EPT[R] What do you think of it? Platinum League - Page 6
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
| ||
|
Champ24
177 Posts
On October 14 2010 00:03 Chriamon wrote: Naw, I know a bunch of people in platinum who have terrible micro/macro, they just know how to pull off a 4gate/3rax. (although I guess that compared to gold level micro/macro they might be considered good...) "Point being, you don't 'suck' if you aren't 1400 diamond, you just (explanation of sucking follows) Also, the chess analogy doesn't work. SC2 has only been out since July. A current "master" at SC2's current skills would become completely average when compared to future "average" players. Compare people in chess from ancient times (Greco or something) to a modern day decent chess player (~1600+ ELO sounds right) I'm sure Greco would get destroyed, but that 1600 player is by no means a master, even though Greco was a master of his time. Right now, we are in the Greco time, and we are comparing who is "good" and "bad" to modern times (i.e. the highest potential we see for SC2 play). Its easier to see the potential SC2 has because we have seen BW players play BW, and we know what RTS is capable of. Last time I attempt to defend this before I ignore strawmans: At the current state of the game, a player who has really obtained a grasp of 1 base play represents approximately the top 10% of all players. In my own personal opinion, you don't suck at this game if you reach this mark. Understanding basic build orders and constructing your own build order to fight it shows an understanding of the game that few posses at this point in time. Therefore, you don't suck. As the game progresses, the required ability to reach said percentile of players will eventually be the capability to manage 2 base play. And so forth. Therefore, my chess analogy is valid because I am comparing current percentile of ones ability to that of all current players. The length at which the game has been played is therefore irrelevant. Again, utilizing global percentile rankings is a valid way to compare ones ability in this game. If you hit the top 0.5% of all players, or 1400+ diamond as of now, you are an exceptional player. You don't suck. As time goes on your ability will grow as will the required capabilities to maintain that worldwide percentile ranking. Comparing your current ability only to that of only the most elite current players in the world and determining you suck is asinine. To bring about my point again, a current USCF master would get absolutely molested by Magnus Carlsen. It doesn't mean he sucks. | ||
|
imaROBOT
United States81 Posts
So before you just shit on every plat player maybe you should consider the division they are in, same with diamond players. I'd take a high plat. player (1.5k-1.6k) over a low diamond player (1k-1.0) any day. When you talk about PRO level play... the ladder doesn't mean a thing. These guys use the ladder for PRACTICE so they are always trying new things, but still they are at the top. PRO level play only comes from tourny's. You are no where near being a PRO until you win some decent tourny's. | ||
|
out4blood
United States313 Posts
I hate that ppl work with percentages - just because 95% of the players are "worse" than you, this doesn't "automatically" mean, that the remaining 5% are actually good; it's simply flawed logic EDIT: 3clipse, you perfectly proved my point; getting an A in class means you are "good" because the measure of your competence will be "standardized"; nevertheless, what would be if 95% got a D on a test and only 5% managed to be above D? would you call all of these 5%-ers good? obviously not; just because a majority is bad at something, doesn't make the minority "good by default" Sure it does. "Good" and "bad" are both relative terms and they only have meaning when used to compare something with something else. The bronze player thinks the silver player is good. The silver player thinks the gold player is good. The gold player thinks the platinum player is good. The platinum player thinks the diamond player is good. The diamond player thinks the 1400+ player is good. The 1400+ player thinks the 2000+ player is good. The 2000+ player thinks IdrA is good. IdrA thinks that everyone else is bad. | ||
|
Gingerninja
United Kingdom1339 Posts
Today's bad players could be tomorrows good ones. people improve. And by being in communities like this they'll learn faster, but if all that happens is they'll get insulted they'll potentially quit, and you'll lose some potential good practice partners, good games and everything that comes with it. Tournaments are the real proving ground, as already has been stated ladder doesn't mean a great deal, and you only play each person once, so that's not a good indicator if A is a better player than B anyway. Just remember guys, the ladder will get reset, and as everyone has had a chance to play the game for a while now. The rankings may very well look different. | ||
|
nonparfumee
Canada21 Posts
