EPTC Ranks Teamleague - Page 4
| Forum Index > Brood War Tournaments |
|
1004
United States104 Posts
| ||
|
hellbound
United Kingdom2242 Posts
The whole idea of "colour" ranks teamleagues is flawed, because the ability strata don't fall along them all that well in reality. D- are beginners or mild casuals who have glaring flaws in their play, however since these problems are not that insurmountable they can and should be pitted against players who maintain D but are not quite able to get D+. D-/D teamleague. A player who consistently beats D's will get C- if he plays enough. D+/C- teamleague. The gap between C- and C is huge, dunno about C+ because chobo, but C/C+ teamleague makes sense to me. Even if we have a yellow rank tournament and cap C+ people. A match between a C- and a C+ would be little fun for anyone. The situation would become like Jeadong OZ or KTFlash very coinflip i.e. dependant of who gets matched up with who. Of course if left as is it will be 2 KTs and 10 estros (apologies to any fans who are disagreeable with the analogy, hopefully in spite of your discontent you will get the point), which is worse. Food for thought. Oh and ninazerg with all that enthusiasm you should definitely participate as a captain. | ||
|
Eywa-
Canada4876 Posts
On February 16 2012 13:48 hellbound wrote: I think I'll expand on my thoughts a little, this is a forum after all. I don't want to sound condescending, telling people "how it is", so take the following as the most humblest of opinions from a guy who has spent a few seasons in the lower rungs of iccup. The whole idea of "colour" ranks teamleagues is flawed, because the ability strata don't fall along them all that well in reality. D- are beginners or mild casuals who have glaring flaws in their play, however since these problems are not that insurmountable they can and should be pitted against players who maintain D but are not quite able to get D+. D-/D teamleague. A player who consistently beats D's will get C- if he plays enough. D+/C- teamleague. The gap between C- and C is huge, dunno about C+ because chobo, but C/C+ teamleague makes sense to me. Even if we have a yellow rank tournament and cap C+ people. A match between a C- and a C+ would be little fun for anyone. The situation would become like Jeadong OZ or KTFlash very coinflip i.e. dependant of who gets matched up with who. Of course if left as is it will be 2 KTs and 10 estros (apologies to any fans who are disagreeable with the analogy, hopefully in spite of your discontent you will get the point), which is worse. Food for thought. Oh and ninazerg with all that enthusiasm you should definitely participate as a captain. Where are you going to get the quantity of players required for 3 leagues ranging from D- to C+? O_O | ||
|
hellbound
United Kingdom2242 Posts
On February 16 2012 14:05 Eywa- wrote: Where are you going to get the quantity of players required for 3 leagues ranging from D- to C+? O_O Rather than giving a solution I was pointing out the problem. I suck like that. Going with the "core and friends" approach is probably the best that can be done imho. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On February 16 2012 13:48 hellbound wrote: I think I'll expand on my thoughts a little, this is a forum after all. I don't want to sound condescending, telling people "how it is", so take the following as the most humblest of opinions from a guy who has spent a few seasons in the lower rungs of iccup. The whole idea of "colour" ranks teamleagues is flawed, because the ability strata don't fall along them all that well in reality. D- are beginners or mild casuals who have glaring flaws in their play, however since these problems are not that insurmountable they can and should be pitted against players who maintain D but are not quite able to get D+. D-/D teamleague. A player who consistently beats D's will get C- if he plays enough. D+/C- teamleague. The gap between C- and C is huge, dunno about C+ because chobo, but C/C+ teamleague makes sense to me. Even if we have a yellow rank tournament and cap C+ people. A match between a C- and a C+ would be little fun for anyone. The situation would become like Jeadong OZ or KTFlash very coinflip i.e. dependant of who gets matched up with who. Of course if left as is it will be 2 KTs and 10 estros (apologies to any fans who are disagreeable with the analogy, hopefully in spite of your discontent you will get the point), which is worse. Food for thought. Oh and ninazerg with all that enthusiasm you should definitely participate as a captain. Interesting thoughts. Trying to decide to what extent I agree. I guess I'm curious as to why you