EPTOne account per game - Goodbye to smurfing? - Page 17
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:48 FragKrag wrote: then why would he care to advance in the ladder in the first place That's part of my point. Anyone at a skill level that might adversely affect the ladder system wouldn't care about the ladder system to begin with. The analogy really doesn't work for or against "casual competition" in any way, because it doesn't describe a realistic scenario. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
chas
Germany18 Posts
why is a B player bashing a C+ player more acceptable than a B player bashing a D player? Because a C+ player needs to have an idea about how the game works and chances are he wants to improve, thus doesn't post on the forums about his loss. The D players do. | ||
|
meathook
1289 Posts
On August 22 2009 08:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: Why? You realize it has 0 positive effects that couldn't be achieved by just tieing all your IDs to one "master account"? It's because he is a dodger. If you play him one time and win.. or even if he wins, he will never ever re you. And he will never ever play a map that is not Pythong. Ever. So, allowing only one account /cdkey makes dodging that much easier. Anyway, this is an awful idea, as many have already said.. makes no sense at all. But no one should be surprised.. Blizzard has already made a bunch of fucked up decisions in regards to SC2. Disabling LAN comes to mind, and this SC facebook or w/e they call it. | ||
|
Crompee
United Kingdom27 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:43 chas wrote: 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. Didnt you watch Blizzcon or readup about Battle.NEt before complaining? Everyone playing in the ladder wont be in the same league, The ladder is being split up into 6 catagorys (i think it is) then in those 6 catagorys, you are put with 200+ people in a league.. The top people in that league also have a minitournament to decide who is the best. So no, Battle.Net Ladder wont put everyone in the same league. 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. They've implemented 1 ladder with different skill levels dividing everyone, so yeah they've done basically what you want  | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:55 chas wrote: Because a C+ player needs to have an idea about how the game works and chances are he wants to improve, thus doesn't post on the forums about his loss. The D players do. You're assuming the D player doesn't want to improve then. | ||
|
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
On August 23 2009 00:38 Liquid`NonY wrote: I support Blizzard's decision. But there are a lot of specific features that need to be in place in order to make it work. Since we don't know all the details, we'll have to wait and see. I'm sure things can be worked out during beta or soon after release. The problem with race picking has always been the same: race pickers can't play everybody. They can't always play other race pickers. yes, good point. For normal ladder, this wouldn't be much of a problem except for ranks with a small amount of players (top ranks). However because they couldn't do race-picking for the automated tournaments, nor for any other league/tournament, especially the pro tourneys/leagues, it wouldn't make sense at all to have players practice only certain matchups on ladder but then for tourneys/leagues, be forced to know the matchups using 1 race only. for these reasons I think they should just stick with the current system of just picking your race only rather than choosing matchups | ||
|
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
On August 23 2009 05:27 Tsagacity wrote: There are definitely plenty of casual players that honestly have no interest in improving their game. Some newbs enjoy having close, funny, or intense games against other newbs. I've been a newb in plenty of games I've played, and honestly enjoyed being able to play it in a relaxing non-competitive fashion. Losing is fine too, but it's never fun for a player if he just gets annihilated in the first 2-3 minutes. Assuming that everyone is competitive and everyone wants to win and everyone wants to get better is a majorly flawed assumption. Well if you want to play "in a relaxing non-competitive fashion" maybe ladder is not for you. Could someone explain to me how wc3 amm is broken? As in why has top players trouble to find games? To me seemed like they canged it so it was more about win% and if you got 100% after 10 games or so you got to play top players. It wont have to be harder than that. You can create an unlimited amount of accs and after 10 games you'll play people with the same win % as you. Perhaps with a little finetuning with levels and such. I know it's abused for AT where people lose games with other constallations and then noob bash due to bad stats but still I think it's the best solution. It's also easy to fix this by just setting a AT teams rating to not have anything to do with previous achievments. That way you can play teamgames on the ladder with a friend on a different skill level and quickly get close games. | ||
|
Ranix
United States666 Posts
Few reasons- no one will play unranked seriously therefore taking away the value in trying to get better at different races -top level players will wait long periods of time waiting to find a match -n00bs like me need to learn from our mistakes instead of complaining about being smurfed | ||
|
Tsagacity
United States2124 Posts
