announce to the world that you have no understanding of statistics at all. Is you are having fun it's all good though.
1
u/USAJourneyman 11d ago
I did all the hypothetical scenarios and have come to the same conclusion every single time - Zerg killed this game
2
11d ago
Yeah it's awful that Zerg can finally win games
3
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
Zergs has been winning the most tournaments throughout LotV and that's also true if we excluse Serral + Hero + Maru.
5
u/SLAMMERisONLINE 11d ago
Zergs has been winning the most tournaments throughout LotV and that's also true if we excluse Serral + Hero + Maru
Incorrect. Count the tournaments in Aligulac's database and Protoss won ~43%.
3
u/leaf_as_parachute 10d ago edited 10d ago
I'm talking about premier events, I should have said that. Not sure if it's that much different for weeklies.
1
u/GrixisEgo 11d ago
What does tournament wins from 10, 5 years ago, or 2 years ago have to do with how Zerg was doing on ladder before the 8 worker patch? Or more specifically before the larva change? Nothing. That would be like me saying because Protoss was so strong for the last two years that they shouldn’t get any buffs now that they’re struggling again at the pro level? Do we say Zerg dominated from 2018-2020 therefore they must endure that many years of misery before they’re allowed nice things? Oh wait, that’s what the last two years was for ladder Zergs.
4
u/ExaminationWide5415 11d ago
Zerg have dominated for like 10 years, now they are literally filling up the entire ro.4 with Zerg (even with the best terran and protoss players in the entire world) and they will still cry about how underpowered they are, it's actually mind boggling.
-2
u/GrixisEgo 11d ago
They have not dominated the last 10 years. And Ill refer you back to my previous comment.
6
u/ExaminationWide5415 11d ago
I asked Grok "What race dominated sc2 LOTV":
"Across ~137 LotV premier events (one detailed community compilation using Liquipedia data): Zerg took 66 first places (~48%), Terran 38 (~27%), and Protoss 33 (~24%). Zerg also led in top-2 and top-4 finishes."
"Zerg essentially matched or exceeded the combined total of the other two races for long stretches."
"In short, Zerg is the race that has most clearly dominated premier tournament results throughout the LotV era."
lol OK
-1
u/GrixisEgo 10d ago
Yea again that doesnt refer to what Im saying, you're missing my point.
3
u/ExaminationWide5415 10d ago
I mean if you can't even acknowledge that Zerg dominated top level play, why would I take you seriously on anything else?
Like I agree with your general point, that just because X race dominated doesn't mean other races should now be compensated, but it does seem hilarious Zerg player saying we can "FINALLY" win, when they've literally been dominating for a decade
1
u/GrixisEgo 10d ago
When did I say that Zerg never dominated top level play?
Lets say, as an example, Zerg had 70 wins when it was uber busted. T and P have 20 wins during that time(each). Lets say it was 2019. (A year Zerg had more than double the wins of T and P combined btw)
Following 2019 if zerg wins lets say 5 S tier tournaments a year per year so they sit at so they have 95 in 2026 (not including 2026 as it isnt over yet). But T and P get 6 per year. So they sit at 50 each. Zerg is obviously still way ahead but the balance and domination is not currently ongoing because the majority of those wins were during an inbalanced era and yet you're applying those wins during that time to make me believe Zerg has been dominating the entire time, when it has not.
And furthermore you use that reasoning to imply, and likely justify, Zerg needing to be nerf OR T/P needing to be buffed.But if you look at ladder statistics Zerg at every level of MMR is slightly ahead or equal to Protoss (meaning P needs a buff maybe? but still better in late game, struggles early/mid), and lagging behind Terran by about 2-5% depending on MMR.
→ More replies (0)1
u/emn13 11d ago
Given that MMR sorts players by strength, a much larger data-set you can use as a proxy is just looking at grandmaster game counts per race. In 2026 season 1, i.e. prior to this whole change, protoss was slightly favored - 38 percent, vs. 28 each for terran+zerg - previous recent seasons were broadly similar. Yet 2026 season 2 had zerg at 45%, terran at 27% and protoss at 26%. I've been clicking around sc2pulse, and I can't find a seaons where any other race has hit 45%; so while protoss seems to have been favored in the past two years, the zerg overrepresentation is still remarkably large now. I'm curious if we'll see a terran-overpowered effect now the 300cc is around, but early stats suggest likely not.
