|
|
|
I would really like some sort of feature along these lines, I ended up hiding SC2 and BW strategy because the quality of posting/advice is really terrible. Problem is, designing the perfect system for a site like TL could be really really hard.
|
I think there should just be a balance suggestion/ balance whining sub-forum.
I know a lot of people are against that but it makes a lot of sense. The people that want to engage in this discussion have their own little forum and every body else can just ignore them.
|
Systematically restricting post capabilities would limit the voices heard and would only hinder discussion. TL is modded well as it is (and as you said  )and while it is desirable to cut out derailing posts or useless topics, ultimately it should be up to human judgment as to who deserves to post (i.e. moderators). A flawless automated system would be desirable though.
Also I don't think this is a whine thread, its an awesome idea I just don't know if its realistic, but maybe I'm too pessimistic.
|
Or, we can just look at liquipedia, majorty of all questions are answered in guides there and if there isn't an answer for the question your looking to be answered then you can take it upon yourself to do some research/figgure it out and put it up there, then everybody wins
|
- Nothing is imba. If you found something imba, it's most likely not. Find a counter. This is no place for balance discussion
I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
Also the quote iirc was said in order to not shit up the strategy forum, and not because actually the mods thought the game is perfectly balanced, but because it was beta obviously it wasnt balanced. However now the game is released so "whining" about imbalance increased, as ppl expect it to be balanced
Damn straight it is imbalanced, it would be a miracle if it wouldnt. What we must hope for is that Blizz at least fixes the matchups to the point where the community can manipulate the balance problems with map features.
Also on the limitation idea, i dont support it, everybody may try and express himself, if his work decreases the level of TL, the mods should ban him.
|
To be fair there is a LOT more content on TL then there is currently on Liquipedia II. I'm sure in time Liquipedia II will be nothing short of breathtaking like it's first incarnation for SC1 but as it stands currently it's a little underwhelming (for good reason). After a few patches and the dust of release has fully settled I'm sure things will get fleshed out. Until then though I'm pretty sure most of my sc2 strat fixes will have to come from TL and replays.
|
On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:
- Nothing is imba. If you found something imba, it's most likely not. Find a counter. This is no place for balance discussion
I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
Damn straight it is imbalanced, it would be a miracle if it wouldnt. What we must hope for is that Blizz at least fixes the matchups to the point where the community can manipulate the balance problems with map features.
Also on the limitation idea, i dont support it, everybody may try and express himself, if his work decreases the level of TL, the mods should ban him.
I think you have to take the context of that rule into perspective. There are two things you have to consider.
First : The strategy section is just that. For strategy. A place for people to discuss strategies that are working well for or against them. Or perhaps the mechanics behind strategies in general? Either way the section's purpose as I understand it is to discuss the way we play the game. Balance issues can be discussed elsewhere such as the general forum.
Second: It was just getting silly during beta. People would lose a game or two and come flying into the forums screaming as if their first born child had been taken in the dead of night. When blizz was doing large balancing changes during beta obviously something is going to get broken. Everyone knew about the really large problems and if you didn't, you were playing a game a day and as a result ran to the forums when you thought you discovered some big secret. Haven't seen a LOT of this since release.
|
while i agree that the posting quality and false information needs to be remedied, stopping people from posting is just inherently contradictory to a forum. Rather, i would suggest a vote up/down system to show/hide posts, much like youtube has for its comments. Shit posts will be voted down and hidden from view unless clicked upon, quality posts will be voted up and maybe have a green label to draw attention to it.
This will also hide most of the bad advice so that readers have to read fewer posts to get the information they want from a thread. To a degree, this might also help lighten the load on the mods.
|
Croatia9492 Posts
On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
That's a very poor reasoning. You DO know that there is also that little thing called 'skill', whereas there are players with different skill?
|
On August 15 2010 21:04 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
That's a very poor reasoning. You DO know that there is also that little thing called 'skill', whereas there are players with different skill?
yes but after thousands of games played, it should make no difference. It's just stupid to assume talented players picked that race. Especially as many times it was T>Z>P for long period of time.
|
On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:
- Nothing is imba. If you found something imba, it's most likely not. Find a counter. This is no place for balance discussion
I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
Also the quote iirc was said in order to not shit up the strategy forum, and not because actually the mods thought the game is perfectly balanced, but because it was beta obviously it wasnt balanced. However now the game is released so "whining" about imbalance increased, as ppl expect it to be balanced
Damn straight it is imbalanced, it would be a miracle if it wouldnt. What we must hope for is that Blizz at least fixes the matchups to the point where the community can manipulate the balance problems with map features.