On August 23 2009 06:09 Crompee wrote: They've implemented 1 ladder with different skill levels dividing everyone, so yeah they've done basically what you want It's not really what I want. I'm just advocating that point of view. But the division stuff is pointless if you can smurf and join any division you want. On August 23 2009 06:44 Eatme wrote: Sorry, I clarified what I meant by "relaxing, non-competitive" later. That probably wasn't a good term for it.Well if you want to play "in a relaxing non-competitive fashion" maybe ladder is not for you. People of all skill levels may be interested in some sort of competition, but not with the same goals or reasons. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 23 2009 06:40 Zelniq wrote: yes, good point. For normal ladder, this wouldn't be much of a problem except for ranks with a small amount of players (top ranks). However because they couldn't do race-picking for the automated tournaments, nor for any other league/tournament, especially the pro tourneys/leagues, it wouldn't make sense at all to have players practice only certain matchups on ladder but then for tourneys/leagues, be forced to know the matchups using 1 race only. for these reasons I think they should just stick with the current system of just picking your race only rather than choosing matchups You have to pick a race vs random, so if two incompatible race pickers matchup, they both get their "vs random" race. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5413 Posts
On August 22 2009 13:51 lazz wrote: if you want to "mentally get in shape", then play NON RANKED GAMES. then when you've decided youve bashed enough newbies there you can go play ladder. what's the problem here? On August 22 2009 15:01 iMate wrote: this is a amazing idea... and for all the people that say OMG i cant learn a new race or let a friend play.. there is a thing called unranked games... like god On August 22 2009 08:32 blade55555 wrote: Agreed with you 100%. So far the arguments to why its bad are pretty bad because its really not hard to play unrated for the problems people are saying like trying a new race or strategy don't see how its hard to play unrated but ok then ^^. OK, so how is bashing noobs in unrated games any better than doing so in ranked games? Where's the logic in that? You, guys, accuse us (people who want smurfing to be possible) of stat whoring, while this exactly what you are doing yourselves. T_____T "I don't wanna play against much better opponents, but as long as people get bashed only in custom games, which I don't intend to play, I'm fine with it." How hypocritical. ;; Also, how come nobody is complaining about the start of the new season? That basically turns everyone into a smurf... Compared to that, regular smurfing is a marginal occurence. T___T On August 22 2009 11:24 Aegraen wrote: What kind of logic is this? This will make the ladder more accurate. I really believe some of you guys have never heard of Custom games..... Yeah, because dropping from B to C when learning a new race, and then having to make your way back up to B after switching back to your main race will make the ladder more accurate... On August 22 2009 15:20 keV. wrote: I'd love to hear all these people saying "its a terrible stupid decision by blizzard" to actually come up with something more fair and a way to determine someones true skill. I especially love the "What if I want to learn another race argument," when get this: YOU HAVE 3 SEPARATE RECORDS. (If you think you have a better solution you don't) Any evidence for that? Sure, you've got separate records for all races in WC3, but you still have only one ELL for 1v1. ;; | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
| ||
|
[DUF]MethodMan
Germany1716 Posts
read again plz: On August 23 2009 08:24 maybenexttime wrote: OK, so how is bashing noobs in unrated games any better than doing so in ranked games? Where's the logic in that? You, guys, accuse us (people who want smurfing to be possible) of stat whoring, while this exactly what you are doing yourselves. T_____T "I don't wanna play against much better opponents, but as long as people get bashed only in custom games, which I don't intend to play, I'm fine with it." How hypocritical. ;; Also, how come nobody is complaining about the start of the new season? That basically turns everyone into a smurf... Compared to that, regular smurfing is a marginal occurence. T___T | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11539 Posts
| ||
|
starPride
United States142 Posts
| ||
|
D00dles
Cambodia217 Posts
 , the game lasted 5 minutes and i didn't learn anything from it (I lolled seriously.) New players will give up if they keep losing to smurfs.. If they give up after losing a few times, this means they never truly wanted to play the game competetively. Smurfing happens in every game."Basically, what i'm trying to say is.. Instead of whining about losing to smurfs, stick with the fucking game and fucking learn. If you don't understand why Smurfing is good for a game. (Not just SC.) Then just stop complaining and play the game you casual, it's not as if it's going to affect you in the longrun when you fuck off to another game. If you're offended by any of my language? I do not care. p.s. I'm not that great at SC. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 23 2009 09:08 starPride wrote: if u wanna bash noobs, mass lose like 20 games then start owning What if you don't want to bash noobs, but you just don't want to play on the same account ALL the time? | ||
| ||
