EPTOne account per game - Goodbye to smurfing? - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
|
chas
Germany18 Posts
You want to learn a new race? Play unrated. The competitive value of an unranked game is usually close to zero because there is no immediate reason to take it seriously. | ||
|
ghermination
United States2851 Posts
On August 23 2009 04:21 chas wrote: The competitive value of an unranked game is usually close to zero because there is no immediate reason to take it seriously. Do you play fastest and bgh seriously? Do you play any UMS seriously? Think before you post plox | ||
|
spkim1
Canada286 Posts
| ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
IceCube
Croatia1403 Posts
On August 22 2009 08:01 blade55555 wrote: How is it idiotic? Great Decision by Blizzard. I remember when I used to be against this 1 account per cd key but aoe3 did it and it worked out splendid. Smurfing = down. You want to learn a new race? Play unrated. Your brother wants to play? Have him play on your account or buy his own. Want to learn a new strategy? Why play unrated!. Why do you need a new account to test strategies when you can do unrated eh? Or are you one of those smurfs who just loves to rape lower ranked players? This! I've been stomped too much times by some b+/a- players. Its a shame. This way when you get next rank you will really get that rank and play agains that rank REAL players not 3-4 ranks above. I like it, I like it ALOT!  | ||
|
chas
Germany18 Posts
Do you play fastest and bgh seriously? Do you play any UMS seriously? Think before you post plox You don't lose anything from losing those games, so there is no immediate reason to play them seriously, what's the point? This way when you get next rank you will really get that rank and play agains that rank REAL players not 3-4 ranks above. You also get those people playing entirely different races, thus performing way below average (maybe your skill level?). I'm sure not even progamers are as good with the other races than with their main, even if they study the other races a lot. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
I don't see how SC players have any right to complain at all. ICCup is so good for this shit. This wasn't implemented because some of you D/D-/D+ players got stomped by A/B/C players, it's because in WC3 the AMM was fucking terrible for high level players, and they were forced to smurf in order to FIND GAMES. | ||
|
ramen247
United States1256 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:14 chas wrote: You don't lose anything from losing those games, so there is no immediate reason to play them seriously, what's the point? You also get those people playing entirely different races, thus performing way below average (maybe your skill level?). I'm sure not even progamers are as good with the other races than with their main, even if they study the other races a lot. i think he is agreeing with you but misread your post. casual players that want to avoid getting destroyed are pathetic... the excuse, "im not trying to get better." doesnt work because you are obviously playing the game to win. and how do you acheive wins more consistently? by practicing. winning against other newbs is just a way of self denial, avoiding the fact that you suck compared to the other people in the game. and to all the newbs, what if you do get better at the game after 10 years hard work but your acc is stained by a bad looking record of 10k//30k? | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
Assuming that everyone is competitive and everyone wants to win and everyone wants to get better is a majorly flawed assumption. | ||
|
EscPlan9
United States2777 Posts
Anyways, I can't imagine Blizzard would go with this decision the way it sounds right now. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
* which is the best way to improve... the best way to improve is by playing against someone Slightly better or Slightly worse than you. That is what the AMM is designed to do. Playing against someone much better or much worse doesn't teach you anything, and also isn't that much fun (either toying with someone or knowing you ae being toyed with) Now if you want to play "off-race" then the skill level will be slightly off... But it will adjust as you play with that race (both by your ladder moving down due to loing and your getting better with that race due to practice) The only bad possibilities are 1) locked in name (which it might not be) 2) no casual multiplayer with/against a friend that doesn't have the game (possibly solved with 'playing as a Guest' ) | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
