|
On April 10 2011 05:55 O-ops wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2011 05:53 frogmelter wrote:On April 10 2011 05:41 O-ops wrote:On April 10 2011 05:37 frogmelter wrote:On April 10 2011 05:31 Antisocialmunky wrote:On April 10 2011 05:30 frogmelter wrote:
Another rule please
If you BM inside of the game, please don't post the replay here for us to analyze
I've analyzed replays where the person who posts the replay is like "Oh excuse my bm" and when I watched the replays he flames the entire game
People shouldn't bm then turn around and expect us to help them Aren't there tools that can extract chat from Reps? Teamliquid promotes manner in games We have an Idra fanclub so i don't know what you're talking about  IdrA gets a lot of haters because of his bm but he gets tolerance because he's a progamer and he has earned it. Average joe in masters hasn't It's not an equal place on teamliquid and no one will pretend that it is. Why so srs lol. Humor likes to get lost on the interwebz or something...
Haha sorry I didn't know you were joking
I'm a bit more passionate about the issue of growing bm
I'm still used to iccup where you can expect good manners 19/20 games
By making Teamliquid's stance on it official and known, we can hopefully alleviate it a bit
People can still bm, but don't expect teamliquid to help you
|
This is why tl is worse than 4chan. Say hi = ban.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On April 10 2011 06:23 Rockstar25 wrote:
This is why tl is worse than 4chan. Say hi = ban.
That's funny I don't remember that being discussed in the first post, and this is suppose to be a strat forum do you really need to say "hi" to discuss strategy?
|
Updated the OP to make things a little more clear and fun for everyone:
If I watch your replay and there are obvious flaws (macro, micro, etc.) in your game that contribute to your loss, you will be BANNED (Hint: read the Analyzing Replays thread and the How to Improve thread). Why? Because if you care enough about your gameplay to clutter up the Strategy Forum with another [H] thread, then you care enough to spend time by yourself to actually improve. Basically, this is if I feel you are being lazy and having others do work for you when you have put in minimal effort yourself.
If you give incorrect advice, you will be SHOT DOWN AND RIDICULED. If you aren't sure whether or not you should be giving advice, then don't. That doesn't mean don't give advice if you're not masters. But anyone (masters included) giving advice better be pretty damn sure of their advice before they give it.
|
Saracen, will there be anything regarding bm in replays?
Thanks in advance.
|
If your thread is about a new strategy and you do not have a damn good analysis (with replays) (i.e. I think your thread is too theorycrafty), you can play against me in a BO3 with your strategy. If you lose, you will be BANNED.
This should be a reality show.
|
On April 10 2011 07:23 frogmelter wrote:
Saracen, will there be anything regarding bm in replays?
Thanks in advance.
Not by me, but other mods might have different opinions. If there's BM in the replay, then you can just choose not to help him. If the BM is derailing the thread, then the OP will get closed anyways.
|
[*]If I watch your replay and there are obvious flaws (macro, micro, etc.) in your game that contribute to your loss, you will be BANNED (Hint: read the Analyzing Replays thread and the How to Improve thread). Why? Because if you care enough about your gameplay to clutter up the Strategy Forum with another [H] thread, then you care enough to spend time by yourself to actually improve. Basically, this is if I feel you are being lazy and having others do work for you when you have put in minimal effort yourself.
I guess I'm a little confused about this particular portion... I play sc2 at a fairly high level, but I've yet to play a game where I didn't KNOW there was improvement to be made regarding my macro, unit control, positioning, and scouting. Does this mean that I can't post a thread with replay, regarding how to deal with a particular unit composition? If I post a game played with someone similar to my level, (or a handful of replays, perhaps, where I try several different unit compositions to deal with what he's doing?).
I ask this with specific intent, I was in the process of writing and editing a strategy thread regarding a specific TvP unit comp (marine/bf.hell/thor+strikecannon/raven/banshee), and I have several replays showing my struggles vs this comp. However, being that I'm a lowly top600-ish(like 600 masters now?) player, and every replay I watch of myself I can find mistakes with my unit control, or mistakes with my macro, does this mean my post would be a bannable offense? Or does this qualify as more than "minimal" effort?
