|
On February 23 2013 09:33 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 09:22 rauk wrote:On February 23 2013 09:10 Savant wrote:
I suggest requiring players to designate their account and play a minimum number of games (with a minimum game length). There would be a quota per week or so. This would weed out inactives and make it harder to smurf, since it would be boring to play 30 or so long games and intentionally lose. If someone has a complaint, you can then review accounts and decide from there. For legit players who want to be in the league, this shouldn't be a big problem since they should be practicing on their account anyway. sounds like a pain in the ass and would drive away most people who only have time to play a few games a week A weekly quota could be removed, and instead make this ICCup season the test season for the next DR event. That way they won't be mandated to play anything during the DR season and only need 30 games throughout this whole ICCup season to qualify. Like I said, it would weed people out but then at least no one can complain.
This is basically what I hoped for; that is, that people's reformatted iCCup rank (ELO style) would be used to judge their skill for the next D Ranks event, ideally with a minimum amount of games on their account.
|
You people...
Is it really necessary to bring this whole discussion up. It's like every single season we do this.
It's a league for people who are approximately D level. There are probably some players that are closer to C- than to true D rank. Who cares?
First off, its a for fun league that offers a level of competitiveness for D rank players that they wouldn't otherwise normally get. It's intended to provide that, as well as incentive to practice and get better. Having stronger players in the league does just that...it puts more onus on people to improve. This is good.
Second, it's not like any of these players is absurd in relative strength. No one is going 15-0 opening with the stove. It's reasonable competition, and the main reason I really don't care. If players were absurdly strong, then it would be a issue but not ONE SINGLE PLAYER has yet to be unreasonably good for this league.
Third, ICCup ranks do not reflect people's skill level. At all. The correlation between ICCup rank and skill is marginally stronger than APM. This is also part of the reason why I don't really care to much about someone's rank. The "rank limit" is only there to put some sort of general cap in league so we don't get all kinds of people that are way too good trying to sign up.
While Birdies system is awesome and will be great once implemented this talk of having people play 30 ladder games, or using ICCup seasons as a basis is downright silly. It's not that hard to tell who is too strong or not if you do a little checking and watch some of their games; and, quite frankly, it doesn't really matter if they are ever so slightly beyond the accepted top value.
I know some people who wanted to sign up a team but were not really that thrilled about people of C- participating in this or something like that. What's the status on the matter now? How many players have a record higher than D+ in this?
They need to stop being so concerned about trivial details. I mean seriously...you're not going to sign up for a league because there might be some C- players in it? *shakes head*
The status on the matter now is that all players in this league are within the leagues allowable skill range. Since ICCup rank does not reflect true skill it is largely irrelevant to who is allowed.
|
Rank:D+
ICCUP account:art_of_turtle
Race:TVP TVZ PVT
|
I agree, Lmaster, that maybe it's not such a big deal if some players are a bit stronger than they should be, but to claim that iccup ranks doesn't mean anything is silly. I don't think you actually believe that, but if you do, I would like to hear your reasoning why.
Iccup ranks aren't the main problem here. The problem is the fact that some ppl don't ladder enough for us to make clear assumptions on their rank, and I don't mean only prophecy. I also mean the ppl with 10-5 scores. You can't tell if 10-5 is a lucky streak, or actual skill. The only problem with iccup is the fact that stats gets reset, but that is only an issue for ppl who haven't played let's say 40 games in a fairly recent season.
Yes, when a 1000-1999 D rank player joins your game on iccup, he could actually be anything from E to A+, but it evens out in the end if you play many games.
All of us have a max rank on iccup that we can reach. Anyone who claims otherwise have clearly not laddered enough games in a single season.
Here's some stats to show how huge the difference is between reaching and sustaining different ranks.
To reach D+, you need a 33+% winrate against D players.
To reach C-, you need a 45+% winrate against D, and 33+% against D+.
To reach C, you need a 69+% winrate against D and 45+% winrate against D+, and 33+% against C-.
Someone who can get a 60% winrate against D, and 40% against D+, would drop down to D+ now and again, but would be strong enough to spend around 2/3 of their time as C-. That's where I would put the border between high D+ and C-. If I ever reach that skill, I'm out of here.
|
I agree, Lmaster, that maybe it's not such a big deal if some players are a bit stronger than they should be, but to claim that iccup ranks doesn't mean anything is silly. I don't think you actually believe that, but if you do, I would like to hear your reasoning why.
