|
On August 24 2009 01:02 ZergZoul wrote:
I have 1 iccup account I use to play a friend for fun. We usually play rvr. I don't care about stats in this account but he does so we play one on one.
I have another "main" account where I play seriously vs everyone else and I care about stats.
I don't want to mix them, how is that gonna be possible in SC2???
Im not smurfing, neither bashing noobs.
uhmm...in real ladder...you can't play the same guy over and over again.
your games against him won't count towards ladder, and i'm not sure if your wins and losses will be recorded...
|
On August 24 2009 00:06 MasterFischer wrote:
It´s a good idea, I don´t really like smurfing.
Celebrities get harassed? Yea so?
What about all the real life celebrities, tv, movie, rock stars.. they dont have a fkin smurf name, they get harassed all the time by low life losers. That´s what its like being a celebrity. Deal with it or quit teh game.
I´m sure they can handle it, and I´m sure some kind of feature will be added to better handle harassment etc.
Play Unrated if u want to check out new stuff, strategies and races.
I have a hard time understanding where all the whine is coming from, I really do. :/
Play unrated if you cant hadle losing games on ladder.
The youth of today, get off my lawn, nannystate ect.
|
On August 23 2009 02:01 Piretes wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 01:39 GG.Win wrote:
As a bit of a newbie (C/C+) I find smurfing so fucking annoying. I don't see a problem with this at all.
As a C-/C player I dont understand this at all. Either you play at korean hours and get stomped or you simply want a positive record. At C+, smurfs are B+ and higher - you won't face of these players, and when you do you can find flaws in your play better than when you play vs C. You can learn alot from losing to better players. And I'd be suprised if you have never tried new strategies on another account.
a kindof problem with playing against alot of those korean players besides the fact that they invade our servers is that they will often play 50 or 200 games and then make a new account after acheiving a certain number of wins. there's no way you can recognize them, but they can recognize you if you do not change your name. so they will always have the advantage against those not changing their name. knowing your enemy is very important.
|
solution: stop caring so much about your f*cking record and take a few losses on your main account if you have to
|
On August 22 2009 22:43 FortuneSyn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2009 22:37 YPang wrote:
ridiculous... Noobs just trying to not get raped cuz they're hurt their ego. How do noobs ever plan on getting better if they keep executing the same horrible strategy against horrible players and working? They need to stop complaining about getting stomped, EVERYONE decent player has been through that. Either change your game to Warcraft3, or get better. Period. Every decent player have gone through getting stomped because previous ladder systems fail at stopping smurfs, NOT because you can only be good by being smurf stomped. A gentle learning curve increases the games popularity. This creates more competition, more tournament earnings, more sponsorships, etc. Do you want this? If you really cannot see why then let me know and I will type it out for you on this thread. As for your retarded comment on changing games, it is you that needs to change games because right now you are the one whining.
Do you know how much experience you get if you play a progamer and get raped? you get to see their psi compared to yours, their economy compared to yours, and their game sense, and game vision when playing against you. Obviously you're the type of person that cannot take losses, nuf said.
There are other options of the "learning curve", i really like iccup's system if players are D-, they get their own channel. Thats a good enough curve. Its a ladder, its for competition, its not for people to complain about losing to better players. Deal with it.
My retarded comment of changing games obviously has gotten you personally, i apologize.
Hey if you want a personal apology letter, please PM me...
|
On August 24 2009 01:27 dcttr66 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 02:01 Piretes wrote:On August 23 2009 01:39 GG.Win wrote:
As a bit of a newbie (C/C+) I find smurfing so fucking annoying. I don't see a problem with this at all.
As a C-/C player I dont understand this at all. Either you play at korean hours and get stomped or you simply want a positive record. At C+, smurfs are B+ and higher - you won't face of these players, and when you do you can find flaws in your play better than when you play vs C. You can learn alot from losing to better players. And I'd be suprised if you have never tried new strategies on another account. a kindof problem with playing against alot of those korean players besides the fact that they invade our servers is that they will often play 50 or 200 games and then make a new account after acheiving a certain number of wins. there's no way you can recognize them, but they can recognize you if you do not change your name. so they will always have the advantage against those not changing their name. knowing your enemy is very important.
same goes even for the 3 names per account idea. it might sound good at first, but really how fair would it be to change your name completely so people can't recognize you? you could play against someone who would normally know you quite well, but instead knows nothing about you because you changed your name. there are all kinds of ways you could use the deception to your advantage. it just doesn't work out as being fair.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 24 2009 00:45 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 10:55 FrozenArbiter wrote:
How many times do I need to bring this up....
