A Note on Commander Win Rates

Co-op Missions Discussion
Just played a match against zergling/muta. Why bother with carriers when adepts can do a much better job? Added some conservators and colossi for the aoe. You say they deal less dps against non-light target but the AI didn't field a single non-light unit.

Before that I played against bio terran. Again, adepts all the way with colossi as support and then some of each to boost the champions and immortals against marauders.

The game before that I played against bio + tank terran. Well I was gonna go for immortals and legionaires but disruptors did most of the work before anyone could even fire a shot.

The game before the game before that, I played on Miner Evac vs baneling/muta. Colossi and adepts. Duh. Scouts for air support. It was a slaughter fest.

...

Whenever I face pure sky terran, of course I will go for carriers but I will add at least 50% scouts. Why? Because of BC armor.

Actually, I always add conservators because they're a very decent unit not only for myself but my teammate as well. And that means I'm gonna need some kind of wall for them so it's always either adepts or legionairs.

I don't think there is any reason to play nothing but mass carrier.
For the most part, co-op is about deathballing an army and no army of Fenix's does that better than mass Carriers.

Escadin, our group does Solo speedruns with all the commanders on all the maps. With the exception of Miner, DoN, and Oblivion Express, mass Carrier has been found to be the best, most reliable, and fastest composition for all the other maps. The problem is that any other composition tends to bleed units, no matter how good you are.

If you'd like, I can challenge you to any other map using mass Carriers while you can use any other composition. I can guarantee that mass Carriers will finish with a faster time for all maps.
07/22/2017 10:07 AMPosted by Centauri
Your time would be better spent offering feedback on how he can be made to feel better to play, which is one area where there definitely is room for improvement.

Everybody did, for weeks after he was released, until Blizzard announced that their only fix for him was "nerf carriers." Which literally nobody suggested or asked for.

The problem with this discussion, every time it comes up, is that certain posters conflate people saying "Fenix feels a bit weak" with "I can't win with Fenix except with carriers, I suck at life." I almost always go with a mixed ground force for Fenix and win. He's fun. He looks fantastic. I know what a disruptor is. I still think he feels a bit weak.
07/22/2017 05:02 PMPosted by monk
For the most part, co-op is about deathballing an army and no army of Fenix's does that better than mass Carriers.

Escadin, our group does Solo speedruns with all the commanders on all the maps. With the exception of Miner, DoN, and Oblivion Express, mass Carrier has been found to be the best, most reliable, and fastest composition for all the other maps. The problem is that any other composition tends to bleed units, no matter how good you are.

If you'd like, I can challenge you to any other map using mass Carriers while you can use any other composition. I can guarantee that mass Carriers will finish with a faster time for all maps.

Well in dead of the night it is much better to go scouts and miner Evac. Because units that are Considered to be "Light" Get Shreded by Scouts.
07/23/2017 03:41 AMPosted by Escape
07/22/2017 05:02 PMPosted by monk
For the most part, co-op is about deathballing an army and no army of Fenix's does that better than mass Carriers.

Escadin, our group does Solo speedruns with all the commanders on all the maps. With the exception of Miner, DoN, and Oblivion Express, mass Carrier has been found to be the best, most reliable, and fastest composition for all the other maps. The problem is that any other composition tends to bleed units, no matter how good you are.

If you'd like, I can challenge you to any other map using mass Carriers while you can use any other composition. I can guarantee that mass Carriers will finish with a faster time for all maps.

Well in dead of the night it is much better to go scouts and miner Evac. Because units that are Considered to be "Light" Get Shreded by Scouts.


07/22/2017 05:02 PMPosted by monk
With the exception of Miner, DoN, and Oblivion Express

As he said. And immortals in Oblivion for the bonus damage to trains.
You make an excellent point, I haven't lost a co-op game in ages, aside from mutations. And more importantly, I haven't ever played Fenix in a mutation, specifically because he more often than not is not particularly strong in mutations (yes I'm aware of the outliers.)

Winrate is a terrible metric to use in a casual gamemode where losing is rare and far between. Like you said, something to the effect of PLAYRATE is a much better metric. If people simply aren't playing him, that should be an immediate indication there's a problem.
This topic was acknowledged in the most recent blue post, thank you co-op team!

EDIT: boohoo
You zombiefied your topic to make a slightly inaccurate statement. Unless I'm reading things wrong, they never specifically mention this topic and there was many MANY people saying the same things at the time.

So no real reason to make a zombie. No one is a fan of it.
08/17/2017 05:54 PMPosted by Yattien
You zombiefied your topic to make a slightly inaccurate statement. Unless I'm reading things wrong, they never specifically mention this topic and there was many MANY people saying the same things at the time.

So no real reason to make a zombie. No one is a fan of it.

I don't frequent here very often and had not seen any other topic on this matter. When I posted the idea on reddit, it wasn't agreed with. Further, I posted this before your recent ramble about a new commander and blue posts, which I regrettably took the time to find and read. Anyway, I genuinely thought I had made a contribution, was happy about it, and wanted to say thank you and also highlight the background behind the misleading statistics they referred to by bumping the thread.