I exaggerated some, but I really don't think they hold tons of water. There is MASSIVE variance in who you play. It's very easy to get a season where you get games against D-/low D mostly and as a D player skyrocket to D+. Conversely, I've seen C- players get stuck at D for 40+ games. Obviously this is much worse at season beginning but it's prevalent at any time.
I've played too many D+ guys with questionable records that are clearly as good or better as anyone in this league (and have no past season at C or w/e), as well as players at D+ with a good record that are truely awful. Sometimes so bad I wonder how they weren't D-.
There is also the "hosting" effect. If you can host, you not only have control over who you play, but there is a much greater tendency for joiners to be lower rank (higher players tend to be more serious and have forwarded ports) and for people that create games to be better rank. Anytime I look at my match history it's always 30-50% C- or better opponents, which is just what happens when you cannot host.
but it evens out in the end if you play many games.
Very few people play 100 games, let alone 300-500+. Even a 50 game sample size is, imo, very small. It's pretty hard to get something statistically significant with the sets of games that most D players play.
|
Man. I remember when I was younger playing 300 to 500 games at least a week. Maybe more back in the late 2000's
|
On February 23 2013 15:42 Psyonic_Reaver wrote:
Man. I remember when I was younger playing 300 to 500 games at least a week. Maybe more back in the late 2000's
I wonder how good I would get if I did that.
I play like 5-10 games a week.
|
On February 23 2013 14:09 ninini wrote:
I agree, Lmaster, that maybe it's not such a big deal if some players are a bit stronger than they should be, but to claim that iccup ranks doesn't mean anything is silly. I don't think you actually believe that, but if you do, I would like to hear your reasoning why.
Iccup ranks aren't the main problem here. The problem is the fact that some ppl don't ladder enough for us to make clear assumptions on their rank, and I don't mean only prophecy. I also mean the ppl with 10-5 scores. You can't tell if 10-5 is a lucky streak, or actual skill. The only problem with iccup is the fact that stats gets reset, but that is only an issue for ppl who haven't played let's say 40 games in a fairly recent season.
Yes, when a 1000-1999 D rank player joins your game on iccup, he could actually be anything from E to A+, but it evens out in the end if you play many games.
All of us have a max rank on iccup that we can reach. Anyone who claims otherwise have clearly not laddered enough games in a single season.
Here's some stats to show how huge the difference is between reaching and sustaining different ranks.
To reach D+, you need a 33+% winrate against D players.
To reach C-, you need a 45+% winrate against D, and 33+% against D+.
To reach C, you need a 69+% winrate against D and 45+% winrate against D+, and 33+% against C-.
Someone who can get a 60% winrate against D, and 40% against D+, would drop down to D+ now and again, but would be strong enough to spend around 2/3 of their time as C-. That's where I would put the border between high D+ and C-. If I ever reach that skill, I'm out of here.
In my eyes you are C- when you have a 50% against other C-s players. I can personally get an above 70% winrate against D and 50% winrate against D+, but no way near 50% against C- and I am pretty sure that there are people in this league who are better than me. If somebody with a 50% against D+ can't play in this a league this isn't a D rank league.
I actually saw a B+ account on iccup that only massed games against D and D- and had a 97% winratio. I am pretty sure that a solid C can achieve that if he made sure that the D opponent wasn't a smurf and hasn't reached a higher rank by looking him up. All I am trying to say that ranks only matter if you can maintain a rank via only playing people from the same rank (We could get to how inflation of players and games played can change the meaning of a rank, but thats besides the point).
|
Can't people just realize that it is impossible to police every single player and check if he is a true D rank player?
As far as I know a C ranked player could just make a new account on iCCup, purposely lose some games to stay at D ranks and come here and register for the league. It is really not that hard...
Maybe we should allow known higher ranked players whom have known D level off-races play in the league if we are in the need of more people. Although I believe a team should not be allowed to have more than 1 of those.
