|
On August 03 2012 08:03 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 07:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Lol? Some commentators, who have great knowledge about the recent trends in strategy (and understand why they are doing that and such), are not in diamond, let alone play random.
The diamond requirement may seem like a joke, but it's just a low limit. There should be many with exceptions. What if someone is really intelligent but is handicapped or such?
Anyways...
DAMN I WOULD LOVE TO WORK FOR SC2 SHIT FUCK LOL
too bad it's temporary This is such a massive joke. The only people who understand or know about recent trends are people like Artosis and Day9, both who would utterly clown 95% of the people on this board if they were to play SC2 full time. Both are quite capable players in their own right, just not as good as say a tier 1 pro from Korea. There are other commentators who do some research, but their level of understanding will never be on the same level as Artosis or Day9. If you look at sports, the vast majority of coaches are former players that played at a very high level. Why? Because the experience as a professional player is necessary in order to be a coach. Being on a balance team obviously would require a high level of skill; you're not working with game design. You're working on balance. Massive difference.
I don't know about the US and A, but in europe, in many sports, the coaches were often average at best at their sport. The very best ones in football (Mourinho, Ferguson, Wenger) have no player career to brag about. Being good at the game is not always a must to be able to understand and solve the game and have others play it out.
|
Should change the title to diamond level +.
|
GM players, especially pros, are not a great source of balance info simply because they have so much emotionally/financially invested into a single race. There are probably a few objective pros, but I doubt very many.
You need to strike a balance between experience, passion, personal investment in playing a powerful race, and ability to communicate well (which is the most important requirement, btw).
|
On August 03 2012 08:08 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 08:03 superstartran wrote:On August 03 2012 07:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Lol? Some commentators, who have great knowledge about the recent trends in strategy (and understand why they are doing that and such), are not in diamond, let alone play random.
The diamond requirement may seem like a joke, but it's just a low limit. There should be many with exceptions. What if someone is really intelligent but is handicapped or such?
Anyways...
DAMN I WOULD LOVE TO WORK FOR SC2 SHIT FUCK LOL
too bad it's temporary This is such a massive joke. The only people who understand or know about recent trends are people like Artosis and Day9, both who would utterly clown 95% of the people on this board if they were to play SC2 full time. Both are quite capable players in their own right, just not as good as say a tier 1 pro from Korea. There are other commentators who do some research, but their level of understanding will never be on the same level as Artosis or Day9. If you look at sports, the vast majority of coaches are former players that played at a very high level. Why? Because the experience as a professional player is necessary in order to be a coach. Being on a balance team obviously would require a high level of skill; you're not working with game design. You're working on balance. Massive difference. I don't know about the US and A, but in europe, in many sports, the coaches were often average at best at their sport. The very best ones in football (Mourinho, Ferguson, Wenger) have no player career to brag about. Being good at the game is not always a must to be able to understand and solve the game and have others play it out.
Average?
You understand that to even be a coach in most sports you have to play at the professional level, meaning you are not "average" by any stretch of the imagination? That or you have to work from amateur levels all the way up to professional in the coaching world, which is no small feat either. Look at tennis, the most international sport of them all. Very few coaches do not have professional experience; the only two that come to mind that are successful are Toni Nadal, and Richard Williams, both who are coaches mainly due to their emotional bond with their player, not because of their technical skills (their players don't need "coaching" they need emotional support more than anything).
|
On August 03 2012 06:30 Lukeeze[zR] wrote:
There is no 100% random player in Master/GM, no ?
tQDante was a GM Random Player before he quit to play DoTA2. LGChobi was also a random player before recently switching to Z. They were the highest ranked random players in NA, both being mid-high GM.
|
On August 03 2012 06:27 steff wrote:
There are hundreds of pro gamers that have a incredible understand of the game and its balancing, might be a better idea to turn to some of them rather than a random diamond. Well you would logically think so...
last time Blizz listens to progamers for balance cough reckful cough, rogue and mage happened.
Not saying WoW arena was balace game, but listening to pro players have made it far worse. Sometimes pro players are much more bias than anyone else out there because their livelihood depends on it. Its better to get feedback from a wide range of players
Also Blizzard is probably not asking anyone for balance or designs, they are simply collecting data that requires huge amount of testers in the higher range of players. They probably have no say to anything except being used as datas and occasional the "fun feedback"
|
On August 03 2012 07:55 Markwerf wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 07:26 MorroW wrote:
does anyone here know what this job is about and what he/she will be doing or is everyone assuming they will help with the balance of WoL or HotS in terms of patches?
i have a feeling this has to be more about map making (be it custom or melee maps) than actually balancing the game
its hard to apply to something that you dont know what it really is, which makes me skeptical. not to mention the silly low diamond+ requirement that makes me feel this is something anyone can do ? :p
if they wanted actual balance help they should reach out to progamers which they say they do (they dont, and they barely never did) and if they want mapmakers they should contact our mapmakers directly i feel (those guys have high ambition) progamers are terrible to resort to for balanced as they are often incredibly biased. They are rarely properly educated either and are just too much dependant on their race being good to assist directly in balance. Most of the time progamers find their own race the weakest, that just doesn't help.. Many progamers are not even good tactically as they don't need to be. They have teammates and coaches to give them strategies so being progamer might more be mental strength and good execution than a talent for exploring strategies.