feel there is a big gap between C- and C? Is it just drastically harder to beat C- players than it is to beat D+ players? If that's true then it also sounds like there is a big gap between D+ and C-. Also not sure If I agree with: A player who consistently beats D's will get C- if he plays enough. He will get D+. Whether he can get C- depends on his abilities to beat other D+ players on a regular basis. There is a respectable difference between a player who cannot get out of D and one that can touch D+, which makes it noticeable harder to beat D+ players as opposed to D. I guess I'm not convinced that any one rank has a harder gap than one preceding it except for ones that result in a change in color as then it becomes harder to maintain/advance rank due to the W/L points differences. Where I think the differences really exist is in where you stand within a rank. Can you touch C-? Hold C-? Touch C? | ||
|
renzy
Canada781 Posts
On February 16 2012 14:22 L_Master wrote: Interesting thoughts. Trying to decide to what extent I agree. I guess I'm curious as to why you feel there is a big gap between C- and C? Is it just drastically harder to beat C- players than it is to beat D+ players? If that's true then it also sounds like there is a big gap between D+ and C-. Also not sure If I agree with: He will get D+. Whether he can get C- depends on his abilities to beat other D+ players on a regular basis. There is a respectable difference between a player who cannot get out of D and one that can touch D+, which makes it noticeable harder to beat D+ players as opposed to D. I guess I'm not convinced that any one rank has a harder gap than one preceding it except for ones that result in a change in color as then it becomes harder to maintain/advance rank due to the W/L points differences. Where I think the differences really exist is in where you stand within a rank. Can you touch C-? Hold C-? Touch C? One of the reasons there is a big skill gap between C- and D+ is that against other D+, you lose 50 points. When a C- players plays another C- and loses, they lose 75. That's one of the few reasons. I think there is quite a big skill gap between C+ and C. A C- player might be able to take a game or two off of a C player given an advantage. They should never be able to take games off of a C+ under normal circumstances. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
One of the reasons there is a big skill gap between C- and D+ is that against other D+, you lose 50 points. When a C- players plays another C- and loses, they lose 75. This is what I have always believed to be the case. I think there is quite a big skill gap between C+ and C. A C- player might be able to take a game or two off of a C player given an advantage. They should never be able to take games off of a C+ under normal circumstances. Not saying there isn't a gap as you suggest, as obviously I have no experience with it. I'm curious as to why the C- -> C gap would be smaller/easier than the C -> C+ gap? Sure a C- player shouldn't take many games from a C+ player, but a C- player doesn't need to. They just need to beat other C- players reasonably often. Would a C player take less games from a C+ player than a C- would from a C (just curious)? | ||
|
renzy
Canada781 Posts
On February 16 2012 14:35 L_Master wrote: This is what I have always believed to be the case. Not saying there isn't a gap as you suggest, as obviously I have no experience with it. I'm curious as to why the C- -> C gap would be smaller/easier than the C -> C+ gap? Sure a C- player shouldn't take many games from a C+ player, but a C- player doesn't need to. They just need to beat other C- players reasonably often. Would a C player take less games from a C+ player than a C- would from a C (just curious)? Good question. I think in order to reach C-, you have to sort of know what you're doing, but you don't really need to know exactly what you're doing. In a sense, you're bullshitting your BO. This changes when players get to C and C+. At the C+ level, players are able to adapt based on what they scout much better than compared to C and C-. C+ players have a better sense of timing. As to why there's a big gap between C and C+ even though the amount of points you gain is the same... I really don't know how to answer that. Maybe the current C players are all pretty consistent and dont make as many stupid mistakes, and in order to hit C+ with a decent record, you need to be quite a bit better than them?? That's my theory. My opinion. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10673 Posts
| ||
|
hellbound
United Kingdom2242 Posts