I imagine DRTL is very tricky to manage, most of the time we will have to take people on good faith and hope no C- and above players have so low self-esteem and go all the trouble to sneak in a D league...
|
The point of the league is to develop real low level players, and getting randomly matched with a high d+/c- and getting crushed doesn't accomplish that. Have a draft to evenly distribute talent, only allow available players with the worst records on each team to
play in matches, and match opponents with similar records. The highest level players would serve as trainers rather than players. There's no reason to copy proleague formatting when your purpose is entirely different.
|
On February 24 2013 01:00 Savant wrote:
The point of the league is to develop real low level players, and getting randomly matched with a high d+/c- and getting crushed doesn't accomplish that. Have a draft to evenly distribute talent, only allow available players with the worst records on each team to
play in matches, and match opponents with similar records. The highest level players would serve as trainers rather than players. There's no reason to copy proleague formatting when your purpose is entirely different.
"What is this?
Welcome to the D Ranks Team League Season 4!
This is a for fun team league for players in the D ranks. The aim is to provide a team for new/lower level players to practice with. Hopefully, this will achieve two things: Interest more people in Brood War, and help you get better at it. While having fun!"
????
:/
Your matches are just 1 game. They give you a reason to practice, and to practice a specific MU or strat or map. The real improvement should be coming from practicing with your team, in other words multiple games. I don't know where you pulled your "point" out of, but it surely wasn't the OP.
Improvement is accelerated by challenging yourself, in this case facing people who are stronger but not unreasonably stronger than yourself. Setting up matches to provide the least challenging opponent is counterproductive. Eliminating participation from higher skill players would kill their desire to play in the league, and thus decrease the practice time and coaching that the lower skill players would receive.
|
Hi there!
I would love to participate in this League but I have no BW ladder experience (I have never ever played a game on iccup before!). I did however play BW (mostly UMS) for 11 years (1999–2010 until SC2 came out) on Bnet.
My question is: What happens to people without a team? Will they form a new team or do you split them evenly between the standing teams? Or something else?
Do you even want noobs like me?
|
On February 24 2013 01:00 Savant wrote:
The point of the league is to develop real low level players, and getting randomly matched with a high d+/c- and getting crushed doesn't accomplish that. Have a draft to evenly distribute talent, only allow available players with the worst records on each team to
play in matches, and match opponents with similar records. The highest level players would serve as trainers rather than players. There's no reason to copy proleague formatting when your purpose is entirely different.
Wrong.
Playing the DRTL matches doesn't do much for your improvement. They are just one game. The improvement comes from the practice you do between weeks to prepare for your games.
getting randomly matched with a high d+/c- and getting crushed doesn't accomplish that.
I'd also question this. High D+ isn't an insane skill gap difference between a D rank guy. Yes, high D+ is going to take 90-95% of the games, but they shouldn't absurdly one sided.
I'm not sure how much I've ever bought into the idea that practicing against players much better than you isn't good for improvement. I learn tons when I play against people that are blue or green ranks, arguably more in my own experience than I do playing against people of similar skill.
The admitted downside is if you are getting horribly smashed everytime, you won't get to do much lategame practice. Playing against a variety of opponents is certainly better because of this but I believe a player can make plenty of improvement playing against player VASTLY superior to them in skill.
The point of the league is to develop real low level players
Not really. If that were the primary concern we would certainly have coaches and a little different match structure as well. The purpose for the league is to give lower rank players a chance to experience what in the past only higher level players really got to experience: team-play in a competitive setting.
Ideally this is a motivator that makes people want to practice and elevate their game, but I wouldn't consider it the number one purpose.
There's no reason to copy proleague formatting when your purpose is entirely different.
Where did you get the idea this was the purpose?\
At D-ranks you certainly don't need a league to get good improvement. Working on macro and mechanics, with a little mentoring from other players is really all that is needed at that level. Each team has some better players on it that can serve that purpose.
|
On February 24 2013 02:09 Biolunar wrote:
My question is: What happens to people without a team? Will they form a new team or do you split them evenly between the standing teams? Or something else?
People without a team go into the pool and will be drafted here in about a week.
Do you even want noobs like me?
YES!
