|
United States41918 Posts
On June 06 2009 06:28 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 04:05 Kwark wrote: Personally a pet project of mine are the metagame topics. I love those but as a Protoss only player I can't write more than a one sided approach to how to exploit the metagame. I'm very much looking forward to seeing how they evolve when people with different experience to mine start editting. Do you understand what metagame means? If so, please expand this thought. A simple example would be mutalisk openings ZvT. I am aware that Zergs use mutalisks to influence the Terran's timing, when he pushes, when he expands etc all by moving them around to create threat and get in the Terran players head. But I'm not aware of how they know when to do what and why.
|
|
Wow! Mad props to all who have put time in and contributed to this. It looks like it took a lot of work! Seriously, this looks amazing. Good work!
I honestly can't wait to see this continue to grow and get better and better. Such a great idea with huge potential
|
awesomeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
|
|
Whoa! This is truely awesome, I admit I've been a lurker on this fantastic forum for quite a while now, but I simply have to express my respect to the people who made this possible! You all deserve a SC2 beta key for this IMO
|
Hahaha I didn't know we were gonna try to put this thing together finally :D
Good Work!
|
|
On June 06 2009 08:47 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 06:28 Chill wrote:On June 06 2009 04:05 Kwark wrote: Personally a pet project of mine are the metagame topics. I love those but as a Protoss only player I can't write more than a one sided approach to how to exploit the metagame. I'm very much looking forward to seeing how they evolve when people with different experience to mine start editting. Do you understand what metagame means? If so, please expand this thought. A simple example would be mutalisk openings ZvT. I am aware that Zergs use mutalisks to influence the Terran's timing, when he pushes, when he expands etc all by moving them around to create threat and get in the Terran players head. But I'm not aware of how they know when to do what and why. That's not what metagame means. I think that's just more of a history of the matchup. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you.
|
On June 06 2009 04:00 GHOSTCLAW wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 03:46 o3.power91 wrote:On June 06 2009 03:40 goldenkrnboi wrote: there should be a minimum post count requirement. not big enough to restrict too many people, but enough to prevent random TL-hating trolls to screw up things I agree with this personally. Even though it could potentially prevent some good contributions, it will definitely limit trolling. Mods can make exceptions for some people with low post count too if they are trustworthy. Just a thought. Good job TL. It's things like these that make me proud to be part of the community data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" Edit: Thanks a lot for giving me another method of wasting time data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt="" well, we don't prevent low post count people from posting links, or from anything else on tl.net. On here, the punishment for a low post count user should be the same as a high post count user if the posts are equally bad. If a low post count user is making bad edits, or something similar, the punishment should be equal to that of a high post count user. Same philosophy.
well, yes the punishment should be just as bad as high post members if the post is bad. but that wasn't what i was getting at.
say in about a month or 2 after it becomes accessible, TL wiki is fully operational and there's been loads of nice contributions to the wiki, and everybody on TL's and people who lurk TL are happy. but say there's a group of people who've been influenced by this fool or for whatever reason really really hate TL. It would be as easy as simply registering a new ID on TL, and since it's accessible to everyone, after several minutes, several pages are replaced with "ROFLFUCKINGTLNOOBS. GET THE FECK OUT", and everyone's displeased and readers will have to wait until the proper content is back up (probably spending the time by seeing how fast the haters get banned)
Now, I'm assuming that the mods have already thought about this and implemented a system where they can just retrieve the old content easily and repost it, and it'd be over in a couple of minutes.But it'd still be nice if that situation can be avoided in the first place.
|
Liquipedia has been a project that has been worked on by Teamliquid for the past 20 months.
Oh. My. God. You guys are beyond epic.
|
|
SOOOO ExcellO! thanks guys/gals Epic Work!