Have one master account.
Allow this account to create - let's say - 3 user IDs for SC2.
Have the ELL be tracked by the master account - so if I have a high ranking account and create a new one, the new account will start with the same ELL as my first account (or, at least higher than a completely new account).
No noobs get bashed, and I get to "smurf" without disrupting the accuracy of the ladder. I think the amount of extra technical work this involves is not worth the very weak benefit of this feature. I think there are more important features missing from B.Net 2.0. Also, if you could clarify this scenario: --Master account has 2000 rating. --First ID has 2000 rating (all games have been played on this ID) --Second ID is created. It has 0 rating, but matches against 2000 rated players (based on master account rating) --Second ID plays against a 2000 rated player (both by ID and master) Are the point changes (for both the IDs and the masters) calculated based on each player's master account rating, or on the rating of their IDs? If it's based on master account rating, then the player who plays on only one ID is going to get easier points than he deserves. That is, with this system, it is guaranteed that people are going to get free points when playing their main race and trying their hardest against someone not playing their main race and/or not trying. But if you try to adjust for this by factoring in the 2nd ID's personal rating into the point change calculation, then the guy playing on one ID stands to get screwed when playing against someone's 2nd ID who is playing his best. Either way, it's corrupting the ladder. If it's based purely on personal ratings, then obviously the guy who uses only one ID is at a huge disadvantage. He is forced to match against people with very low rating who have a much better chance of beating him than their rating reflects. The bottom line, I think, is that if you are playing rated ladder games, you ought to be trying your hardest every single game. You only need one account for that. Asking for multiple accounts is purely an aesthetic thing, for both the name of the account and the stats on the account. Such weak aesthetic features aren't worth adding an entire new layer of account registration and management.
Good point. I had been thinking about that briefly but I sort assumed there would be a good way around that, but I can't actually think of one at the moment.
Much better reason to have 1 ID than all the "omg smurfs are killing me" paranoia :[
Ok then maybe allowing 1 name change per season...?
If you want to change your name DURING the season you need to pay like 2~5$ or something (and you could list all name changes in your profile).
On August 24 2009 00:06 MasterFischer wrote:
It´s a good idea, I don´t really like smurfing.
Celebrities get harassed? Yea so?
What about all the real life celebrities, tv, movie, rock stars.. they dont have a fkin smurf name, they get harassed all the time by low life losers. That´s what its like being a celebrity. Deal with it or quit teh game.
I´m sure they can handle it, and I´m sure some kind of feature will be added to better handle harassment etc.
Play Unrated if u want to check out new stuff, strategies and races.
I have a hard time understanding where all the whine is coming from, I really do. :/
Just because there's a limitation IRL, doesnt mean you should bring that limitation to an online platform - that's just stupid!
Don't you think most celebrities would LOVE being able to go out anonymously?
|
Do you know how much experience you get if you play a progamer and get raped? you get to see their psi compared to yours, their economy compared to yours, and their game sense, and game vision when playing against you.
Sure getting beat by a progamer teaches you stuff. So what? The accuracy of a ladder rank should not be reduced in exchange of adding a feature that is supposed to make you improve faster.
Obviously you're the type of person that cannot take losses, nuf said.
Please tell me how you came to that conclusion. Additionally, please tell me how this retarded comment is in any way relevant to this thread.
There are other options of the "learning curve", i really like iccup's system if players are D-, they get their own channel. Thats a good enough curve. Its a ladder, its for competition, its not for people to complain about losing to better players. Deal with it.
C players will still be smurfed by B, D players will still be smurfed by C. Smurfing will still occur, smurfing creates an innacurate ladder (see Nony's excellent post), innacurate ladders are useless ladders.
|
On August 24 2009 00:45 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 10:55 FrozenArbiter wrote:
How many times do I need to bring this up....
Have one master account.
Allow this account to create - let's say - 3 user IDs for SC2.
Have the ELL be tracked by the master account - so if I have a high ranking account and create a new one, the new account will start with the same ELL as my first account (or, at least higher than a completely new account).