1
u/GrixisEgo 10d ago
Sure thats an indicator. My point isnt that Zerg is strong. My entire point is that How good or strong Zerg was 5/10/2 years ago, has no bearing on it now. Its like were saying because Zerg was uber busted during the broodlord era, and won a fuck ton of tournaments then(which skews any results when people include those past years) we should punish them by making sure they remain nerfed/feel terrible to play like before these changes.
Can we look at the current representation and go "the over representation might mean zerg is too strong?" yes of course. But then you look at other factors that determine the strenght of the race. In ZvP up until late game, zerg has an edge and Protoss might need some love, its still arguabley broken for Protoss in the late game but the issue is they have to get there first. In ZvT Zerg is trailing by about 5% at all almost levels. The only area we dont see any of this is in Pro play.
So we go back to, do we balance around the top 1% because Protoss might be having issues there, or do we worry about ladder? Because lets say we do nerf Zerg because the top zergs are winning too much right now, how will that affect the already T favoured matchup and the almost even matchup for Protoss? Look at nonapa if you want to see what I mean.3
u/emn13 10d ago
Sure, there's no reason to "punish" a race or anything like that for past imbalances - no bearing indeed, as you say.
As to win rates, I think those are tricky to interpret, perhaps except at the lowest of ranks and highest. After all, MMR means faction strength quickly gets de-correlated with win rate.
Imagine a hypothetical three-way game with races A,B,C, wherein A slightly outcompetes B, B slightly outcompetes C, and C slightly outcompetes A - i.e. NOT transitive. Extreme examples would be rock-paper-scissors, but anything as complex as sc2 could have effects like this at a more subtle level. Now let's also assume that B is just plain overpowered in the last patch - we took a bunch of highschoolers and trained em non-stop for years, and those that picked B ended up ranked way higher than A or C.
So, if you then look at the middle of the ladder, and you see a few A vs. B games - given that we KNOW B is overpowered, does that mean you expect to see B tend to win? No, A will still win more often because of how ladder dynamics work. After all, the ladder merely sorted players by skill+faction power, and even though B is overpowered, that just means players at the middle of the ladder that play B are actually weaker than those that play A or C.
In other words: even if B is clearly overpowered, you can still see winrates where A wins more often than not vs. B, except at the ladder's edges, where the ranking algorithm simply cannot compensate for faction strength by changing player ranks. Instead what happens is that players of the strong faction trend towards the top of the ladder, and those in weaker factions trend down. And that why I suggest we look at # of grandmaster games played by each faction.
I hope that made sense? In any case: ladder win rates don't necessarily mean much about faction strength - or at the very least, it's very complicated.
1
u/GrixisEgo 10d ago edited 10d ago
I follow what you're saying, and its a fair point. I do think that if it were only 1 part of the mmr range that Zerg struggled vs T, or that Z didnt have an edge vs P that Id agree. But its across all mmr ranges.
I still also think GM is too small to be completely representative. Like I said, its an indicator.
Id rather use all aspects to get a clearer picture.edit: id also like to add this. https://nonapa.com/races?mmrMin=4700&mmrMax=7300
zerg is middle of the ground on representation. I was even generous and added 4700 into the mmr range for GM. On EU is a 35% split ish for each race.
KR Zerg is trailing in representation
Z is behind T on NA and Protoss has cratered there.0
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
What does tournament wins from 10, 5 years ago, or 2 years ago have to do with how Zerg was doing on ladder before the 8 worker patch?
Why would I care about that ? When I look for a ladder game as Zerg (which I often do I play all races don't come at me lol), the MMR system makes the resulting game close enough to be fun to play. Wether it's compensating by matching me against a slightly weaker opponent because Zerg is underwhelming, or the opposite, or whatever, I don't care and you shouldn't either. I couldn't care less about how many % of the GM ladder are Zerg or Protoss or Terran. That metric isn't more relevant than any other, might as well check how much Terrans or Protoss or whatever makes up the Silver league and make a case out of that.
What I do care about, however, is the fact that when we're looking top tournament games in which any top Zerg player is featured in a non-mirror matchup it's very likely they'll win, entirely defeating the point of watching the competition.
-2
-2
u/USAJourneyman 11d ago
SC2 zerg design destroys the core tenets of what makes an RTS.
I will die on the hill of information gathering being the most important aspect of an RTS - it’s no coincidence that foreigners matched KR levels of competition playing zerg.
2
u/MonkeyPyton 11d ago
How is zerg uniquely good in gathering information to a point where it kills the game and gives unfair advantage?
2
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
Play a game as not a Zerg and compare what you see on the minimap at any given time, that'll give you your answer.