not every pro is terribly biased and stupid
diamond players wouldnt know a thing about high level play which is where balance matters
teammates are also progamers and coaches are usually useless.
regardless I don't see how some pros being biased means blizzard should look for anyone but a pro to advise on balance in any way shape or form. lower league players simply don't know enough about the game.
|
Believe it or not, the ability to think clearly about a game is not the same thing as being able to play the game at the highest levels.
|
On August 03 2012 08:14 SnuggleZhenya wrote:
Believe it or not, the ability to think clearly about a game is not the same thing as being able to play the game at the highest levels.
That's common sense but it's really hard to convince people of that. It's really hard to convince Bob that Steve understands the game on a similar level to Bob despite not playing it at that level. Funnily enough as an eSport we depend on people who don't play the game at a top level to understand it at a pretty high level for growth.
And as others have said this is for an assisant position. It's not like this diamond player is going to be making the balance decisions or approving them. Whatever the job is for, and it's a temp job btw, they want a person that's at least Diamond level because they feel that's the minimum level at which a person can understand what they need to understand in order to do their job. They also want someone that has some amount of dedication to the game, which you would have if you're in Diamond. On the forums we can act like everyone is Masters+ easy, but most people that play the game are not.
|
On August 03 2012 06:30 Lukeeze[zR] wrote:
There is no 100% random player in Master/GM, no ?
There are. But it's the NA ladder anyway. So skillcap is different anyhow.
I think it's a great idea actually. Maybe that guy(or girl) isn't supposed to just "balance" the game, but help them do so while not losing the less hardcore players. Keeping the game fun even if you don't have excellent control and mechanics.
Or look for places where the execution of counters might be too hard to do for a diamond player.
Those are just examples of course, but in general what I am hoping for is a balance that works on the highest as well as lower skill levels, so everybody has fun and challenge.
I should probably give an example. Its way easier to blindly follow some all in build with zerg/terran against protoss then to actually execute the right building/forcefield placement to stop it. So maybe they wish to equalize stuff like that a bit.
Love the idea!
|
I'm a noob (but watch a hell of a lot of GSL) but I can't see why Diamond players opinions are worth that much? I thought they had their own backend stats engine pulling data for ALL the matches world wide.
Combine that with grandmaster / pro opinions as well as DEFINITELY some casters, who know what makes for a good game. but Diamond seems to be going bit low for opinions :/
|
I think a random player who is diamond+ makes a lot of sense.
Random players especially I feel like wont be biased and they should have some sort of insight into all races.
The fact that the applicant would only have to be at a diamond level doesn't really bother me. Diamond players do have some insight, they might not have the time/will/whatever to improve their execution and mechanics to a master/gm level but that doesn't mean they HAVE to be complete idiots.
Besides, it's not like they're hiring someone to totally dictate the future of starcraft 2 balance, but rather someone they hope could contribute to a balance discussion within the team.
|
WHY would you not ask pros and GM players... diamond players shouldn't even have a say.. that sounds mean I KNOW but the fate of game play shouldn't rest with them,... should rest with good pros and GM players who know the game more? .... lets ask high school football players what they best thing to do in the NFL is... come on now...
|
On August 03 2012 08:12 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 08:08 nkr wrote:On August 03 2012 08:03 superstartran wrote:On August 03 2012 07:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Lol? Some commentators, who have great knowledge about the recent trends in strategy (and understand why they are doing that and such), are not in diamond, let alone play random.
The diamond requirement may seem like a joke, but it's just a low limit. There should be many with exceptions. What if someone is really intelligent but is handicapped or such?
Anyways...
DAMN I WOULD LOVE TO WORK FOR SC2 SHIT FUCK LOL
too bad it's temporary This is such a massive joke. The only people who understand or know about recent trends are people like Artosis and Day9, both who would utterly clown 95% of the people on this board if they were to play SC2 full time. Both are quite capable players in their own right, just not as good as say a tier 1 pro from Korea. There are other commentators who do some research, but their level of understanding will never be on the same level as Artosis or Day9. If you look at sports, the vast majority of coaches are former players that played at a very high level. Why? Because the experience as a professional player is necessary in order to be a coach. Being on a balance team obviously would require a high level of skill; you're not working with game design. You're working on balance. Massive difference. I don't know about the US and A, but in europe, in many sports, the coaches were often average at best at their sport. The very best ones in football (Mourinho, Ferguson, Wenger) have no player career to brag about. Being good at the game is not always a must to be able to understand and solve the game and have others play it out. Average? You understand that to even be a coach in most sports you have to play at the professional level, meaning you are not "average" by any stretch of the imagination? That or you have to work from amateur levels all the way up to professional in the coaching world, which is no small feat either. Look at tennis, the most international sport of them all. Very few coaches do not have professional experience; the only two that come to mind that are successful are Toni Nadal, and Richard Williams, both who are coaches mainly due to their emotional bond with their player, not because of their technical skills (their players don't need "coaching" they need emotional support more than anything).