No noobs get bashed, and I get to "smurf" without disrupting the accuracy of the ladder. I think the amount of extra technical work this involves is not worth the very weak benefit of this feature. I think there are more important features missing from B.Net 2.0. Also, if you could clarify this scenario: --Master account has 2000 rating. --First ID has 2000 rating (all games have been played on this ID) --Second ID is created. It has 0 rating, but matches against 2000 rated players (based on master account rating) --Second ID plays against a 2000 rated player (both by ID and master) Are the point changes (for both the IDs and the masters) calculated based on each player's master account rating, or on the rating of their IDs? If it's based on master account rating, then the player who plays on only one ID is going to get easier points than he deserves. That is, with this system, it is guaranteed that people are going to get free points when playing their main race and trying their hardest against someone not playing their main race and/or not trying. But if you try to adjust for this by factoring in the 2nd ID's personal rating into the point change calculation, then the guy playing on one ID stands to get screwed when playing against someone's 2nd ID who is playing his best. Either way, it's corrupting the ladder. If it's based purely on personal ratings, then obviously the guy who uses only one ID is at a huge disadvantage. He is forced to match against people with very low rating who have a much better chance of beating him than their rating reflects. The bottom line, I think, is that if you are playing rated ladder games, you ought to be trying your hardest every single game. You only need one account for that. Asking for multiple accounts is purely an aesthetic thing, for both the name of the account and the stats on the account. Such weak aesthetic features aren't worth adding an entire new layer of account registration and management.
IMO the purpose of the master account's points should be to determine your overall skill so you wont get bashing noobs whenerever you make a new ID. So when you make a new ID it starts with the same points as your master account.
After a match the point change to your ID is done according to your ID's points. That way if you use this account for offrace/screwing around your ID's points will eventually go down but that wont be bad for the opposing players because you are playing badly on this account.
In the same time, after a match your master account's points get readjusted but not with the same amount as your ID but taking into account your other IDs - if you have another very strong main ID the points wont go down so much after a loss (or to make it simpler the master account's points may be equal to the points of your best ID)
In short the matchmaking is done according to how well you play on your current ID - if you play bad there is no harm for your noob opponents. The master points are to determine your overall skill so that when you make a new account you dont start from 0 points and start bashing weaker players.
Or in other words the purpose of the master account's points is so that when you start a new ID not to start from the bottom and rape weaker opponents till you get high, but to start from your current level and get raped yourself until you go down to the level you are playing at.
|
What you suggest MER, sounds like it might actually work if that is the case.
I have no problem with people changing names (albeit, I fail to understand why), if it means that destroying noobs can be partly if not totally avoided. We are all trying to have fun playing games, whether you make 100.000 dollars in a pro league or you just picked up the game from the store yesterday and sat down with it for 10 minutes in multi.
The better and more skill you have, the greater the impact it will have on possible alternative smurfing accounts, så virtually it does nothing other than relate your account with a different name.
It should probaly display your master account name, on both accounts and what other smurf account u got.
All in all, I might be ignorant, but I don´t understand why it is so terrible important to have smurf accounts to try stuff. I mean, whats the big deal with just handling everything from 1 account? Other than the fact that you might not like your NAME.. but cmon.. that is hardly why people change names nowadays, huh?
Please enlighten me further.
|
I like Mer's idea. That way we could have separate accounts, and practicing another race on another account won't murder your beginning account.
|
mer's idea is pretty much what tons of other usesrs have proposed.
|
Wow Jared is going to hate this
|
|
|
On August 24 2009 03:11 ramen247 wrote:
mer's idea is pretty much what tons of other usesrs have proposed.
Yeah, but FrozenArbiter is just getting ignored now 
|
On August 24 2009 02:48 MasterFischer wrote:
All in all, I might be ignorant, but I don´t understand why it is so terrible important to have smurf accounts to try stuff. I mean, whats the big deal with just handling everything from 1 account? Other than the fact that you might not like your NAME.. but cmon.. that is hardly why people change names nowadays, huh?
Please enlighten me further.
It would be purely cosmetical if it was only the ID. But when there's matchmaking system you would want to play high level games with your main account and in the same time be able to offrace/just screw around with friends without this affecting your ELL/stats when you play seriously.
Besides that people often change IDs just because they dont like them anymore, especially in a game that lives for 11 years. I know it because I myself would never use the nick I started with 11 years ago when I was a kid.