I apologize if this post/question is redundant in any way, just wanted to clarify.
Thanks.
|
On April 10 2011 08:30 Leyra wrote:Show nested quote +
[*]If I watch your replay and there are obvious flaws (macro, micro, etc.) in your game that contribute to your loss, you will be BANNED (Hint: read the Analyzing Replays thread and the How to Improve thread). Why? Because if you care enough about your gameplay to clutter up the Strategy Forum with another [H] thread, then you care enough to spend time by yourself to actually improve. Basically, this is if I feel you are being lazy and having others do work for you when you have put in minimal effort yourself.
I guess I'm a little confused about this particular portion... I play sc2 at a fairly high level, but I've yet to play a game where I didn't KNOW there was improvement to be made regarding my macro, unit control, positioning, and scouting. Does this mean that I can't post a thread with replay, regarding how to deal with a particular unit composition? If I post a game played with someone similar to my level, (or a handful of replays, perhaps, where I try several different unit compositions to deal with what he's doing?). I ask this with specific intent, I was in the process of writing and editing a strategy thread regarding a specific TvP unit comp (marine/bf.hell/thor+strikecannon/raven/banshee), and I have several replays showing my struggles vs this comp. However, being that I'm a lowly top600-ish(like 600 masters now?) player, and every replay I watch of myself I can find mistakes with my unit control, or mistakes with my macro, does this mean my post would be a bannable offense? Or does this qualify as more than "minimal" effort? I apologize if this post/question is redundant in any way, just wanted to clarify. Thanks.
The amount of effort you put into your OP should reflect the amount of time you're willing to spend analyzing your game and solving your problem by yourself. If it's clear that you put in at least the amount of effort we're going to be spending helping you out, then you're fine. If you half-ass the OP and don't try searching for answers first, then you're going to be banned. You don't have to be too hard on yourself, and you don't have to play perfectly in the replay. But if there's something stupid that contributed to your loss (e.g. you were supply blocked when he attacked or you suicided all your units into his army), then don't bother posting it.
TL;DR: Search for discussions on what you're having trouble with first. Then, if you can't find anything relevant, make a pretty OP with replay analysis and title it properly.
|
Why on earth should there be some sort of Banning for posting a Replay with BM in it if were asking for help in a non-BM manner?
IdrA, regarded as one of the best Zerg players out there, BM's quite often.
Many people are very emotional players, and we get upset when we are losing to something we wish we weren't. And for those people, they may BM some times.
Now if we apologize for the BM before we upload the replay, because we are sorry about it (well, most of us anyways), I don't see a problem with posting BM had replays..
*Edit* If you (being used in the ambiguous case, not Saracen) aren't someone who agrees on that note, then you shouldn't post in those OP, but don't allow others NOT to help them out if they don't share your views.
|
I respect your decision to police the strategy forum section better. At least rules this strict haven't come into force on other boards.
At first when I read this, I thought "Well this is overly strict" but now I see why.
|
On April 10 2011 08:40 Jeffbelittle wrote:
Why on earth should there be some sort of Banning for posting a Replay with BM in it if were asking for help in a non-BM manner?
IdrA, regarded as one of the best Zerg players out there, BM's quite often..
I addressed this already. Please read my posts before.
On April 10 2011 08:40 Jeffbelittle wrote:
Many people are very emotional players, and we get upset when we are losing to something we wish we weren't. And for those people, they may BM some times.
Now if we apologize for the BM before we upload the replay, because we are sorry about it (well, most of us anyways), I don't see a problem with posting BM had replays..
*Edit* If you (being used in the ambiguous case, not Saracen) aren't someone who agrees on that note, then you shouldn't post in those OP, but don't allow others NOT to help them out if they don't share your views.