This league is for everyone.
|
Well then:
Rank: D
ICCUP account: Biolunar
Race: Terran
Random is unfortunately not allowed :/
|
On the purpose of this league:
I feel like one of the best things this league offers is the team and social environment into a layman's BW experience. The team and social aspects can be great motivators for competitive gaming, as evidenced by MOBA games in general, which have incidentally sapped at our population. What's behind that motivation is simple: instead of sitting down and grinding out 5-500 games, you get + Show Spoiler +
You show up to practice because it's practice not for you, but for your teammates as well. You're motivated to analyze the game and talk postmortems with your longtime practice buddies. You wake up early to help them warm up. You wake up early to show up for the game because you don't want to let your team down. Of course in a number of cases it doesn't work like that, but when it does it's lot more fun than just playing on your own.
Motivation can lead to improvement as well. Just on my team we have Nagisama who went from firmly in D- to brushing C-, Sentenal who dodged 100% of PvPs when he laddered years ago and now all-kills with PvP, and new players like KazeHydra and CptElem who practice harder than anyone else despite being stuck in D-.
Of course dealing with a conceptual skill cap for the league is an issue that demands a verdict. I feel like we need some sort of experienced, impartial arbiter or panel to make judgments on whether good players are too good. The imprecision of iCCup ranks complicates matters further.
On my perspective: I've been thinking of the possibility of retiring myself from the league since DRATL. It's no secret that I have an extremely strong record in these events. But what part of that is obsessive planning/abusive play/comprehensive research of map&foe, and what part is "skill"? I literally have never laddered up to D+ and whenever I play some of the true yellow ranks I know (snipinpanda, Wala.Revolution, Kororo, fold before he hit B- grats to him) I get my ass handed to me easily 95% of the time. Even C- Zergs like aeghrur, L3gendary, and Ravelyn wipe the floor with me. The end result is that I simply don't know whether I exceed some ambiguous skill boundary and don't feel qualified to make that judgment myself.
But the bottom line for this issue in my eyes is: ultimately a party will need to make a judgment if the community feels a player exceeds the league's intended skill level. That party should preferably be impartial and experienced enough to make the right call.
|
On February 23 2013 17:28 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 14:09 ninini wrote:
I agree, Lmaster, that maybe it's not such a big deal if some players are a bit stronger than they should be, but to claim that iccup ranks doesn't mean anything is silly. I don't think you actually believe that, but if you do, I would like to hear your reasoning why.
Iccup ranks aren't the main problem here. The problem is the fact that some ppl don't ladder enough for us to make clear assumptions on their rank, and I don't mean only prophecy. I also mean the ppl with 10-5 scores. You can't tell if 10-5 is a lucky streak, or actual skill. The only problem with iccup is the fact that stats gets reset, but that is only an issue for ppl who haven't played let's say 40 games in a fairly recent season.
Yes, when a 1000-1999 D rank player joins your game on iccup, he could actually be anything from E to A+, but it evens out in the end if you play many games.
All of us have a max rank on iccup that we can reach. Anyone who claims otherwise have clearly not laddered enough games in a single season.
Here's some stats to show how huge the difference is between reaching and sustaining different ranks.
To reach D+, you need a 33+% winrate against D players.
To reach C-, you need a 45+% winrate against D, and 33+% against D+.
To reach C, you need a 69+% winrate against D and 45+% winrate against D+, and 33+% against C-.
Someone who can get a 60% winrate against D, and 40% against D+, would drop down to D+ now and again, but would be strong enough to spend around 2/3 of their time as C-. That's where I would put the border between high D+ and C-. If I ever reach that skill, I'm out of here. In my eyes you are C- when you have a 50% against other C-s players. I can personally get an above 70% winrate against D and 50% winrate against D+, but no way near 50% against C- and I am pretty sure that there are people in this league who are better than me. If somebody with a 50% against D+ can't play in this a league this isn't a D rank league. I actually saw a B+ account on iccup that only massed games against D and D- and had a 97% winratio. I am pretty sure that a solid C can achieve that if he made sure that the D opponent wasn't a smurf and hasn't reached a higher rank by looking him up. All I am trying to say that ranks only matter if you can maintain a rank via only playing people from the same rank (We could get to how inflation of players and games played can change the meaning of a rank, but thats besides the point).
If you can accomplish above 70% and 50% against D+ consistently, you could easily achieve C rank, and currently max rank C rank is not allowed, with the exception of ppl who accomplished it a long time ago. What's your id?