Personally, I think the ladder system has it's flaws but overall it really makes sure that you have all of your skill bases covered before you can progress. I have played in Bronze, Silver, Gold and Plat leagues (in 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3), both being promoted and demoted so I would say that I've seen a significant spread of the kinds of games that you will face. From what I've deduced, you can progress by (basic summary): Bronze = finding a strategy that works. basic fundamentals for worker management and unit production. Silver = "" + Macro + scouting. Gold = "" + Correct unit composition. Platinum = "" + Micro. Diamond = "" + refinement(???) These are the things that I've found myself coming back to when progressing through these levels of ladders. The progression seems logical as the higher you go up in ladder ranks, the harder it becomes and the more complex your gameplay has to become to win consistently. Personally, I find that this progression describes what I find hardest to perform in gameplay. Also, with my own progression over the last month, I've found that my APM has almost doubled and I'm far greater at multitasking. There is always room to improve in and out of the game, and a lot of my improvements were coeval and just sort of clicked. I was a gold 1v1 player and recently went on a huge streak of suck. I stopped macroing well in my matches and was focusing too much on unit composition. I was then demoted to silver, and have since started to refocus on my macro game. Since then in 2v2s or 3v3s I've been leading the scoreboard in my match-ups at endgame and have won some good 1v1 matches as well. So, from what I've been able to teach myself about my wins and losses, is don't forget the basics and build from what you know. Watch your replays. If you see yourself changing your play style and losing all of a sudden, stop and ask yourself "what am I doing/not doing now that I used to do?". Keep working on a strategy that you have become comfortable with and chase the wins. Eventually, you'll be much better at making decisions on the fly, and changing your strategy to suit the immediate game. Everything that you want to know about your play style will eventually reveal itself with enough iterations, as long as you're paying attention. The worst feeling that I find myself suffering from is when I am ready to go for a long game, have a great start with building production timings etc, then lose to a 6 pool that I forgot had existed - something that you rarely see outside of Bronze or Silver. What I'm trying to get across is that focusing on your Rank in ladders is great, but it has to be a long term goal. There are plenty of good lessons to learn in the lower levels, and if you rush by them (like I tried to), you will be promoted, hit a wall and then fail until you figure it out. Try and learn everything you can from the games you have played, even in Bronze. If you find that you're watching replays and don't know what to look at or what to do, just keep watching them, take note of what you do at what food count and it will eventually all click for you. Prepared Buddha is Prepared. | ||
|
Orzabal
France287 Posts
I think good player are >1500 Diamond. So I am not proud be in this league. | ||
|
skipdog172
United States331 Posts
Really it comes down to making workers and not getting supply blocked while having a solid build. I know everybody here likes to scream at the top of their lungs that most diamond players are horrible, but when you compare them to the average player, they have pretty sound mechanics. They are better than ~93% of other SC2 players. That doesn't mean they are "pro". Just think about the top 7% of a high school football team. It's really about the same thing. So much of it is just having crisp timing and not forgetting to make workers/depots. Overall, I think the leagues rank players quite appropriately. My friend who started in Platinum and was there for quite awhile moved up to Diamond because he improved his mechanics. My sub-20 APM friend who moved from Bronze to gold may still click a lot of things instead of using hotkeys, but he is still able to execute build orders much better than he used to. None of my RL friends are in the "wrong league". They seem to be in the league appropriate to how good their mechanics have become. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
You're good or bad based on how you play, not how horrible others around you are. I'm bad because my mechanics are horrible and I constantly make mistakes. I can't multitask for shit, which leads to me regularly mistiming my early build because I was focused on my scout. My builds are hardly refined at all. I constantly miss production cycles. Many times I find myself paying to much attention to a battle and not macroing. My micro is bad to boot. The list goes on. Now, according to some being a 1200 diamond player makes me good, but at best I'm decent. If I was good I wouldn't make so many mistakes and have such horrible mechanics(which prob is due to the fact I've never played competitive RTS before). Being able to execute a couple build orders(poorly) is not all that's required to be good. There is no set definition of 'good' but not making mistakes in the first 3 minutes of the game is a start, and low diamond players do that almost every game. | ||
|
skipdog172
United States331 Posts
On October 14 2010 01:30 imaROBOT wrote: You guys trying to compare skill level in star craft 2 league system is pretty funny. The big thing I see a lot of you guys are missing is what division the player is in. Everyone saying that plat. players are just terribad is a joke. I'm in one of the highest ranked plat. division (look up sc2ranks) and ranked number 1. I've been stuck there since 700pt and I'm almost at 1.2k. I don't know why I haven't moved up, I've been #1 for almost a month and I shit on a lot of diamond players. I think it may be just because my division has a lot of high point players and it may be harder for use. So before you just shit on every plat player maybe you should consider the division they are in, same with diamond players. I'd take a high plat. player (1.5k-1.6k) over a low diamond player (1k-1.0) any day. When you talk about PRO level play... the ladder doesn't mean a thing. These guys use the ladder for PRACTICE so they are always trying new things, but still they are at the top. PRO level play only comes from tourny's. You are no where near being a PRO until you win some decent tourny's. Your division has absolutely no bearing on anything. Being in a tougher division means nothing. You don't play others in your division. Sorry to say but you are Platinum because you just aren't quite in the top 7% of players. There is no magical thing holding you back... you just aren't beating enough higher quality players and are still losing to some lower quality players to get promoted yet. Nobody is shitting all over Platinum players... you just need to improve. There is no point in trying to claim that a high plat player is better than a low diamond player.... just improve your own game and the promotion will come. | ||