Except they aren't really sorry because they go do it again...
|
This has been so great, you mods have been doing a great job keeping the bad posts off of Strategy Forums, its so nice to be able to log on, go to strat forums and read ACTUAL builds and strategies. Great work keep it up :D
|
On April 08 2011 11:35 Aequos wrote:Show nested quote +
If I watch your replay and there are obvious flaws (macro, micro, etc.) in your game that contribute to your loss, you will be BANNED (Hint: read the Analyzing Replays thread and the How to Improve thread). Why? Because if you care enough about your gameplay to clutter up the Strategy Forum with another [H] thread, then you care enough to spend time by yourself to actually improve.
By far the best ban reason in the thread. I hate reading 5 threads about "why did I lose this?" when the answer is clearly macro.
Finally, strictening things up. However, now it feels like any person asking for strategy help --^ will need to be a top tier player (pro gamer) or the replay will have flaws in it? Nobody is perfect in micro/macro, there will always be flaws. Unless you mean that the flaws must be the only reason the strategy you used didn't work??
And what about if you post a replay for a strategy and the person you are facing off make major macro/micro mistake, that makes your build valuable in this condition, but not otherwise???¸
Thanks for answering
|
Some of these rules seem a bit absurd, here's some that stuck out at me:
If the guide doesn't apply to a high enough level, it will be CLOSED. Why? Because we have quality standards at TL. The Strategy Forum is for helping people be the best they can be. If you have a fun build you want to write a guide about, blog it or post it on the B.net forums.
What do you define as "high level?" The majority of this section's members are well below the level of the blue highlighted posters but the blue highlighted posters (that make regular posts and content) still tend to be well below Semi-Pro / Pro NA level (what I take to mean high level).
If your thread doesn't apply at a high enough level, it will be CLOSED.
Same as above. Except this is for the [D] section. So anyone below Masters can't engage in discussion applicable to their skill level pretty much, as there is plenty of discussion that is applicable to only lower levels (core demographic of this section).
If you give incorrect advice, you will be SHOT DOWN. If you aren't sure whether or not you should be giving advice, then don't. That doesn't mean don't give advice if you're not masters. But anyone (masters included) giving advice better be pretty damn sure of their advice before they give it.
Completely subjective. For example, Catz was advocating his silly 4 drone harass on steppes of war for whoever knows how long and it's clearly, mathematically, suboptimal ("Terrible" - QXC) and yet I've seen him advocate here. So insta ban or does Catz get a free pass just because he thinks it works even though 99% of people think it doesn't. Of course he didn't mathematically test it, just a hunch that he got ahead if he manages to kill 1 worker. Sounds like your own racial bias (everyone has some) or skill level bias could easily sway your opinion with regards to what is correct or incorrect.
The reason we have such strict moderation is we want people in this community to be self-sufficient, not dependent on others, and we want to keep discussion in the Strategy Forum at the highest level.
So there would basically only 50 or less people posting, most of them not discussing strategy at the "highest level" but more around casual/semi-pro 3700-3900 masters level, most of which is only partially applicable to the true "highest level" of play while the lower level players effectively have no reason to post at all since they can't meet the new guidelines.
It sounds like what you're envisioning is (arguably) high level content and not much discussion (high level players are not magically going to start using this forum for discussion as opposed to talking with clan members). Is that the idea? If that's the idea then completely disregard this as this is more of a defense to all the lower level players, but if you don't want them posting at all until they are at least mid masters or so, then I understand.
|
I believe there are some fallacious ideas underlying this that need to be addressed.
Let's take the idea that people can't ask questions until their macro is up to some mod's individual standards.
First, it's unwise to make issues for mod judgment calls any more subjective than absolutely necessary. The reason is that it creates inevitable error, and where error means banning people without cause, that gives the site a bad reputation.
Second, the idea that people can't ask productive questions until one aspect of their play is satisfactory (macro, etc) is fallacious. Just because macro can improve, they can't improve some other aspect of their play? No, of course not. Macro wins games, but other things matter too. And sometimes asking questions to improve macro is important too.
Third, the unstated intention behind removing posts that aren't from highly skilled players is to exclude newer, less skilled players from making posts, asking questions, and so on. This is great if you're a skilled player who wants a forum exclusively covering issues related to skilled play, but not everyone is a skilled player. In fact, most people aren't. Tossing out everyone not up to some standard is unjust, reduces the number of people who will be interested in the site, and ultimately gives Team Liquid a (deserved, at that point) bad reputation for being elitist and scornful of engaging casual players.