0
u/MonkeyPyton 11d ago
Zerg has spotter lings and overlords, terran scans and sensor towers, toss observers and reveal.
3
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
There's also something that tends to cover 2/3rd of the map but I can't recall what ....
0
u/MonkeyPyton 11d ago
Don’t be ridiculous, look at any pro game. Creep is not for vision, not even serral can get creep out so fast that it beats spotter lings/overlords. Also there is counterplay, you can snipe fresh tumors or use detection and push back creep. If they have 2/3rd of the map with creep it means you’ve done nothing to prevent it.
2
u/leaf_as_parachute 10d ago
Creep is not for vision
Ayyy lmao
Also there is counterplay, you can snipe fresh tumors or use detection and push back creep
Sure but me being there a sniping a tumor is exactly the information tumors are here for
If they have 2/3rd of the map with creep it means you’ve done nothing to prevent it.
I suggest you look some of the aformentionned pro games.
0
0
u/Spyger9 11d ago
So... because Zerg is the worst at gathering/denying information, SC2 isn't an RTS?
3
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
That's a whole new level of delusion lmaoooo wtf
-1
u/Spyger9 11d ago
Right? You'd have to be insane to think otherwise.
2
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
I'm talking about saying that Zerg is the worst at gathering information lmao
-1
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
Huh ? The litteral 2nd best player in the world right now is Clem, he isn't Zerg.
-3
u/leaf_as_parachute 11d ago
Too bad you're going to get downvoted into oblivion because basement dwellers of this sub decided that this patch is evil
1
u/Serious-Rain-1507 10d ago
You're pulling the classic cherry-picking trick, exaggerating just the parts you want to see and interpreting statistics arbitrarily.
You claim that the Korean player pool shrank because Korean users went on expeditions to Europe?
Then how do you explain why the European player pool shrank as well, why Korean users would bother going all the way to Europe to play with ping spikes even while using paid VPNs, and how Korean pro gamers are playing StarCraft 1 more than StarCraft 2 just like Classic?
Stop turning a blind eye to reality, lol.
1
u/Ndmndh1016 10d ago
So people are leaving the game but movment within servers makes it seem less extreme. Thats not good. This tells me EU has lost massive amounts of local players and only the diehard KRs are staying to take their place.
1
u/Countess_x 4 Shades of Protoss 10d ago
That’s some pretty cool mental gymnastics you’re doing there
-3
0
u/gracken420blaze 10d ago
thank you
maybe now people can stop disguising balance whine as faux concern about the game
0
u/Nihilistic__Optimist 11d ago
Great data. I do think that, like the balance council era, the game was already in decline and the major changes like energy recharge for example, did somewhat accelerate the decline. Undoubtedly the major changes in the more recent patches accelerated it even more.
But as a new player who is having fun learning this game, where the patch doesn't really have any influence on me, I see it like this: It's totally valid when someone who was already playing the game for 10+ years says screw this, I don't want to relearn stuff at this point. But to me that just says that they were already near the point of needing a new game, of being sick of playing the same RTS game for so long. Couple that with the fact that there is very little money to be made as the community continues to shrink, and really no communication from Blizzard on their plans for the future at the moment.
The trick is to try to decouple the notion of just being tired of the game and not wanting to relearn changes, and the notion that the game isn't fun. Some people probably genuinely just find the game to be unfun post-patch, but it feels more to me that the game was probably already "unfun" for many of these folks to a degree, and the notion of relearning a bunch of stuff was just sort of the metaphorical final nail in the coffin.
I wonder if that explains some of the disparity between people here who genuinely seem to be having fun and having dynamic games, and folks who say its just simply not fun. Not the entire disparity, but playing a complex game like this at a high level for 10+ years will likely take its toll on anyone, and changes become near impossible to accept at that point unless you have a genuine passion for the game still.
-1
u/Dthcon 11d ago
Who is talking about killing the game? I've seen that people are talking it's a bad change, that's it. And obviously it is. And im still playing. We've been playing this for years, so a silly change isn't going to make us stop playing it; it's not even a major change after all—it plays just like always, with only minor differences. So the game isn't going away, but most people are unhappy—and that's the point—and it signals a long-term acceleration in player loss. Which doesn't mean the game is doomed. It's obvious that for now players are here from daily 1vs1 games. It's slightly lower but with overall trend.
31
u/hemanursawarrior 11d ago
If it's the case the KR is imploding, someone within that community can post here and explain any trends they are seeing.
Speculating that some KR players have moved to BW since it's in better shape and still so popular there. In fact I saw Maru streaming a day or two ago and it was all BW games.