Also on the limitation idea, i dont support it, everybody may try and express himself, if his work decreases the level of TL, the mods should ban him.
You can't use that as an argument to why there is imbalance in bw and sc2, no two players are compleatly even in skill and no one plays exactly the same over and over so its impossible to get even statistics over every game
Mods are talking in a sense of people posting "unit x is unbeatable" which detracts from the quality of the forums
On August 15 2010 21:06 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 21:04 2Pacalypse- wrote:On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
That's a very poor reasoning. You DO know that there is also that little thing called 'skill', whereas there are players with different skill? yes but after thousands of games played, it should make no difference. It's just stupid to assume talented players picked that race. Especially as many times it was T>Z>P for long period of time.
So your saying that after 100 games with jaedong i should go 50-50 with him right? And if i lose i can blame it on imbalance?
|
Croatia9492 Posts
On August 15 2010 21:06 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 21:04 2Pacalypse- wrote:On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
That's a very poor reasoning. You DO know that there is also that little thing called 'skill', whereas there are players with different skill? yes but after thousands of games played, it should make no difference. It's just stupid to assume talented players picked that race. Especially as many times it was T>Z>P for long period of time.
And again poor reasoning, but this time I won't even bother with an explanation. I'll just say though, that you're in a uphill battle if you continue to represent "BW is imba" opinion ^^
|
Actually he is right, over time and with a large enough sample size outliers such as skill are cancelled out. Or to put it less scientifically, I think we can rule out that coincidentally all the best players chose to play Terran and Zerg only, thus giving them a much higher number of SL wins than Protoss. But no game is ever going to be perfectly balanced, all you can hope for is that it is balanced enough that a competitive community can work with it.
|
Croatia9492 Posts
On August 15 2010 21:41 Balfazar wrote:
Actually he is right, over time and with a large enough sample size outliers such as skill are cancelled out. Or to put it less scientifically, I think we can rule out that coincidentally all the best players chose to play Terran and Zerg only, thus giving them a much higher number of SL wins than Protoss. But no game is ever going to be perfectly balanced, all you can hope for is that it is balanced enough that a competitive community can work with it.
Wow, do you really want to turn this thread into BW is imba discussion? (hint: it's not.)
|
On August 15 2010 21:06 Scaramanga wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:
- Nothing is imba. If you found something imba, it's most likely not. Find a counter. This is no place for balance discussion
I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
Also the quote iirc was said in order to not shit up the strategy forum, and not because actually the mods thought the game is perfectly balanced, but because it was beta obviously it wasnt balanced. However now the game is released so "whining" about imbalance increased, as ppl expect it to be balanced
Damn straight it is imbalanced, it would be a miracle if it wouldnt. What we must hope for is that Blizz at least fixes the matchups to the point where the community can manipulate the balance problems with map features.
Also on the limitation idea, i dont support it, everybody may try and express himself, if his work decreases the level of TL, the mods should ban him. You can't use that as an argument to why there is imbalance in bw and sc2, no two players are compleatly even in skill and no one plays exactly the same over and over so its impossible to get even statistics over every game Mods are talking in a sense of people posting "unit x is unbeatable" which detracts from the quality of the forums Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 21:06 Geo.Rion wrote:On August 15 2010 21:04 2Pacalypse- wrote:On August 15 2010 20:42 Geo.Rion wrote:I said this before, but here it is again:
Some people out of some sort of "professionalism" claim that cheese, imbalance and these sort of things do not exist. That's bullshit, imbalance exist, and it will always exist, it exist in BW too. If not we'd have probably 33/33/33% of the SLs won by P/Z/T and overall mu statistics would look like 49.x/49.x. However they dont. And here we are talking about a game which just got released, after a relatively short beta, ending with most of the people claiming balancing isnt well done.