Fourth, whatever happened to simple curiosity? Is there something wrong with someone asking a question because they want to know, regardless of how good their macro is? Yeah, if someone's not interested in the question they get to keep reading on to the next subject line. That is not a serious blow to the forums; indeed, appealing to as many people as possible is what creates a lively community, one that will last and engage yet more people as time goes on. Excluding people, by the same token, does the opposite.
If what you really want is a forum with only great content, go make a forum where you only link great threads. If what you want is a forum with high level content, go make one. No one will mind! But excluding people by restricting a forum of broad applicability? That people will mind. This isn't about quality standards; it's about who is allowed to engage in the community. The answer, if the community is to be healthy, should be everyone.
|
On April 10 2011 19:57 Taliesin wrote:
Second, the idea that people can't ask productive questions until one aspect of their play is satisfactory (macro, etc) is fallacious. Just because macro can improve, they can't improve some other aspect of their play? No, of course not. Macro wins games, but other things matter too.
What they are trying to achieve is that the strategy forum is about strategy. If your macro isn't up to a decent level, there's no point in looking at strategy (e.g. how do I kill mass carriers???).
On April 10 2011 19:57 Taliesin wrote:
And sometimes asking questions to improve macro is important too.
As stated in the OP, there is a simple questions/simple answers thread.
|
On April 10 2011 17:43 PokePill wrote:Some of these rules seem a bit absurd, here's some that stuck out at me: Show nested quote +If the guide doesn't apply to a high enough level, it will be CLOSED. Why? Because we have quality standards at TL. The Strategy Forum is for helping people be the best they can be. If you have a fun build you want to write a guide about, blog it or post it on the B.net forums. What do you define as "high level?" The majority of this section's members are well below the level of the blue highlighted posters but the blue highlighted posters (that make regular posts and content) still tend to be well below Semi-Pro / Pro NA level (what I take to mean high level). Same as above. Except this is for the [D] section. So anyone below Masters can't engage in discussion applicable to their skill level pretty much, as there is plenty of discussion that is applicable to only lower levels (core demographic of this section). Show nested quote +If you give incorrect advice, you will be SHOT DOWN. If you aren't sure whether or not you should be giving advice, then don't. That doesn't mean don't give advice if you're not masters. But anyone (masters included) giving advice better be pretty damn sure of their advice before they give it. Completely subjective. For example, Catz was advocating his silly 4 drone harass on steppes of war for whoever knows how long and it's clearly, mathematically, suboptimal ("Terrible" - QXC) and yet I've seen him advocate here. So insta ban or does Catz get a free pass just because he thinks it works even though 99% of people think it doesn't. Of course he didn't mathematically test it, just a hunch that he got ahead if he manages to kill 1 worker. Sounds like your own racial bias (everyone has some) or skill level bias could easily sway your opinion with regards to what is correct or incorrect. Show nested quote +The reason we have such strict moderation is we want people in this community to be self-sufficient, not dependent on others, and we want to keep discussion in the Strategy Forum at the highest level. So there would basically only 50 or less people posting, most of them not discussing strategy at the "highest level" but more around casual/semi-pro 3700-3900 masters level, most of which is only partially applicable to the true "highest level" of play while the lower level players effectively have no reason to post at all since they can't meet the new guidelines. It sounds like what you're envisioning is (arguably) high level content and not much discussion (high level players are not magically going to start using this forum for discussion as opposed to talking with clan members). Is that the idea? If that's the idea then completely disregard this as this is more of a defense to all the lower level players, but if you don't want them posting at all until they are at least mid masters or so, then I understand.
Ok, let's settle this once and for all. I don't give a flying shit whether you're bronze league or masters league or wooden toy soldier league or ultra fantastic Justice league. If your OP sucks, it's gonna be closed, and you're gonna suffer the consequences. If Mr. wooden toy soldier league needs help with his gameplay and can't for the life of him figure out what he's doing wrong, then he should be all means post a thread analyzing his gameplay and asking for help. And if Mr. grandmaster superhero posts a two line help thread going "omfg wtf happened how did I looooze?!!?!?" he's going to get his ass banned.