If I go to the gym on the weekend to play Basketball with a few groups of people, I'll probably be a bit competitive. We'll keep score. I'll try to win, and maybe we'll have a round robin tournament. At the end of the day though, I know I'm a mediocre basketball player and I'm not really going to try to change that. I'm not trying to become Michael Jordan, and if Michael Jordan shows up at the gym and starts playing against me I'm probably not going to have much fun. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:24 ramen247 wrote: and to all the newbs, what if you do get better at the game after 10 years hard work but your acc is stained by a bad looking record of 10k//30k? If the rating system works correctly, there's no reason that a bunch of losses from 2-3 years ago should actually affect who you're playing against in a noticeable way. Either stats will get wiped season-by-season, or they'll have a rating system that actually accounts for that. Worrying that results that should be irrelevant won't be is probably one of the less reasonable reasons to be against this. On August 23 2009 05:34 Krikkitone wrote: Now if you want to play "off-race" then the skill level will be slightly off... But it will adjust as you play with that race (both by your ladder moving down due to loing and your getting better with that race due to practice) Even this is reasonably fixed by having the AMM use race-by-race stats rather than global stats. Your skill with Zerg shouldn't affect what opponents you play with Terran, for better or for worse. On August 23 2009 05:34 Krikkitone wrote: The only bad possibilities are 1) locked in name (which it might not be) 2) no casual multiplayer with/against a friend that doesn't have the game (possibly solved with 'playing as a Guest' ) Exactly. Most of the conceivable problems with this have easy fixes that are likely either already in place or planned. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
and blizzard isn't perfect with their ladder. D2 players are whining for a reset, and WC3 players are whining for a reset, so chances are those stats will stay with you for some time. | ||
|
chas
Germany18 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:37 Tsagacity wrote: One of the panel speakers used a nice analogy for casual competition: If I go to the gym on the weekend to play Basketball with a few groups of people, I'll probably be a bit competitive. We'll keep score. I'll try to win, and maybe we'll have a round robin tournament. At the end of the day though, I know I'm a mediocre basketball player and I'm not really going to try to change that. I'm not trying to become Michael Jordan, and if Michael Jordan shows up at the gym and starts playing against me I'm probably not going to have much fun. Your group of casual basketball players also doesn't play in the NBA, like a professional basketball player would. Edit: To clarify, in the ladder, everyone will be playing "in your league", there is absolutely no separation. It doesn't really matter whether you're terrible or good. I'm playing in a casual soccer league, we also sometimes get rolled by a team that is full of people playing in clubs and yes, it's not much fun. But the growth of the league by a huge margin every year on top of no one making a real point out of it, the league hasn't taken action against those players yet. Do you really play against _that_ many high ranked players on ICCup or any other ladder? Because I really don't that often. Now I'm sure your casual basketball group got together because they wanted to play in a more relaxed environment and/or don't have the spare time to join a real club, but you're intentionally separating yourself from the people being serious about their game. To do that, Blizzard would have to introduce two different ladders you have to pick from, one for bads/casuals and one for serious players. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:39 FragKrag wrote: except take it from the point of view of Michael Jordan. He's on top of the world, top of the AMM, now he's waiting 30 minutes to an hour trying to find a game, and he eventually gets frustrated and leaves. and blizzard isn't perfect with their ladder. D2 players are whining for a reset, and WC3 players are whining for a reset, so chances are those stats will stay with you for some time. The Michael Jordan analogy is pretty flawed to begin with. At that level, players aren't going to care about their ranking on the AMM, and will more likely be playing planned games, either with other teammates, or with other progamers they know personally. Jaedong isn't going to care that he can't find opponents on the AMM, because he'll be practicing specific builds, and he'll want to do with with Lomo or Backho because they can chat about it afterwards. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:39 FragKrag wrote: except take it from the point of view of Michael Jordan. He's on top of the world, top of the AMM, now he's waiting 30 minutes to an hour trying to find a game, and he eventually gets frustrated and leaves. and blizzard isn't perfect with their ladder. D2 players are whining for a reset, and WC3 players are whining for a reset, so chances are those stats will stay with you for some time. That problem has to do with the AMM's strictness Essentially the AMM needs to be less strict when payer's are at a level that causes them to wait a long time. Actually, the AMM could determine its Strictness based on how many people were online at that time near that level | ||
| ||