On August 24 2009 03:29 FragKrag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2009 03:11 ramen247 wrote:
mer's idea is pretty much what tons of other usesrs have proposed. Yeah, but FrozenArbiter is just getting ignored now
I think its what FrozenArbiter also had in mind, I just put it into more concrete words 
|
On August 22 2009 11:57 FrozenArbiter wrote:Ye, I got the definition of sandbagging a bit wrong - I thought it could be used for both that and for intentionally lowering your rank to play worse players. Anyhow, the smurfing definition apparently goes for both situations, it is not exclusively used to describe someone griefing (and in fact, this is probably why I have such a problem with the term - I have never used it to describe someone noob-bashing - smurfs to me mean nothing beyond it being someones secret alias). As for the threshold for a new player today, I don't think it has anything to do with smurfing frankly. The game is 10 years old, even someone who is comparatively a noob is going to destroy a REAL noob. It's not disingenous of him to join a "1v1 noobs" game, because he is also a noob... just not to the same degree. Maybe I'm wrong, but I somehow doubt it... I started playing in Brood war in 2002 (played some vanilla SC in 2001), and played probably 300++ games before I had a positive record. These are probably my fondest SC memories because I really, really, really loved the game at that time... I cannot relate AT ALL with people feeling frustrated over losing when just starting... I just do not get it :/ Every win - rare as they were - was awesome, because I had worked so hard for it and I could tell I was improving. I did have the benefit of knowing about the professional scene, of watching replays and VODs for inspiration, so maybe if I hadn't known about the extraordinary level of play that was possible, my ego would have been more easily bruised? The rest I agree with. As I've said, I think having a "master account" that determines your ELL for all your IDs, is the best solution. Show nested quote +On August 22 2009 11:56 Aegraen wrote:On August 22 2009 11:50 Bosu wrote:On August 22 2009 11:24 Aegraen wrote:On August 22 2009 11:17 Bosu wrote:
If this is the case ladder will be pretty pointless. Ladder will be for mass gaming, maybe trying new things. However, if you want to try other races, strategies, or play styles you will get worse before you get better. Ladder status will be nothing to brag about.
If I only have one account to play with my friends who will be terrible I won't be worrying about my win %. I shouldn't be forced to not worry though, because I had fun shooting for high ranks and high win % in war3. 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..... It is great logic Why should my record be wrecked because I want to play with my RL friends that WILL be terrible? Why should I be forced to play custom games to try new things and new races? It will take hundreds of games to learn a new race. Going from a 70% win rate to 30% because I switched races does not make the ladder more accurate. Really my biggest gripe though is that I will lose HUNDREDS of games playing AT with friends that are terrible. How does that make the ladder more accurate? Who is forcing you to play Ladder with them? Play Custom Games. You aren't forced to play custom games to try new things. You can play custom or ladder its your decision. Win % doesn't mean fuck all in RTS. You could have 25% and still be better than 90% of the SC2 players. Seems to me you are a statophobe (Yes I made that up). In any event, a decrease in smurfing, a more reputable community, and a more accurate ladder because there are not or are very little duplicative names is much more lofty and worthy than the cries of someone who made a bad choice for his name and now regrets it. Pro's vastly outweight the minor inconvenience cons. Playing custom games after getting used to AMM, is absolutely terrible I like playing SC more than WC3, but the AMM for WC3 makes me want to play it more than I want to play SC right now.
The major difference is that I've been playing since 2007, have probably played over 3000 games, and still do not have a positive record on any account. The game atmosphere is different from 2002. I played occasionally online from 99-01 and I was like... 10 or 11, and all I did was make carriers and I had a positive win % account.
Now, I can tell that I've greatly improved, however improving skill does not seem to have any effect any more because I either play people that were worse than me when I had 50 apm or insanely better with 150 eapm+
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Yes but that's a problem with the game being 11 years old, not with smurfing :p
+ I was absolutely obsessed with starcraft when I started playing it - I was like "ok, I'm gonna go pro". I think I downloaded every single PvZ on YaoYuan.com (it was not as big back then as now lol ) and I played 20 games a day + watched a ton of replays. And I had the good fortune to run into a few really nice korean players who taught me a lot about how to play (especially this one guy who went by qqqoooqqq on west, really nice guy).
|
On August 24 2009 00:54 Krikkitone wrote:
OK, to clarify
1) Playing someone way out of your level (above OR below) is not fun and won't help you learn: 1 account helps this
There's no objective way to judge whether something like this is fun.
For some people (including myself) getting to play some gosu is fun.
For some people playing
3) Changing your ID, and/or Privacy options should allow you to avoid papparazzi/having a stupid name, Multiple IDs are not necessary
But they are for other reasons stated before...
4) Using different strategies will affect your Ladder Level.... as it should, because that could be anything from a race change to a 20 sec.change in build order. You Ladder Level will adjust as you get better with the new strategy or give it up and go back to your old strategy (in any case your current Ladder Level is the best predictor of yor Ladder Level with a new strategy)
Again, read our previous posts...