|
imaROBOT
United States81 Posts
On October 14 2010 01:41 Gingerninja wrote: Just remember guys, the ladder will get reset, and as everyone has had a chance to play the game for a while now. The rankings may very well look different. When did Blizzard say that ladder is going to be reset? That would be pretty interesting, but piss off a lot of people. Can you show me a link. On October 14 2010 01:56 skipdog172 wrote: Your division has absolutely no bearing on anything. Being in a tougher division means nothing. You don't play others in your division. Sorry to say but you are Platinum because you just aren't quite in the top 7% of players. There is no magical thing holding you back... you just aren't beating enough higher quality players and are still losing to some lower quality players to get promoted yet. Nobody is shitting all over Platinum players... you just need to improve. There is no point in trying to claim that a high plat player is better than a low diamond player.... just improve your own game and the promotion will come. Sorry, but I don't care about the opinion of someone with only 600pts. You're the exact low level diamond people I am talking about. I'd really love to see you beat me with your "superior" play. XD EDIT: I do apologize if this isn't you skipdog#960 http://www.sc2ranks.com/us/339938/skipdog I'm just assuming it is. If not show me your rank. | ||
|
Reason.SC2
Canada1047 Posts
On October 14 2010 01:44 Orzabal wrote: I am low diamond and I see myself as a bad player. I win vs 1200 diamond player and I think they suck pretty hard. This make me feel that be in Diamond doesnt mean your are good. I think good player are >1500 Diamond. So I am not proud be in this league. I very much agree with Orzabal here. I'm a 1400 diamond player and honestly don't have much time at all to play, don't have refined or practiced build orders, and my RTS experience consists of beating single player Starcraft + Brood War about 10 years ago, and some ROC DOTA. Considering how many diamond players there are, its nothing special at all to be low or mid diamond. In fact, if you play a lot, practice builds, and STILL aren't at the level of a mid-diamond then you're probably pretty terrible. This isn't an attack on your character or anything, being great at SC2 is not exactly a life defining trait (unless you're a top pro who is making a meaningful amount of $$$ from it). Fact is, it really has nothing to do with SC2. If you're trying really hard to be good at anything, studying it and training, and cannot make it into the top few percentile, then in my book thats a fail (especially considering its just a game that most people in the lower leagues play purely for fun and have no interest in being competitive in) | ||
|
wristuzi
United Kingdom1168 Posts
I'm a platinum player and I'm certainly aiming for diamond. It is a bit silly that I just want to get into diamond, and that I don't really care if I'm low diamond or whatever, but I think it's how most players feel. It's nice to feel like you're in the upper echelons of players ^^ I also feel really happy with my choice as zerg as my race. I hear that alot of people who get into diamond do so by early-mid game builds which win easily against inexperienced players, but have trouble once they meet better players who can fend them off, meaning that their macro gets much worse after a certain point. With zerg, always playing for the mid-late game makes me think I might avoid that problem  | ||
|
3clipse
Canada2555 Posts
On October 13 2010 23:31 sleepingdog wrote: when watching my games I feel like double-face-palming myself at least 2-3 times; the best way to distinguish "bad" players and "mediocre" players (starting imo at 1.4k as I said) is, if you can't "immediately" tell from their reps why they lost; more often than not a semi-pro steamrolls a "good" player and you couldn't say that the "good" player has made any obvious blunders - then it's fair to say that the latter one didn't suck; but when you watch games from players around or below 1.4k and see how they don't produce workers constantly, get supply-blocked, stack up minerals, don't have any expo-timing at all and just randomly throw down hatch/cc/nex, don't have micro etc......then seriously it's simply not justified to call them "good" I hate that ppl work with percentages - just because 95% of the players are "worse" than you, this doesn't "automatically" mean, that the remaining 5% are actually good; it's simply flawed logic EDIT: 3clipse, you perfectly proved my point; getting an A in class means you are "good" because the measure of your competence will be "standardized"; nevertheless, what would be if 95% got a D on a test and only 5% managed to be above D? would you call all of these 5%-ers good? obviously not; just because a majority is bad at something, doesn't make the minority "good by default" No sir, it is you who is operating on flawed logic. Your example of spotting numerous mistakes in your play exemplifies why Starcraft isn't purely a game of strategy; it's very difficult to execute your ideas perfectly. I might carry your analogy to almost any other activity; hockey, for instance. You can sit in your armchair