|
On June 06 2009 09:26 goldenkrnboi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 04:00 GHOSTCLAW wrote:On June 06 2009 03:46 o3.power91 wrote:On June 06 2009 03:40 goldenkrnboi wrote: there should be a minimum post count requirement. not big enough to restrict too many people, but enough to prevent random TL-hating trolls to screw up things I agree with this personally. Even though it could potentially prevent some good contributions, it will definitely limit trolling. Mods can make exceptions for some people with low post count too if they are trustworthy. Just a thought. Good job TL. It's things like these that make me proud to be part of the community data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" Edit: Thanks a lot for giving me another method of wasting time data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt="" well, we don't prevent low post count people from posting links, or from anything else on tl.net. On here, the punishment for a low post count user should be the same as a high post count user if the posts are equally bad. If a low post count user is making bad edits, or something similar, the punishment should be equal to that of a high post count user. Same philosophy. well, yes the punishment should be just as bad as high post members if the post is bad. but that wasn't what i was getting at. say in about a month or 2 after it becomes accessible, TL wiki is fully operational and there's been loads of nice contributions to the wiki, and everybody on TL's and people who lurk TL are happy. but say there's a group of people who've been influenced by this fool or for whatever reason really really hate TL. It would be as easy as simply registering a new ID on TL, and since it's accessible to everyone, after several minutes, several pages are replaced with "ROFLFUCKINGTLNOOBS. GET THE FECK OUT", and everyone's displeased and readers will have to wait until the proper content is back up (probably spending the time by seeing how fast the haters get banned) Now, I'm assuming that the mods have already thought about this and implemented a system where they can just retrieve the old content easily and repost it, and it'd be over in a couple of minutes.But it'd still be nice if that situation can be avoided in the first place. This happens on all wikis, the page will get reverted back to the last version when it's noticed, and the person gets banned. It's not as bad as it seems.
|
CA10824 Posts
On June 06 2009 09:26 goldenkrnboi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 04:00 GHOSTCLAW wrote:On June 06 2009 03:46 o3.power91 wrote:On June 06 2009 03:40 goldenkrnboi wrote: there should be a minimum post count requirement. not big enough to restrict too many people, but enough to prevent random TL-hating trolls to screw up things I agree with this personally. Even though it could potentially prevent some good contributions, it will definitely limit trolling. Mods can make exceptions for some people with low post count too if they are trustworthy. Just a thought. Good job TL. It's things like these that make me proud to be part of the community data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" Edit: Thanks a lot for giving me another method of wasting time data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt="" well, we don't prevent low post count people from posting links, or from anything else on tl.net. On here, the punishment for a low post count user should be the same as a high post count user if the posts are equally bad. If a low post count user is making bad edits, or something similar, the punishment should be equal to that of a high post count user. Same philosophy. well, yes the punishment should be just as bad as high post members if the post is bad. but that wasn't what i was getting at. say in about a month or 2 after it becomes accessible, TL wiki is fully operational and there's been loads of nice contributions to the wiki, and everybody on TL's and people who lurk TL are happy. but say there's a group of people who've been influenced by this fool or for whatever reason really really hate TL. It would be as easy as simply registering a new ID on TL, and since it's accessible to everyone, after several minutes, several pages are replaced with "ROFLFUCKINGTLNOOBS. GET THE FECK OUT", and everyone's displeased and readers will have to wait until the proper content is back up (probably spending the time by seeing how fast the haters get banned) Now, I'm assuming that the mods have already thought about this and implemented a system where they can just retrieve the old content easily and repost it, and it'd be over in a couple of minutes.But it'd still be nice if that situation can be avoided in the first place. yes, there's a method in place to prevent that sort of stuff.
anyone can make revisions, but they have to be approved by the liquipedia staff first. this prevents unwanted tampering with articles. i would elaborate more, but there's a section within liquipedia itself that explains it in full.
|
oh hellz yeH!!!!!!!! TL is awesome <3
|
|
FuDDx
United States5007 Posts
|
United States41918 Posts
On June 06 2009 09:24 sixghost wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2009 08:47 Kwark wrote:On June 06 2009 06:28 Chill wrote:On June 06 2009 04:05 Kwark wrote: Personally a pet project of mine are the metagame topics. I love those but as a Protoss only player I can't write more than a one sided approach to how to exploit the metagame. I'm very much looking forward to seeing how they evolve when people with different experience to mine start editting. Do you understand what metagame means? If so, please expand this thought. A simple example would be mutalisk openings ZvT. I am aware that Zergs use mutalisks to influence the Terran's timing, when he pushes, when he expands etc all by moving them around to create threat and get in the Terran players head. But I'm not aware of how they know when to do what and why. That's not what metagame means. I think that's just more of a history of the matchup. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you. My understanding of metagame is the part of the game played out in the heads of the players, rather than the tactics or strategy. Take July's 5 pool against BeSt in Game 1 of the OSL finals, establishing the psychological upper hand and throwing BeSt off balance. The 5 pool itself was an in-game strategy but the "I'm July and we're gonna play this my way and I'm going to win" mentality it created was a metagame strategy.
|
Awesome! Can't wait until this is released to see all the builds I never even knew about.
|
|
|
|