How is getting dragged to C level from A because of simple off-racing making the ladder/your level accurate? You're still an A Terran despite being a C Zerg... T____T
Why should I be unable to practice cetain strategies with a secondary account while being able to use my perfected strategies on a serious account I compete with others on?
How exactly would it represent my current skill level more accurately if I were unable to practice new strategies on a different account? I could simply do the same thing in custom games ,except it's much less convienient to do so...
E.g. let's say I'm a B level Terran and want to practice a new BO, and hence I drop to B-.
Does that represent my current skill level more accurately compared to the situation where I practice that new BO on another account and do not drop to B- thanks to that?
If so, how is that different from practicing it in custom games or with friends in order not to drop to B-? Should Blizzard prevent us from practicing in custom games for the sake of our ladder level being more accurate?
What's next? Fingerprint check before each game just to make sure someone else is not playing on your account? ;;
On August 24 2009 01:27 iamho wrote:
solution: stop caring so much about your f*cking record and take a few losses on your main account if you have to
Hypocrisy much? Why can't you take a few losses from smurfs then?
On August 24 2009 01:38 dcttr66 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2009 01:27 dcttr66 wrote:On August 23 2009 02:01 Piretes wrote:On August 23 2009 01:39 GG.Win wrote:
As a bit of a newbie (C/C+) I find smurfing so fucking annoying. I don't see a problem with this at all.
As a C-/C player I dont understand this at all. Either you play at korean hours and get stomped or you simply want a positive record. At C+, smurfs are B+ and higher - you won't face of these players, and when you do you can find flaws in your play better than when you play vs C. You can learn alot from losing to better players. And I'd be suprised if you have never tried new strategies on another account. a kindof problem with playing against alot of those korean players besides the fact that they invade our servers is that they will often play 50 or 200 games and then make a new account after acheiving a certain number of wins. there's no way you can recognize them, but they can recognize you if you do not change your name. so they will always have the advantage against those not changing their name. knowing your enemy is very important. same goes even for the 3 names per account idea. it might sound good at first, but really how fair would it be to change your name completely so people can't recognize you? you could play against someone who would normally know you quite well, but instead knows nothing about you because you changed your name. there are all kinds of ways you could use the deception to your advantage. it just doesn't work out as being fair.
How can you even complain about something like this?
How is a known player playing vs. an unknown one fair? The latter can study the former's play style while it's impossible for the former to do the same, he's playing blind...
There's no right or wrong here, it's a matter of preference.
|
Reading though this thread made me think WoW was being described.
On WoW, though you technically can make multiple usernames (different characters), you technically only have one username, as you will likely only one one raiding character, perhaps two or more if you are really hardcore. Over time, name recognition spreads over the server, along with guild recognition, so the fact that you can't randomly change your name without paying $15 does something good there. However, each server has a limited population, which is what makes this feasible. I don't see this particular benefit being very useful in SC2.
A few people mentioned unrated matches: WoW has that for arena matches; you can play rated or unrated. The unrated games are a complete PoS, it's worse than smurfing. Depending on the comp you run, if you are not really well geared, you will probably get alternatively rofl stomped or rofl stomping, with few good games in between. Perhaps the system can be improved, but I don't like the idea of resorting to unrated games. Something like different rating for MUs, which has been mentioned, is certainly better.
Also, bads who q.q all the time almost certainly remain bads, as they do not really care to improve and just want free loot (or wins, in SC). Curiously, blizzard has started catering more to them, probably because of their greater population. I won't get into the details here although I have a long q.q concerning what has happened to raiding as a result.
Having different ratings for different matchups might solve the problem of smurfing, but like FA said, I don't at all understand people who really get discouraged by losing to a smurf. Those games are actually more enlightening than playing someone ranked the same as you, if you are bad. From my experience the people who cry about that are just like the people on WoW who tell you to stfu because you told them how to correct the bad rotation you see them doing based on Recount data.
I just hope the rating system doesn't evolve along the lines of the MMR rating system used in WoW arena. It went from ehhh problems to an ok system with a few problems to a system that rewards low ranked people but fucks over the high rated people (rediculously long queues, constantly playing teams 500-1000 points below you; arena has a 3000 point cap) just as PvE got a HUGE shift to casuals. I of course can't judge the hardmodes yet of the newest raid as they are not out yet, but the normal modes are so much easier than the previous patch's content that I can see people clearing 3.3 content before 3.2, which is pretty sad. I'm hoping that SC2 isn't taking the same turn as WoW has.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