On February 16 2012 14:22 L_Master wrote: guess I'm curious as to why you feel there is a big gap between C- and C? Is it just drastically harder to beat C- players than it is to beat D+ players? If that's true then it also sounds like there is a big gap between D+ and C-. I feel that way, because I think C- is too easy to get. Assuming motw for a D+ player 130 for win and -50 for defeat means getting C- even with a ~40% winrate against D+. Even lower throwing in a random win against a C- guy. One cannot even dent a C player with that kind of ability. Now getting C is completely different. To at least touch it hosting 1v1 D+/C- motw you need ~75%+ winrate against D+ and ~50% winrate against C-, it is truly a level above. Also not sure If I agree with: A player who consistently beats D's will get C- if he plays enough. He will get D+. Whether he can get C- depends on his abilities to beat other D+ players on a regular basis. There is a respectable difference between a player who cannot get out of D and one that can touch D+, which makes it noticeable harder to beat D+ players as opposed to D. This is more to do with the murky waters that are D levels. I've stated before somewhere that in the latter half of the season D+ is easier than D (damn you smurfs). With the huge points that can be got off "true" D+ players who are proud owners of a 100-200 record having 50%+ winrate against D inevitably gives you C- in no more than a hundred games. In the end I blame iccup. In order to facilitate their complete resets they made getting out of D easy. They overdid it. C- should be harder to achieve. This is something known to me very personally, because the days when I was a true D player enjoying 35-50% winrates against my peers and then hitting C- like a wall are not far behind me. Reds don't like you any more, the ones that do are most likely not really red and yellows destroy you, it was horrible. I'd stop playing for the rest of the season or reset. To clarify when I mention rank I mean "max" not "can hold", i.e. the aforementioned C- guy who got there with a 60% winrate against D, 40% winrate against D+ and <20% winrate against yellow things. Now imagine a game between him and a guy who goes toe to toe against C+... | ||
|
LuMiX
China5757 Posts
| ||
|
SlowBullets
United States839 Posts
| ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
A C- player can take a game off a C+ player in a macro game, a D- will never beat a D+, actually there is a huge discrepancy in the C ranks which you don't get in the D's. You will often find some C- rank players who are really good, and some that are terrible. Sometimes I will be consistently taking games off a C-/C player as a D+, and other times I get my ass kicked. I think its due to the fact that a lot of really good players simply can't be assed playing enough games to get to C, compared to some people who will mass ladder. Its almost the same situation in the D ranks where often you will play anyone between D- and B+, where as in D+ you can be certain that most of your games will be against a legit D+. | ||
|
Reaper[Pain]
United States10 Posts
Race: Protoss Iccup account : Reaper[pain] | ||
|
Lumire
United States607 Posts
On February 16 2012 16:14 Reaper[Pain] wrote: Rank: C Race: Protoss Iccup account : Reaper[pain] lmao | ||
Kiante
Australia7069 Posts
On February 16 2012 16:14 Reaper[Pain] wrote: Rank: C Race: Protoss Iccup account : Reaper[pain] lol that account. get to C, stat reset-repeat. no way you're a legit c, considering how quickly you get there (30-2 lol) | ||
|
S2Glow
Singapore1042 Posts
| ||
Sayle
United Kingdom3685 Posts
On February 16 2012 16:07 sluggaslamoo wrote: The difference between D- and D+ is massively huge compared to C- and C+. A C- player can take a game off a C+ player in a macro game, a D- will never beat a D+, actually there is a huge discrepancy in the C ranks which you don't get in the D's. You will often find some C- rank players who are really good, and some that are terrible. Sometimes I will be consistently taking games off a C-/C player as a D+, and other times I get my ass kicked. I think its due to the fact that a lot of really good players simply can't be assed playing enough games to get to C, compared to some people who will mass ladder. Its almost the same situation in the D ranks where often you will play anyone between D- and B+, where as in D+ you can be certain that most of your games will be against a legit D+. If you're a D+ player, why do you think you have any idea what the level difference between C rank players is. | ||
|
Wala.Revolution
7582 Posts
EDIT: info rank: C- (current) ID: Drywater Race: T | ||
|
puppykiller
United States3128 Posts
| ||
| ||