That's a very poor reasoning. You DO know that there is also that little thing called 'skill', whereas there are players with different skill? yes but after thousands of games played, it should make no difference. It's just stupid to assume talented players picked that race. Especially as many times it was T>Z>P for long period of time. So your saying that after 100 games with jaedong i should go 50-50 with him right? And if i lose i can blame it on imbalance?
He is probably only talking about pro-scene; no one is dumb enough to believe that you should go 50-50 with Jaedong 
|
United States22883 Posts
We're always looking for ways to clean up the Strategy forum. It goes without saying that different opinions are not equal, but we'd also like to keep the forums accessible and fun, and it's a difficult balance to maintain. We might be elitists and snobs but, personally, I don't think segregating posters is the right method to develop the Strategy section. With all the closing we do, one thing that doesn't get any credit are some of the really good threads that are still made, even if they're just asking for help.
Deep down, I hope that with time, the quality of posting rises a bit. I also think that as time goes on, it'll be easier to tell someone with greater certainty that their opinion is simply wrong, like we can do in the BW section. And remember, it doesn't just fall to some new rule or feature to make that happen. Veterans are expected to be examples for newer posters to follow, so while we can help set the culture, it's the entire userbase that has to maintain it. So far, a lot of posters have actually stepped up to help with that.
As for the links you posted, I know you're many months short of being able to Report, but you can still PM those links to mods when you find a bad thread or inappropriate post. The backseat modding Commandment applies to posting in threads, not giving us tips when there's something that needs to be moderated. I can only speak for myself, but I can only browse a few dozen Strategy forum threads in a day before I need to take a break and enjoy TL on my own. At that point, Reports/PMs are a huge help.
|
United States22883 Posts
On August 15 2010 21:48 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2010 21:41 Balfazar wrote:
Actually he is right, over time and with a large enough sample size outliers such as skill are cancelled out. Or to put it less scientifically, I think we can rule out that coincidentally all the best players chose to play Terran and Zerg only, thus giving them a much higher number of SL wins than Protoss. But no game is ever going to be perfectly balanced, all you can hope for is that it is balanced enough that a competitive community can work with it. Wow, do you really want to turn this thread into BW is imba discussion? (hint: it's not.)
It's silly to think that perfect balance exists in anything. BW is balanced to the point where varying maps and current performance levels affect the outcome, but it's certainly not in perfect harmony.
I guess the best way to describe it would be with variation. 48-52 with +5 variation for maps and +10 for current player ability. Something like that.
|
I fully agree with Jibba. It would stop some people from making threads and possibly end up making tons of help threads and stuff in the general SC2 forum which then makes being a Mod pretty annoying(in that u have to spend time to possibly ask the other Mods what punishment should be given and also take the time to close said threads and carry out said punishment).
Also, this is a little off topic but I can think of another way to make the job easier for Mods. Add some sort of special PM function that PMs to all the Mods or some sort of multi-PM function that maybe u can personalize or something just for Mods or possible for all users. Like PM to all users that are in a beta contest at once instead of one at a time.
|
There should be some sort of multiple choice exam required for posting in any SC/SC2 forum. Nothing obscenely hard, things that could easily be answered by googling or searching TL. In addition to stopping absolute morons from posting, it might also encourage people to use search before making threads for common questions
|
On August 15 2010 22:38 3FFA wrote:
I fully agree with Jibba. It would stop some people from making threads and possibly end up making tons of help threads and stuff in the general SC2 forum which then makes being a Mod pretty annoying(in that u have to spend time to possibly ask the other Mods what punishment should be given and also take the time to close said threads and carry out said punishment).
Also, this is a little off topic but I can think of another way to make the job easier for Mods. Add some sort of special PM function that PMs to all the Mods or some sort of multi-PM function that maybe u can personalize or something just for Mods or possible for all users. Like PM to all users that are in a beta contest at once instead of one at a time.
There is a function like that, the report button, it gets available a year after joining TL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