If Mr. Top 200 in the US posts a discussion about a new strategy, of course it's going to have more credibility if Joe Bronze league posts a discussion about the same strategy. But if Mr. Top 200's OP sucks, it's gonna get closed, and if Joe Bronze league's OP is amazing, then it's going to be left open. Believe it or not, I trust that people in Bronze league can make just as good of OPs as any other league. We want threads to be relevant. It doesn't matter who's posting them, as long as people can get some benefit out of them.
If ROOTGosu or VTI'mSoPro or EGSuperAwesome gives terrible advice in a help thread, he's going to be warned. Similarly, if Mr. Diamond League gives incorrect advice, you'll see big bold red letters under his post saying "This guy's a retard don't listen to him." Why? Because you don't want to be confusing the OP by telling them bullshit.
If a person isn't cut out to write a guide, then he shouldn't be writing it, whether or not he's in grandmaster. How is this so hard to see? Do you really see anything useful coming out of Sterling Silver writing about his super awesome Mothership DT double cloak rush? Who's going to find that useful? No one. But if he pulls a magic rabbit out of his ass and writes a flat out amazing guide, then I'll give him fifty billion e-hugs. And it actually does happen quite often, believe it or not. Not all of the amazing guides and discussions you see in the Strategy Forum were started by master league players. A good portion of them were written by gold/platinum/etc. leaguers.
To be honest, I don't give half a shit about how elitest you think I'm being. The bottom line is we want our Strategy Forum to be the place to go to get the highest quality information and advice. That's what separates us from other forums that you may or may not frequent. That means we can't have random bullshit posted 24-7 here, and that means we need strict moderation. If you want everybody to live in magical-unicorn-pony-shooting-rainbows-and-theorycrafting-bullshit-out-of-our-asses, then there's a site just for you. If you want real advice that you can trust is 100% correct; if you want to actually improve your gameplay; if you actually want to learn something worth learning, then come here.
|
I think you can stop the holier-than-thou attitude Mr Saracen. We are humans, not the stray-dogs/cats you see on the streets. Perhaps you can put your words and thoughts across in a nicer manner? And not going I-DONT-CARE-OF-WHAT-YOU-THINK-COS-U-CAN-GTFO-IF-U-DONT-LIKE-IT attitude and use a mutually exclusive tone. Being a mod has its responsibilities and its authority, please use it in a more proper way if you will, using condescending tones to members dont make you more respected. Making sense in your post and treating others politely and respecting others do. I am not disagree-ing with your actions, but it could be put across in a more proper manner
EDIT: spelling
|
On April 10 2011 22:45 DarkJirachi wrote:
I think you can stop the holier-than-thou attitude Mr Saracen. We are humans, not the stray-dogs/cats you see on the streets. Perhaps you can put your words and thoughts across in a nicer manner? And not going I-DONT-CARE-OF-WHAT-YOU-THINK-COS-U-CAN-GTFO-IF-U-DONT-LIKE-IT attitude and use a mutually exclusive tone. Being a mod has its responsibilities and its authority, please use it in a more proper way if you will, using condescending tones to members dont make you more respected. Making sense in your post and treating others politely and respecting others do. I am not disagree-ing with your actions, but it could be put across in a more proper manner
EDIT: spelling
They have a damn good reason to stand their ground firmly and draw the line once and for all. They've tried it with blue posts, they've tried it with the soft aproach, now its simply time to go all out mode and strangle all those who clutter the strategy forum with posts which have zero effort put into them.
Yes, we are humans. But in some cases stray cats and dogs are better on the strategy forum because they lack the thumbs to type and reply to strategy forum threads.
They WANT to strangle out all those who just post a 30 second reply because it has been killing the strategy forum for so long. It won't matter how much critique you want to give towards them.
TL simply wants its quality forum back, and it will give everyone hell until the forum returns to a shimmer of its former glory. This is the aditude they HAVE to have in order to keep on purging, and we as the users that want quality should encourage that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
