|
Canada780 Posts
On December 06 2009 09:17 Shiva_Chandra wrote:
Just an idea, but if you dont want to choose players based on ranks, you should do it based on games played on iccup this season; I think it'd be the best way (I'm sure coaches want ACTIVE players).
I know what your saying, with more games = better chance of the player not losing interest.
But, I have not played any ranked games on my Iccup account this season. That does not mean I'm not active (I play almost everyday), and is probably the case with some other people.
|
That's a good idea, since I played over 1100 games this season on various accounts on ladder and on "melee" with friends ^^. However, I peaked C- few days ago for the first time, so I guess I won't be able to participate ;/.
|
l10f
United States3241 Posts
Even if you're C- still sign up.
|
yea seriously, tbh i'd rather have a group of Solid D/D- players that are super active/motivated, than a C- that comes on every 3 days.
|
As I said earlier, though it might have been missed, I personally am definitely in support of allowing C-s who are below or at 3500 and currently have a record at this rating with more losses than wins. If you can beat a single D+ you can get C- with just mass gaming, the actual skill gap from low c- to anywhere in d+ doesn't seem to be that great or even existent to me.
I don't really like the the form we had to fill out, the concision of it only allows for precision if you have nothing "special" about you. I felt I had to write a lot in the "extra" box to be giving accurate information. It's weird for me to write a "main race" because I play all three so often, and my matchup skills are so different for the mostpart. And the iccup id I'm currently using doesn't reflect all of that accurately.
Probably doesn't matter though ._>
This League should be fun, I hope it doesn't die out quickly. People seem to lose interest so fast in these kinds of things =/
|
|
|
I did. But C-'s are behind in like 30 votes, and it starts tomorow, so I have no hopes ;/.
|
|
|
current situation:
(Note that this is an estimate, this is not the exact numbers, and they are changing very quickly)
Status:
ICCup Ranks:
Time Available:
Have Mic or not:
Other Activities:
|
What if we got to C- and then started playing on alt accounts?
|
On December 06 2009 11:12 Nevuk wrote:
What if we got to C- and then started playing on alt accounts?
i dont think this needs to be so complicated, if there is 1-2 players that just wants to smurf in to be an asshole it doesn't even matter.
|
On December 06 2009 10:56 ProoM wrote:
I did. But C-'s are behind in like 30 votes, and it starts tomorow, so I have no hopes ;/.
The vote is more of a guideline for the guys in charge eh?
My thoughts on possible maps to be used:
Odd-Eye (maybe, can understand people not wanting it for a lack of replays and a scarcity of vods)
Destination (popular, relatively balanced, lots of replays, fair amount of variety in gameplay)
Outsider (maybe.. fair amount of vods/replays, but as it's no longer a courage map not that popular anymore, also could be too hard of a map on players not used to large amounts of cheese and drop/island based play)
Neo Medusa (maybe, fairly basic macro map with a fair amount of harass potential and strategic diversity, but not all that popular, and the backdoor might be hard on players)
Athena 2 (basic macro map, not played all that much, lack of replays/vods made up for in map simplicity imo)
Sin Chupung-Ryeung (not played a whole lot, fairly basic macro map with good harass potential and strategic variety, racial imbalances might be too strong though)
Byzantium 53 (basic macro map, not played a whole lot, but maybe too boring?)
