|
And obviously that makes my opinion fucking matter...
Seriously getting SUPER tired of anytime someone states an opinion that might not be very popular that they preface it with. "Well I'm mid diamond" or "I'm high diamond" my favorite "1800 rated Diamond here..."
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/C8mk9.jpg)
Proven fact this is what you look like when you try to use your ranking as an argument
Don't get me wrong I don't mind this when people are talking about their PLAY. IE when they're posting about a stream or signing up for a limit slot tournament that is not first come first serve.
BUT your ranking has absolutely 0.00% of a factor to do with you having an opinion about the game. If you think something should be changed don't bring your ranking into the equation just fucking back up your argument. People keep using their ladder ranking in arguments instead of like FACTS you know those things that people like to use in debates. Apparently the only fact I need is HEY IM IN DIAMOND!
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/AeV0o.jpg)
Hey it still counts right? RIGHT?
Ladder ranking not only doesn't tell us anything, but at this point points don't say much either as the bonus points have completely destroyed the rating system. Inflation is completely out of control all telling us your rank tells us is you might know how to play the game but that doesn't mean you have any clear understanding of the game as a whole. Wow you're 2000+ good job do you know any races besides your own?
![[image loading]](http://i43.tinypic.com/dbgvur.jpg)
What's a baneling again?
"Err... well I know the Protoss match ups." Good job my point exactly, I've known Silver players who had deep understanding of the game just didn't know how to fucking play it. So next time you're tempted to start off an argument with "Hey 2100 Zerg here!" Just slap yourself real good across the face then use a real argument.
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/fb1mK.gif)
Internet slapfights almost as stupid as listing your rank as an argument
Ragecun out
 
|
from a broodwar perspective, sc2 ladder points are worth almost as much as the turds that brag about them
|
People should just have their ranking in their sigs at all times. This would be nice
Nothing fancy, just a half a line of text that says "1800 Diamond Rank 30 US" or something
|
On November 07 2010 01:40 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
Ragecunt out
As a 1337 point diamond player, I find that isn't always true at my level of play. Maybe if you provided some replays I could see what you are talking about.
:D lolz, good blog post though.
|
As much as I agree with you it'll never change.
Teamliquid has an abundance of people who have this notion that they're way better than everyone else.
Some serious superiority complex breeding around here.
High 2000 Diamond Terran out.
|
I remember when we were in DC I said to Shiver and Orb (I think) that I bet at least 5 people tell us their ranking within the first 2 sentences to us.
I won, 12 was the end number.
"Hey Ret I'm a big fan, I mean I'm only an 1800 point zerg but...."
Don't worry Raelcun, this trend will not stop and only get worse with time...
|
'BUT your ranking has absolutely 0.00% of a factor to do with you having an opinion about the game'
Erm, actually it's quite important. I think it's very important to state your rank, it gives you a sort of credibility so the poster can't just say 'oh, he's probably a gold scrub, his opinion doesn't matter.'
Also, at the high level strategy is actually a factor. Below mid-diamond you can win every game with just macroing properly. You can say any unit counters any unit just by having more of it.
|
On November 07 2010 01:48 Iamsmart wrote:
'BUT your ranking has absolutely 0.00% of a factor to do with you having an opinion about the game'
Erm, actually it's quite important. I think it's very important to state your rank, it gives you a sort of credibility so the poster can't just say 'oh, he's probably a gold scrub, his opinion doesn't matter.'
Also, at the high level strategy is actually a factor. Below mid-diamond you can win every game with just macroing properly. You can say any unit counters any unit just by having more of it.
You're completely missing the point below mid diamond you could have an idea of what you're supposed to be doing but lack the skills to actually do them. Read that quote again it has 0 factor with you having an opinion. Thats the thing anyone can have an opinion and as long as they back it up with solid facts why the fuck does it matter what their rank is? Guess what it doesn't the whole "oh he's probably a gold scrub his opinion doesn't matter" is the elitist bullshit I'm talking about that has no place in any argument as you should be evaluating the argument not the person.
|
How could you possibly know what you're supposed to be doing though? You don't have the proper skills to get to a point where you're maximizing your units, and therefore unit composition actually is a huge factor. Below mid-diamond you'd never know if the strategy you did actually worked, or if you just macro'd better in the game. (or if your opponent macro'd poorly etc etc)
It's called ethos - To state an opinion you have to have some sort of credibility behind you to be persuasive. How can a gold player present a proper replay that effectively show's maximized play by both players, to show that a certain tech build order works? Their skill level can be too volatile from game to game for it to be correctly compared.
|
100% agree, it's so obnoxious when people post the rating :/
|
On November 07 2010 01:56 Iamsmart wrote:
How could you possibly know what you're supposed to be doing though? You don't have the proper skills to get to a point where you're maximizing your units, and therefore unit composition actually is a huge factor. Below mid-diamond you'd never know if the strategy you did actually worked, or if you just macro'd better in the game.
It's called ethos - To state an opinion you have to have some sort of credibility behind you to be persuasive. How can a gold player present a proper replay that effectively show's maximized play by both players, to show that a certain tech build order works? Their skill level can be too volatile from game to game for it to be correctly compared.
See the problem is you're right except for one thing, ethos isn't based completely on your rank. Your rank doesn't matter there's guys in high diamond who are just fodder and have no deep understanding of the game. While there are on the other side of the equation players who watch lots of games pay attention to top players and have a good idea on how the game is played but their mechanics are terrible. Like it or not there are people who understand this game yet don't play it very often and to give a blanket statement like anyone below mid diamond has no opinion is just ignorant.
|
I never said they have no right to have an opinion. Every friend I have in the Starcraft community bar 1-2 are below Diamond.