Professional as in they made money, hell people in masters would've made money if this was as big as football. They were not even close to being kings of the hill.
|
i didn't play 1v1 for over a year, played maybe 10 team games in the last 18 weeks or so, and decided to queue up for 1v1 yesterday. i stomped this zerg and he rage quit, he was top 8 diamond.
i thought diamond was the new masters, but i guess not
i think you can see if i agree with this or not
|
Few famous wine critics are also winemakers, most famous food critics have never owned restaurants, the biggest baseball stats junkies (including this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball) are probably terrible at the game, music writers/critics do not have recording contracts, etc etc etc
This idea that the top players are the best for balance info doesn't mesh at all with what makes a good analyst/critic in every single other aspect of life. Those are the facts, and the community will eventually have to come to terms with this.
|
Childish thread. May I remind you that they are not looking for a consultant to sit on a high council to educate and enlighten blizzard about game design and balance, but for some guy who is able to test things out with diamond level skill and report his results. To do that, he neither needs to be amazingly intelligent nor amazingly skilled. He just needs to be able to test things out with diamond level skill. Do you also freak out when someone who just finished school gets a job at a publishing house because you fear that it will be him who decides what gets published from then on?
|
On August 03 2012 08:37 worldsnap wrote:Few famous wine critics are also winemakers, most famous food critics have never owned restaurants, the biggest baseball stats junkies (including this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball) are probably terrible at the game, music writers/critics do not have recording contracts, etc etc etc This idea that the top players are the best for balance info doesn't mesh at all with what makes a good analyst/critic in every single other aspect of life. Those are the facts, and the community will eventually have to come to terms with this.
Good luck being a music critic if you don't know anything about composition.
|
On August 03 2012 08:36 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 08:12 superstartran wrote:On August 03 2012 08:08 nkr wrote:On August 03 2012 08:03 superstartran wrote:On August 03 2012 07:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Lol? Some commentators, who have great knowledge about the recent trends in strategy (and understand why they are doing that and such), are not in diamond, let alone play random.
The diamond requirement may seem like a joke, but it's just a low limit. There should be many with exceptions. What if someone is really intelligent but is handicapped or such?
Anyways...
DAMN I WOULD LOVE TO WORK FOR SC2 SHIT FUCK LOL
too bad it's temporary This is such a massive joke. The only people who understand or know about recent trends are people like Artosis and Day9, both who would utterly clown 95% of the people on this board if they were to play SC2 full time. Both are quite capable players in their own right, just not as good as say a tier 1 pro from Korea. There are other commentators who do some research, but their level of understanding will never be on the same level as Artosis or Day9. If you look at sports, the vast majority of coaches are former players that played at a very high level. Why? Because the experience as a professional player is necessary in order to be a coach. Being on a balance team obviously would require a high level of skill; you're not working with game design. You're working on balance. Massive difference. I don't know about the US and A, but in europe, in many sports, the coaches were often average at best at their sport. The very best ones in football (Mourinho, Ferguson, Wenger) have no player career to brag about. Being good at the game is not always a must to be able to understand and solve the game and have others play it out. Average? You understand that to even be a coach in most sports you have to play at the professional level, meaning you are not "average" by any stretch of the imagination? That or you have to work from amateur levels all the way up to professional in the coaching world, which is no small feat either. Look at tennis, the most international sport of them all. Very few coaches do not have professional experience; the only two that come to mind that are successful are Toni Nadal, and Richard Williams, both who are coaches mainly due to their emotional bond with their player, not because of their technical skills (their players don't need "coaching" they need emotional support more than anything). Professional as in they made money, hell people in masters would've made money if this was as big as football. They were not even close to being kings of the hill.
To be a professional player in tennis, you have an ATP point. That would put you in an elite category of like top 4000-5000 people in the world. That means out of all the tennis players out there, you are better than every single one except like .0001% of the population of the damn world.
It's a joke to believe that Coaches that have professional experience are bad players. They would kick your teeth in even at their age in their respective sport.
|
On August 03 2012 08:40 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 08:37 worldsnap wrote:Few famous wine critics are also winemakers, most famous food critics have never owned restaurants, the biggest baseball stats junkies (including this guy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball) are probably terrible at the game, music writers/critics do not have recording contracts, etc etc etc This idea that the top players are the best for balance info doesn't mesh at all with what makes a good analyst/critic in every single other aspect of life. Those are the facts, and the community will eventually have to come to terms with this. Good luck being a music critic if you don't know anything about composition.
I don't think even 10% of all music critics knows the intricacies of composition let alone have a major in music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
