EPTOn April 08 2011 13:45 Griffith` wrote:
Saracen - are there any plans to make a subforum under strategy that only masters players can post?
Saracen - are there any plans to make a subforum under strategy that only masters players can post?
no
[!] A WARNING (Purge) - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Saracen
United States5139 Posts
no | ||
|
PowerKock
46 Posts
finally this place is turning into a jail. which is good...... i hate logging onto this site, and reading non sence. | ||
|
pRo9aMeR
595 Posts
Thank you Saracen! | ||
|
entropius
United States1046 Posts
Such draconian ZOMG YOU WILL BE BANNED moderation and mod-rage is really not terribly constructive, in my opinion. Whether it is the intent or not, this sort of thing (having BANNED in red caps twenty times in a post) makes anyone below high masters terrified to post here. Whether it is the intent or not, this sort of police-statery will have a chilling effect on well-intentioned discussion. Yes, I realize that the TL staff can do whatever they want with their webspace, and that people who don't like it are free to go elsewhere; the problem is that some people who you don't want to stop posting *will* likely stop posting and/or go elsewhere. I feel that there are less merciless and less exclusive ways to improve the quality of posting on the strategy forum. Also, perhaps the place for the super-high-level, exhaustively-researched, took-five-hours-to-write posts that this post seems to encourage is Liquipedia? I notice that its SC2 strategy section is missing coverage of some fundamental topics. | ||
|
TheNessman
United States4158 Posts
NOTE: All bans will be temporary Strategy Forum bans. DO NOT PM me about bans/thread closures. This is my least favorite part. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
| ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On April 08 2011 14:51 entropius wrote: -1, imo. Such draconian ZOMG YOU WILL BE BANNED moderation and mod-rage is really not terribly constructive, in my opinion. Whether it is the intent or not, this sort of thing (having BANNED in red caps twenty times in a post) makes anyone below high masters terrified to post here. Whether it is the intent or not, this sort of police-statery will have a chilling effect on well-intentioned discussion. Yes, I realize that the TL staff can do whatever they want with their webspace, and that people who don't like it are free to go elsewhere; the problem is that some people who you don't want to stop posting *will* likely stop posting and/or go elsewhere. I feel that there are less merciless and less exclusive ways to improve the quality of posting on the strategy forum. Also, perhaps the place for the super-high-level, exhaustively-researched, took-five-hours-to-write posts that this post seems to encourage is Liquipedia? I notice that its SC2 strategy section is missing coverage of some fundamental topics. As long as they follow the forum guidelines, low-level players shouldn't be scared at all about asking for help to improve their gameplay. That is, of course, after they've done everything they can to improve their gameplay on their own. As for all other discussion...well the strategy forum is supposed to be a compilation of the best, most thought out guides and discussions. Chances are anybody below Masters (I am Diamond, for reference) who tries to add to the discussion is really just theorycrafting. And we know how Saracen feels about theorycrafting. I guess what I'm trying to say is if low-level players are afraid to post, that's fine. They should be reading, not posting, unless they are specifically asking for help. In that case, the guidelines are easy to follow. | ||
|
MajorityofOne
Canada2506 Posts
On April 08 2011 15:02 ZasZ. wrote: As long as they follow the forum guidelines, low-level players shouldn't be scared at all about asking for help to improve their gameplay. That is, of course, after they've done everything they can to improve their gameplay on their own. As for all other discussion...well the strategy forum is supposed to be a compilation of the best, most thought out guides and discussions. Chances are anybody below Masters (I am Diamond, for reference) who tries to add to the discussion is really just theorycrafting. And we know how Saracen feels about theorycrafting. I guess what I'm trying to say is if low-level players are afraid to post, that's fine. They should be reading, not posting, unless they are specifically asking for help. In that case, the guidelines are easy to follow. Excellently said. While the "BANNED"! "CLOSED!" fire and brimstone makes it seem pretty intense, what's being asked of everyone here is actually very moderate. If you have a question, make use of all the resources already offered; if you do so and find your question still can't be answered, then there should be no fear in making a new thread to address the problem. On the other side, people providing help should make sure to really mean it. If an aspect of SC2 strategy warrants the creation of thread, that means it is NOT a "Simple Questions, Simple Answers" kind of thing, or a "Just macro better" kind of thing, or even a "really obvious unit composition question" kind of thing. So no matter how good you are, your throwaway comments thoughts are not going to be very useful. I was initially a bit skeptical, but the more I think about it, I have to say I'm fully in agreement with the mods on this one. | ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