Troy (generally basic macro map, not played much, with a great potential for interesting play and tactics)
Neo Forte ! (blast from the past, pretty basic macro map, should be playable still, problem lies in all replays being corrupt and vods being of bad-by-today's-standards players (more or less); less boring than some of the other macro maps of today though, cliffable nat, somewhat encouragement of 1base play with low min nat and high min main, and small mains possibly encourage more proxies)
Hitchhiker (older map, not too extreme imo, fun map, but maybe too few replays with vods being somewhat outdated)
Azalea ! (awesome older map, very basic, popular until last two years when it was removed from wcg, provides variety in the form of possible viable 1base openings vs FE to min only vs FE to gas expo, etc)
BlitzX (older map, few replays but fairly basic macro map, a lot of variety in games though, really neat, underused (when it was played at all) map)
I'd really rather not see Heartbreak Ridge (too awful/annoying, albeit courage/popular), Moon Glaive (courage map, but potentially annoying nat), Fighting Spirit (seems boring and imbalanced? courage map though), Colosseum2 (basic and up until recently fairly popular as a courage map, but really boring and the nat placement and turtlability of the 3rd gas expo can be hard on players), God's Garden (really boring, though basic and with room for variety in games), Python (everyone knows it, but it's pretty boring), Longinus (boring and imbalanced), Andromeda (boring and can be hard on players trying to play the map "correctly"), and Match Point (few replays, not courage, seems to be imbalanced). Bluestorm'd be ok though I'm concerned the tight path could be hard on people not already used to it. I wouldn't mind Andromeda/Python, just they're boring. Moon Glaive is iffy for me only because of the nat.
|
l10f
United States3241 Posts
I think some people may be confused (by the looks of the spreadsheet) Coach + Coach = 2 co-coaches.
|
i think for this round it'll be ok since we don't know if this will die out or whatnot but if this is successful, I think a preliminary tournament for players would be nice. And then the coaches can do a draft thing based on their rank.
I feel like this does 3 things
1. It will be more likely the coaches will want to work with the players since they were hand picked.
2. It would reaffirm the ranks of all the players.
3. It would help balance the skill difference in the coaches (although i guess playing skill isnt the same as teaching skill.
Just a thought
|
Oh and to add to that, it could possibly show a map imbalance because at low levels, who knows..
We could call the prelim tournament the NoobSL!
|
I may be interested.. although I might be on the border of both. I have gotten C+ and almost B- in the past at my absolute peak (early 2008), but I havent played seriously for about a year, hardly played more than 20 games since may too.. hmm.
I do know lots about BW/RTS's, I have been organizers for top RTS teams and helped going over strategy with top Canadian players (one who won WCG Canada in the past) so I feel I could train good, I just dunno if my APM is at a level to prove it on my own at the moment without practicing lately.. so who knows.
It'd be nice to be a player too, cause I could get back in shape for SC2 -_-
|
l10f
United States3241 Posts
On December 06 2009 11:43 Xenocide_Knight wrote:
i think for this round it'll be ok since we don't know if this will die out or whatnot but if this is successful, I think a preliminary tournament for players would be nice. And then the coaches can do a draft thing based on their rank.
I feel like this does 3 things
1. It will be more likely the coaches will want to work with the players since they were hand picked.
2. It would reaffirm the ranks of all the players.
3. It would help balance the skill difference in the coaches (although i guess playing skill isnt the same as teaching skill.
Just a thought
That would be hell to get everyone together, but we'll see how this one goes.
|
3 Lions
United States3705 Posts
imo if we do a draft we should limit the number of people for a rank on the team
like no more than 2 D+'s, 4 D's, or something liek that
|
what does the option "help the team" mean exactly? Afaik only players can play and coachs/co-coaches can teach. What other tasks would there be? o.o
|
l10f
United States3241 Posts
On December 06 2009 13:00 FyRe_DragOn wrote:
what does the option "help the team" mean exactly? Afaik only players can play and coachs/co-coaches can teach. What other tasks would there be? o.o
Well, I don't know either tbh. RaptorX made that. I think he meant help organizing or something. in my opinion, the option co-coach and help the team shouldn't be there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
as long as you got the time zone and the available time.
go lose a couple of games ![[image loading]](http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/8559/chartvc.png)
![[image loading]](http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/1643/chart2w.png)
![[image loading]](http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/3571/chart3.png)
![[image loading]](http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/6621/chart4.png)
![[image loading]](http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/6081/chart5.png)