But surely you have to see there has to be some SIGNIFICANT correlation between rank and understanding the game - Even if it's not a true 100% factor, or even very close, (nothing worth studying is) it has a damned good place to at least put some credibility to your statement.
|
On November 07 2010 01:56 Iamsmart wrote:
How could you possibly know what you're supposed to be doing though? You don't have the proper skills to get to a point where you're maximizing your units, and therefore unit composition actually is a huge factor. Below mid-diamond you'd never know if the strategy you did actually worked, or if you just macro'd better in the game. (or if your opponent macro'd poorly etc etc)
It's called ethos - To state an opinion you have to have some sort of credibility behind you to be persuasive. How can a gold player present a proper replay that effectively show's maximized play by both players, to show that a certain tech build order works? Their skill level can be too volatile from game to game for it to be correctly compared.
Tell that to Jaehoon.
Ohh poor guy.
|
I think that you might have a point there. The forums are full of posts like that and in all honesty I
am sick of that shit.I think it would be great if they made that strategy section where you have to be
1500 point atleast ( or more like 2000 due to inflation) to post. Over 2000 is the level where every
point really starts to matter and therefore real skill and insight to the game are needed. So being
diamond would mean shit and then probably those dicks would stop posting like idiots. Those guys
suck... bad. Most of them simply cheese their way up to 1500, no skill involved there. The ladder,
it is badly "made", the system needs a complete overhaul. Too bad Blizzard doesn´t care, nothing
you can do. So we are left with these 10 post idiots who get to diamond and rush to TL just like a
scrub who doesn´t even notice acrostic writing when it´s in front of his eyes.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
You're wrong again, Raelcun. I mean you're kinda right in that POINTS don't mean anything, but server rank on sc2 rank means a whole fucking LOT actually.
BUT your ranking has absolutely 0.00% of a factor to do with you having an opinion about the game. If you think something should be changed don't bring your ranking into the equation just fucking back up your argument. People keep using their ladder ranking in arguments instead of like FACTS you know those things that people like to use in debates.
That's completely ass backwards. When you're a top200 player, chances are your opinion will be correct more often and come closer to actual reality. Argument from experience is a valid part of Ethos - one of the parts of rhetoric according to Aristotle.
There's a REASON people LISTEN to EXPERTS in their field. And top players whether you like it or not ARE experts, so when one of them says something, it's YOU who better damn make sure you're not whining or speaking out of your ass, and not the top200 player, because chances are way better that he knows what he's talking about and YOU dont.
The problem is that 99% of people can't tell a real fact from their opinion if their life depended on it. You would see people (wood leaguers) making an "argument" that X units are cost ineffective, and in their MIND, they made a _good_ argument, when in fact it was nothing but their dumbass anecdotal experience in bronze league that is not a valid support for anything.
|
That's completely ass backwards. When you're a top200 player, chances are your opinion will be correct more often and come closer to actual reality. Argument from experience is a valid part of Ethos - one of the parts of rhetoric according to Aristotle.
Sure, the top 200 guys are the best people to listen to, but I think he's arguing that your average 1800 point player doesn't necessarily have that much more understanding of the game than anyone else, they just have better mechanics.
|
On November 07 2010 02:09 Sadistx wrote:You're wrong again, Raelcun. I mean you're kinda right in that POINTS don't mean anything, but server rank on sc2 rank means a whole fucking LOT actually. Show nested quote +BUT your ranking has absolutely 0.00% of a factor to do with you having an opinion about the game. If you think something should be changed don't bring your ranking into the equation just fucking back up your argument. People keep using their ladder ranking in arguments instead of like FACTS you know those things that people like to use in debates. That's completely ass backwards. When you're a top200 player, chances are your opinion will be correct more often and come closer to actual reality. Argument from experience is a valid part of Ethos - one of the parts of rhetoric according to Aristotle. There's a REASON people LISTEN to EXPERTS in their field. And top players whether you like it or not ARE experts, so when one of them says something, it's YOU who better damn make sure you're not whining or speaking out of your ass, and not the top200 player, because chances are way better that he knows what he's talking about and YOU dont. The problem is that 99% of people can't tell a real fact from their opinion if their life depended on it. You would see people (wood leaguers) making an "argument" that X units are cost ineffective, and in their MIND, they made a _good_ argument, when in fact it was nothing but their dumbass anecdotal experience in bronze league that is not a valid support for anything.
Notice how I didn't mention any of the top 200 thing? This is mostly about the people who are barely high diamond or just past mid diamond. The experts are one thing and thats the thing they don't validate their posts by saying HEY IM IN DIAMOND! Cuz they can rely on the fact that they are experts and ranked highly and well known to give them credibility without having to stand on the street corner shouting HEY LISTEN TO ME!
See people like qxc if they post don't say hey I'm 2300+ they just let the fact that they're qxc speak for themselves. Once again completely missed the point. I never said that you should listen to all wood leaguers just look at the argument not the person because if you completely ignore someone just because they're ranked low you're going to miss out on stuff.
|
Well yes, I was only talking about top200.
I actually LOVE when people DO post their points, as that saves a lot of time from reading their giant 3 page OP, that describes the PERFECT BUILD ORDER that they found in XvX matchup, when it turns out their opponent just sucked ;\
So I guess I actually agree with this blog.
|
If you win a bunch of games and have a relatively high point score you probably have more clue than some random scrub.
It's only a problem is the post contains no actual evidence or logic and relies on that number.
|
Again - Just because you don't DEFINITELY have better grasp of the game doesn't mean you don't PROBABLY have a better grasp of the game. There is a small, distinct, and important value in that. If you don't see that, then I guess there's not much point in arguing over this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