On April 08 2011 11:11 Saracen wrote: [*]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. I'm not completely sure about this rule. It seems that even at master level, there are micro and macro mistakes and they "contribute" to a loss whether or not they were the primary contributor. Sometimes it's not as obvious as "oh, you weren't making probes for 3 minutes". Sometimes the player is bronze and just doesn't understand what they are doing wrong even if it is obvious to us, and even if they have read the replay analysis thread. Also, in some games, you lose to a strategy and you know you lost because of bad micro, but maybe you want help to learn how to deal with the strategy better next time instead of relying on your micro to save you. I think it's reasonable to say "Hey, I know I lost this game because of the bad positioning in this last fight, but it's a long replay and I know I could have done other things better. Can anyone help me?" | ||
|
Blurb
Denmark55 Posts
Fine with me! | ||
|
Chroniel
Germany46 Posts
"•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." This rule applies to both [H] and [L] and I am not sure if it's just me but this sounds a bit harsh to strictly enforce: [L] threads are (supposed to be) from low level players so it is quite obvious that there will be makro holes in their games which will most likely contribute to their loss. While it is of course right that the players can do a lot to improve on that on their own enforcing this sounds like "don't ask for help until you are master league and pretty much have perfect makro". I think much depends on the word "obvious" - missing some larva injects and failing to spread your creep during big battles even happens on the highest levels of play (and while a lot of mistakes are easily noticeable by you I think a bronze or silver player might struggle to identify them even after reading the improvement threads). If it just means "look at your own replay and think about it for a second - you didn't make drones after 5 minutes into the game and were fighting a terran on 4 bases" please forget what I was saying. EDIT: Well just what Cel.erity was saying - obviously took me a lot longer to type out what I was thinking then I thought. | ||
|
brainpower
United States233 Posts
On April 08 2011 15:32 Cel.erity wrote: I'm not completely sure about this rule. It seems that even at master level, there are micro and macro mistakes and they "contribute" to a loss whether or not they were the primary contributor. Sometimes it's not as obvious as "oh, you weren't making probes for 3 minutes". Sometimes the player is bronze and just doesn't understand what they are doing wrong even if it is obvious to us, and even if they have read the replay analysis thread. Also, in some games, you lose to a strategy and you know you lost because of bad micro, but maybe you want help to learn how to deal with the strategy better next time instead of relying on your micro to save you. I think it's reasonable to say "Hey, I know I lost this game because of the bad positioning in this last fight, but it's a long replay and I know I could have done other things better. Can anyone help me?" Pretty sure this falls under the "Analyze your replays first" rule. If someone has read the Analyzing a replay thread, and watched the game over once or twice, they should have at least a basic understanding of why they lost if it was something macro based. However, I also disagree with the rule of being banned for losing a game over a macro mistake. Games are worth watching for more than their win or lose moments. If someone is trying to refine a timing attack, but it gets repelled, then 10 minutes later they didn't notice that their main had only one patch left with 25 probes on it, while their 3rd had 6 workers, there is no reason the person shouldn't make a thread asking for help with the first 10 minutes of the game. | ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
| ||
|
5unrise
New Zealand646 Posts
On April 08 2011 11:11 Saracen wrote: [/b]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 sounds almost like a dare, I'm tempted to take this challenge  kidding.. kidding | ||
|
FlattLine
80 Posts
| ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On April 08 2011 11:11 Saracen wrote: Wow.... best rule on any forum I've ever been to ever!play against me in a BO3 with your strategy. If you lose, you will be BANNED. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On April 08 2011 11:27 CecilSunkure wrote: I like how it's mandatory to read my thread on improving :D Your thread is quite amazing. Reading amazing threads should always be a must. | ||
|
Ledcaveman
100 Posts
| ||
|
Aequos
Canada606 Posts
On April 08 2011 13:45 Griffith` wrote: Saracen - are there any plans to make a subforum under strategy that only masters players can post? I think the hope is that we won't need a special subforum once the purge has gone through. I mean, 90% of the reason to avoid the strategy section is "XvX is so IMBA" "Why did I lose this?" "XXX's Stargate-first Guide to PvP" etc etc. With these changes, hopefully it'll make it more readable and reasonable. | ||
|
Xacalite
Germany533 Posts
| ||
| ||