Anyway, with that way of looking at iccup ranks, very few of the players here would even categorize as D rank. Iccup rank is about what ranking you can hold, not which ranking group you are the most similar to in skill. If you would rather categorize players in your way, then go ahead, but then keep in mind that your D+ is way different to what most ppl would call D+.
The problem with looking at a ranking group and comparing yourself against them is the fact that most of those players are rising, and the d rank player you played yesterday, will be d+ today, and c- tomorrow. If you made sure to only play true D players, I agree that a mid D rank player, should get a 50% winrate against other D rank players, but with all the smurfs on iccup, and the season resets, it doesn't work that way.
|
On February 24 2013 04:29 ninini wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2013 17:28 thezanursic wrote:On February 23 2013 14:09 ninini wrote:
I agree, Lmaster, that maybe it's not such a big deal if some players are a bit stronger than they should be, but to claim that iccup ranks doesn't mean anything is silly. I don't think you actually believe that, but if you do, I would like to hear your reasoning why.
Iccup ranks aren't the main problem here. The problem is the fact that some ppl don't ladder enough for us to make clear assumptions on their rank, and I don't mean only prophecy. I also mean the ppl with 10-5 scores. You can't tell if 10-5 is a lucky streak, or actual skill. The only problem with iccup is the fact that stats gets reset, but that is only an issue for ppl who haven't played let's say 40 games in a fairly recent season.
Yes, when a 1000-1999 D rank player joins your game on iccup, he could actually be anything from E to A+, but it evens out in the end if you play many games.
All of us have a max rank on iccup that we can reach. Anyone who claims otherwise have clearly not laddered enough games in a single season.
Here's some stats to show how huge the difference is between reaching and sustaining different ranks.
To reach D+, you need a 33+% winrate against D players.
To reach C-, you need a 45+% winrate against D, and 33+% against D+.
To reach C, you need a 69+% winrate against D and 45+% winrate against D+, and 33+% against C-.
Someone who can get a 60% winrate against D, and 40% against D+, would drop down to D+ now and again, but would be strong enough to spend around 2/3 of their time as C-. That's where I would put the border between high D+ and C-. If I ever reach that skill, I'm out of here. In my eyes you are C- when you have a 50% against other C-s players. I can personally get an above 70% winrate against D and 50% winrate against D+, but no way near 50% against C- and I am pretty sure that there are people in this league who are better than me. If somebody with a 50% against D+ can't play in this a league this isn't a D rank league. I actually saw a B+ account on iccup that only massed games against D and D- and had a 97% winratio. I am pretty sure that a solid C can achieve that if he made sure that the D opponent wasn't a smurf and hasn't reached a higher rank by looking him up. All I am trying to say that ranks only matter if you can maintain a rank via only playing people from the same rank (We could get to how inflation of players and games played can change the meaning of a rank, but thats besides the point). If you can accomplish above 70% and 50% against D+ consistently, you could easily achieve C rank, and currently max rank C rank is not allowed, with the exception of ppl who accomplished it a long time ago. What's your id? Anyway, with that way of looking at iccup ranks, very few of the players here would even categorize as D rank. Iccup rank is about what ranking you can hold, not which ranking group you are the most similar to in skill. If you would rather categorize players in your way, then go ahead, but then keep in mind that your D+ is way different to what most ppl would call D+. The problem with looking at a ranking group and comparing yourself against them is the fact that most of those players are rising, and the d rank player you played yesterday, will be d+ today, and c- tomorrow. If you made sure to only play true D players, I agree that a mid D rank player, should get a 50% winrate against other D rank players, but with all the smurfs on iccup, and the season resets, it doesn't work that way.
I've never hit C- or C, but I could if I only played D ranks with losing records, but I am still clearly a D+ player especially since I don't play consistantly I just tried to poing out that referring to ranks is meaningless. i know that there are a lot of players in this league who can easily reach C- and even C if they just massed tons of game, but that truly doesn't mean anything.
|
people should really stop being so salty over people being better than them.
saying someone shouldnt be in a league because you cant beat them is literally the stupidest thing ive ever heard
|
On February 24 2013 06:42 arb wrote:
people should really stop being so salty over people being better than them.
saying someone shouldnt be in a league because you cant beat them is literally the stupidest thing ive ever heard
that's exactly what a league with a max skill cap is though
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