and evaluate how badly a team is playing and how their strategy and teamwork is way off, and your critique could have some truth to it. But the fact is, the people you are criticizing are some of the best players in the world, and the fact that they make recognizable mistakes speaks to the difficultly of executing strategies well in the heat of the moment. Just because you can theorize that something could be done better doesn't mean it's easy to do. I may as well say that the SR-71 Blackbird is a slow plane because we should theoretically be capable of accelerating things to just below the speed of light. A plane is considered fast because it is faster than most other modern planes. There is no other logical basis for evaluation. If 95% of the class got a D on an exam, it is almost certainly the method of evaluation which is flawed. You wouldn't call the students "terrible", you would assume that the arbitrary grade given by the professor is skewed low. That letter grade is nothing but a number. If you started calling "Diamond League" "Shit League", the skill of the players would obviously be unchanged. Yes, the top 5% of the class would be considered good if that class was the only sample available. If 10 other classes were given the same exam and all scored A's, then you would have grounds to say that the entire class performed poorly. Equating ICCUP to your little exam scenario, the majority of the entire world scored D or lower. Of course >D is good. When you say "oh man I'm 1500 points and i'm so terrible", you are implying that all the people who worked hard to get 1200 or 1400 points are worse than terrible. It's really a dickish things to say. I know that, relative to the teamliquid community, I'm a pretty average player, but when I play with my irl friends I don't say I'm bad or average or they would feel like shit when I beat them. How good you are is entirely relative to the group you're comparing yourself to. Yeah, if you're about to play vs Idra, tell him you're really fucking bad. If you're addressing the tl audience as a whole, recognize that most posters are somewhere in the middle of diamond, and anything above that is "good" when put against the average. If you're talking to irl friends or posting on casual boards, don't be an elistist ass and tell everyone how horrible they are. It's really all about who you're comparing yourself to. Making posts to the tl community at large and calling yourself "terrible" in reference to the very top tier doesn't make a lot of sense to me. None of us assume you're top tier in the first place. tldr: On October 14 2010 01:35 out4blood wrote: "Good" and "bad" are both relative terms and they only have meaning when used to compare something with something else. | ||
|
Orzabal
France287 Posts
On October 14 2010 02:01 Reason.SC2 wrote: I very much agree with Orzabal here. I'm a 1400 diamond player and honestly don't have much time at all to play, don't have refined or practiced build orders, and my RTS experience consists of beating single player Starcraft + Brood War about 10 years ago, and some ROC DOTA. Considering how many diamond players there are, its nothing special at all to be low or mid diamond. In fact, if you play a lot, practice builds, and STILL aren't at the level of a mid-diamond then you're probably pretty terrible. This isn't an attack on your character or anything, being great at SC2 is not exactly a life defining trait (unless you're a top pro who is making a meaningful amount of $$$ from it). Fact is, it really has nothing to do with SC2. If you're trying really hard to be good at anything, studying it and training, and cannot make it into the top few percentile, then in my book thats a fail (especially considering its just a game that most people in the lower leagues play purely for fun and have no interest in being competitive in) This is interesting. Like me you are an "old" player. I am 32 and I used to play SC/BW but only 2v2. In SC2 I give a try to the 1v1 matchmaking system and made my way to low diamond lvl. I never practice, or learn BO. It is just "game sense". That's why I think if you know mecanic and basic stuff, anyone can be diamond. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Kishkumen
United States650 Posts
That said, I realize I'm still a pretty terrible player. I mostly just do strong one base all-ins, but even then I still supply block myself and make other stupid mistakes. So I think platinum doesn't mean you're good, but I think it at least shows that you know enough about the game and its fundamentals to win. It seems to me like platinum means you're a bad player comparatively, but in a kind of respectable way. | ||
|
DragonDefonce
United States790 Posts
| ||
|
Crushgroove
United States793 Posts
People who consider the whole body of thousands of nerds trying to play the game, are going to understand that any diamond level player is in the top 5% of your server, and that's not awful. This, however, is a competitive community. And as such, we will consider diamond as a starting point because anything before that can be quite bad when compared to pros. | ||
|
Toxigen
United States390 Posts
On October 13 2010 18:01 Endorsed wrote: Seriously? Pro in diamond league? Man, when you get in Diamond league you are just starting. This is the best way to look at it, in my opinion. If you're in diamond, it means that you have a basic, passable understanding and execution of fundamentals. No, you're not macroing like a pro, but you're hitting 70% of your injections on time, not getting supply blocked, and knowing what you're seeing (mostly) when you scout. People in diamond league are in the top 3-5% of players worldwide. Progamers probably make up about 1-2% of diamond leaguers. That's a huge divide of skill. | ||
| ||