In contrast, you've replied in two threads only to make sure I knew I was wrong (which you do not actually know for sure) and simply couldn't let a stranger be happy, even if it might be for the wrong reason one time. What horse do you have in the race of a random rezzed thread except to be smarmy? It contributes nothing, unlike the original content of my thread here. Bnet forums outside of Bnet are known as just a pissing contest to see who can cruise through and get upset the most, which is why I don't come here too much. You can have the credit if it helps you enjoy your day a bit more!
Threads about how Fenix is underpowered are plenty but most of them do not mention winrate is misleading topic.
I do not recall seeing any thread "Highest winrate can be misleading" or similar recently, Jayborino's thread is the most recent and has a few constructive feedback for Devs to take in. So when the dev says "As someone correctly pointed out in the Co-op forums" this thread would likely be the one they refer to.
I don't know why people always complain when somebody bumps an old thread. Stuff doesn't move that fast around here. It's not like Fenix and win rates are ancient history and it's super confusing for somebody to come across this thread for the first time. They literally haven't changed anything since this thread was made. It's not a big deal. Jay's a cool guy with a fun YouTube channel, give him a break.

That said, if you want to see a real pissing contest about getting upset, check out the Starcraft Remastered forums. Half of the people are complaining that every single change has ruined the game by making it more like Starcraft II, the other half are complaining that the game is awful because they didn't change it to be more like Starcraft II. It is a majestic tour de force of butthurt.
Using Fenix' winrates as a metric to judge him with was first criticized in this thread (https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20754847672?page=1) by raincamp, myself and many others. They could have been referring to any one of those posts, or this thread.

But the specifics of who is responsible or whatever isnt really important. What is important is that a bunch of us came together to point out that winrate is a poor metric when it comes to judging coop commander performances, and as a result, the coop dev team listened to us and reversed their earlier stance, thus benefiting Fenix for the better with this change to better support his intended design. Great work, everyone who posted feedback about Fenix!
08/17/2017 08:23 PMPosted by Jayborino
08/17/2017 05:54 PMPosted by Yattien
You zombiefied your topic to make a slightly inaccurate statement. Unless I'm reading things wrong, they never specifically mention this topic and there was many MANY people saying the same things at the time.

So no real reason to make a zombie. No one is a fan of it.

I don't frequent here very often and had not seen any other topic on this matter. When I posted the idea on reddit, it wasn't agreed with. Further, I posted this before your recent ramble about a new commander and blue posts, which I regrettably took the time to find and read. Anyway, I genuinely thought I had made a contribution, was happy about it, and wanted to say thank you and also highlight the background behind the misleading statistics they referred to by bumping the thread.

In contrast, you've replied in two threads only to make sure I knew I was wrong (which you do not actually know for sure) and simply couldn't let a stranger be happy, even if it might be for the wrong reason one time. What horse do you have in the race of a random rezzed thread except to be smarmy? It contributes nothing, unlike the original content of my thread here. Bnet forums outside of Bnet are known as just a pissing contest to see who can cruise through and get upset the most, which is why I don't come here too much. You can have the credit if it helps you enjoy your day a bit more!


I'm not taking credit. And I said you were slightly inaccurate, not wrong, please read what I said properly. You appeared to be taking full credit for something that was discussed a lot at the time. This topic may be one of the most clear examples that they might have read, but that's still no reason to assume it was the only one.

Also, I didn't post in the first topic solely to say you are wrong, I posted in that one to say it was nice that they finally listened to US and had posted an update in the co-op forums. If I wanted to be a jerk I'd have taken full credit for them doing that as my recent "ramble" was possibly the catalyst, but I don't, because I know that I'm not the sole reason for things happening.

Not to mention that my "ramble" is also a reasonably well worded feedback topic, and is not a "ramble" in the first place.

08/17/2017 11:10 PMPosted by typhoon
I don't know why people always complain when somebody bumps an old thread.


Cos it makes people think it's a new topic, with new information, and not something dated at the end of last month. Old topics contribute nothing, as they have already been read and digested by anyone who cared. That is why it is complained about and disliked.
08/18/2017 03:48 AMPosted by Aron
But the specifics of who is responsible or whatever isnt really important. What is important is that a bunch of us came together to point out that winrate is a poor metric when it comes to judging coop commander performances, and as a result, the coop dev team listened to us and reversed their earlier stance, thus benefiting Fenix for the better with this change to better support his intended design. Great work, everyone who posted feedback about Fenix!


Thanks man, yes, I lost sight of that and it is absolutely true.
08/18/2017 04:36 AMPosted by Jayborino
08/18/2017 03:48 AMPosted by Aron
But the specifics of who is responsible or whatever isnt really important. What is important is that a bunch of us came together to point out that winrate is a poor metric when it comes to judging coop commander performances, and as a result, the coop dev team listened to us and reversed their earlier stance, thus benefiting Fenix for the better with this change to better support his intended design. Great work, everyone who posted feedback about Fenix!


Thanks man, yes, I lost sight of that and it is absolutely true.


I agree with Aron, who has explained what I tried to say in a much better manner. I'm not very good at that sometimes.
I have no problem playing Fenix on brutal, never tried mutation, though.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum