|
On August 25 2009 07:59 gumbum8 wrote:
I think a lot of us are losing privileges because of a few of us being assholes.
The story of just about everything nowadays.
Talk bout hitting the nail in the head ...
Still, I think the 1 acc is more about the online marketplace than to prevent smurfing
Me personally I hate having horrible ratings, and I love ceating new accounts, trying new races and weirds builds.
Now ill play 90% of my melle games as custom games because Ill want to give ladder only my A game.
The noob ladder will be at a horribly slow speed, and therefore being good at it wont really improve your game.
It all leads me to think that this system doesnt fix noob bashing at all (and nothing will they are noobs!) its more about having control over ones content and making ladder more serious.
|
On August 25 2009 08:43 Rakanishu2 wrote:
Everyone who is against this idea, prepare to be countered:
Play custom or unrated.
Brother wants to play? Unrated
New Race? Unrated
New Strategy? Unrated
I'm expected they'll just gloss over this and argue with the others, but you can't say I didn't try.
The answer is: Why should I?
Why should I be forced to do that if noob bashing can be prevented even while allowing multiple accounts? Why should there be only one account available "for the sake of ladder accuracy" when I already proved that there's no way to make sure the ladder is accurate anyway despite it?
On August 25 2009 08:53 D10 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 07:59 gumbum8 wrote:
I think a lot of us are losing privileges because of a few of us being assholes.
The story of just about everything nowadays. Talk bout hitting the nail in the head ... Still, I think the 1 acc is more about the online marketplace than to prevent smurfing
Well, the marketplace would be handled through one's master account.
The noob ladder will be at a horribly slow speed, and therefore being good at it wont really improve your game.
Yeah, but the people who actually do enjoy bashing noobs shouldn't really mind that.
It all leads me to think that this system doesnt fix noob bashing at all (and nothing will they are noobs!) its more about having control over ones content and making ladder more serious.[/QUOTE]
The top of the ladder will be serious regardless of multiple accounts allowed, while the middle and bottom of it won't due to the attitude of players (the bottom especially so).
|
Canada11349 Posts
On August 25 2009 06:43 Krikkitone wrote:
Actually, the best reaon to play on the Ladder is to take advantage of the AMM so you get....
Fun Games
a competitive (non custom/v. AI) game is fun if it is very competitive ie playing someone at your level... 50% win/loss
(for a fun/easy win you play v. an Easy AI, for a fun weird game you play custom)
This also happens to be the best way to improve (playing people about as good as you)
But this is exactly why others are arguing for a separation of the race stats so that it is "competitive ie playing at your level... 50% win/loss" An 'A' level zerg may be a 'B' or 'C' level toss or terran. There is no competition if your playing your offrace against another A level player.
On August 25 2009 08:43 Rakanishu2 wrote:
Everyone who is against this idea, prepare to be countered:
Play custom or unrated.
Brother wants to play? Unrated
New Race? Unrated
New Strategy? Unrated
I'm expected they'll just gloss over this and argue with the others, but you can't say I didn't try.
But if the purpose is solely to prevent noob stomping, how does playing unrated help at all? The multi id/master account (in theory) allows an A level to drop down to their proper level when they off race/ try a new strategy. No noob stomping there.
|
I think that allowing a second SC2 account with reduced xp gain (as mentioned earlier) would be a decent idea. At the very least, this new account would allow people the freedom to experiment while under less pressure to win. This system would simultaneously make it more difficult for a smurfer to advance (e.g. at a 50% cut in experience per game, you would need to gain ~twice as many wins as usual to be able to achieve the desired rank).
I don't think that players' stats should be penalized if they want to practice a new strategy or pick up a new race in a competitive setting. I would agree that an unrated "ladder" would be a good place to start practicing a new race or strategy, but even then I doubt that anyone can get completely realistic feedback about his/her performance until he/she tests the new race or strategy in a competitive setting. I imagine that it would be frustrating to have to go from A rank to C rank just because one wants to try Terran seriously for a while or attempt to introduce innovations to the meta-game.
Alternately, perhaps Blizzard could reset the ladder stats and allow a name change after each season (i.e. every three months) This would still curb the smurfing issue (the hypothetical smurfer would still only have one fresh account each season with no way of manual stat reset), and this way, if you wanted to pick up a new race or has just come back from a long hiatus, you would be starting over at the appropriate level of difficulty.
|
if any of you have played arena in wow, I imagine it might it would work similar to that
|
On August 25 2009 10:36 lazz wrote:
if any of you have played arena in wow, I imagine it might it would work similar to that
I don't think it would. WoW is an RPG (thought I have never played it), so I assume each character will start out at the starting level, no matter what you main account is. So wouldn't you be able to match individually simply based off of level? Please explain more.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 25 2009 10:36 lazz wrote:
if any of you have played arena in wow, I imagine it might it would work similar to that
I am not familiar with that system - could you elaborate?
|
On August 25 2009 08:53 D10 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 07:59 gumbum8 wrote:
I think a lot of us are losing privileges because of a few of us being assholes.
The story of just about everything nowadays. Talk bout hitting the nail in the head ... Still, I think the 1 acc is more about the online marketplace than to prevent smurfing Me personally I hate having horrible ratings, and I love ceating new accounts, trying new races and weirds builds. Now ill play 90% of my melle games as custom games because Ill want to give ladder only my A game. The noob ladder will be at a horribly slow speed, and therefore being good at it wont really improve your game. It all leads me to think that this system doesnt fix noob bashing at all (and nothing will they are noobs!) its more about having control over ones content and making ladder more serious.
No in most of it's ways it takes care of hardcore smurfing. I believe that you will not be able to play in lower level ladders once you get to the next level.
Anyway yea, gumbum8 summed it up.
And of course they want to make the ladder more serious. I remember in one interview Dustin said the mothership wont be used in "B/B+ level games." I am not sure how the original ladder worked, but I am sure now that Blizzard knows of PGT and iCCup. People love this ladders because they are very serious ladders, and they showcase your true skill. A serious and accurate ladder will help them in their mission to spread e-sports in America.
|
On August 25 2009 10:59 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 10:36 lazz wrote:
if any of you have played arena in wow, I imagine it might it would work similar to that I am not familiar with that system - could you elaborate?
In WoW, when you want to play an arena game, you have 2 choices: Rated and Unrated games.
Rated games count (ELOish system), and unrated don't. However, for both, the search is automatic, and you are matched automatically.
Generally people will play a few unrateds before jumping into rated games, making it so there are always a great quantity of unrated games available. No problem with search times whatsoever.
This, IMO, would be perfect for SC2 too. Especially if they add thumbs down and thumbs up for matchups (like, say, I wanna play TvT and TvZ, but no TvP, or I just wanna practice TvZ)), like for maps in WC3 (you can choose to never play a map in WC3).
It would just make sense and would be a natural evolution.
In my opinion, if the only thing that really gets public on your account is your rating, and a solid unrated game system (better than OMG MASS MONEY games spam) is available, 1 key 1 account system is a significant step forward.
Also: In account info, in the SS, losses are not visible. Only Wins. My guess is that it's for icon winning purposes (a la WC3). No % given. E-Penis is safe.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Almost sure there's a bunch more detailed stats if you click the "statistics" tab.
|
On August 25 2009 11:41 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Almost sure there's a bunch more detailed stats if you click the "statistics" tab.
Most likely. Whether they will be available to other players directly online with a /stats command or not remains to be seen.
Frankly, I can't wait for it to be released. I feel like I'm babbling to no end over speculations on something I actually know nothing about but a couple screenshots ^_^
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On August 25 2009 07:59 gumbum8 wrote:
I think a lot of us are losing privileges because of a few of us being assholes.
The story of just about everything nowadays.
In a way true, but it goes beyond that subject.
- real i.d. is also is there to try to limit pirating; if people want to play online people they are going have to pay for the game.
- it's also about the distinction between "sport" and "game". For example you don't see Micheal Jordan or Lim Yo-Hwan smurfing in their respective sports when they compete - and neither has the privilege either from hiding from their fame. If sc2 is going to be treated as a sport and there is to be an honest attempt at minimizing cheating, social engineering methods are at the core, i.e. real i.d - just like in "real" sports - specially in the online sphere were everything is at the whim of people that rather play with code than the game itself regardless of how full proof the methods to prevent cheating and pirating are..
If one wants sc2 exclusively as a "game" then of course real i.d. hinders the definition of fun for your average gamer.
Anyway I would rather have sc2 to have a solid foundation for online competition out of the bat without having to deal with the myriad of failed ladders, phucking cheaters and hackers out there to the extent that we have endured all these years. I disagree that we will lose any privileges - unless of course you count playing for free, without paying for the game.
So real i.d. all the way here : ) -
|
On August 25 2009 12:10 Physician wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 07:59 gumbum8 wrote:
I think a lot of us are losing privileges because of a few of us being assholes.
The story of just about everything nowadays. In a way true, but it goes beyond that subject. - real i.d. is also is there to try to limit pirating; if people want to play online people they are going have to pay for the game. - it's also about the distinction between "sport" and "game". For example you don't see Micheal Jordan or Lim Yo-Hwan smurfing in their respective sports when they compete - and neither has the privilege either from hiding from their fame. If sc2 is going to be treated as a sport and there is to be an honest attempt at minimizing cheating, social engineering methods are at the core, i.e. real i.d - just like in "real" sports - specially in the online sphere were everything is at the whim of people that rather play with code than the game itself regardless of how full proof the methods to prevent cheating and pirating are.. If one wants sc2 exclusively as a "game" then of course real i.d. hinders the definition of fun for your average gamer. Anyway I would rather have sc2 to have a solid foundation for online competition out of the bat without having to deal with the myriad of failed ladders, phucking cheaters and hackers out there to the extent that we have endured all these years. I disagree that we will lose any privileges - unless of course you count playing for free, without paying for the game. So real i.d. all the way here : ) -
actually, isnt it real ID + nickname? remember the enoyles account? I think that was his nickname (like in Facebook, you can set 1 nickname for yourself). This way the average gamer can have fun as well.
|
I wouldn't mind real ID if it had time-based stats, too. It would be fun to track our progress over time (EG your win rate increases, etc.).
|
On August 24 2009 18:17 lepape wrote:
Also, FrozenArbiter's suggestion to be able to have many accounts all tied to the main account with shared stats is really the most logical solution, I can't think of any downside to this idea.
how about the one i mentioned about the fact that the hidden identity makes the player unrecognizable? so he can play someone who hasn't changed his name and know how he plays and the other guy knows nothing about him...that's a downside.
|
On August 25 2009 08:43 Rakanishu2 wrote:
Everyone who is against this idea, prepare to be countered:
Play custom or unrated.
Brother wants to play? Unrated
New Race? Unrated
New Strategy? Unrated
I'm expected they'll just gloss over this and argue with the others, but you can't say I didn't try.
Or,
Don't want to lose points to people better than you? Unrated
that way we can both be bigots
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 25 2009 11:38 BlackSphinx wrote:
Generally people will play a few unrateds before jumping into rated games, making it so there are always a great quantity of unrated games available. No problem with search times whatsoever.
This, IMO, would be perfect for SC2 too. Especially if they add thumbs down and thumbs up for matchups (like, say, I wanna play TvT and TvZ, but no TvP, or I just wanna practice TvZ)), like for maps in WC3 (you can choose to never play a map in WC3).
It would just make sense and would be a natural evolution.
The problem with unrated games is not the quantity of players, but the quality. Unrated is rarely played by those with established ratings, at least not in any significant numbers, and that makes it hard for higher level players to utilize it well. A B- Terran might have a C Zerg, or be practicing a new build that he plays like a C+, but if unrated is filled with Ds and D+s, he can't really effectively practice.
|
On August 25 2009 14:13 FragKrag wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 08:43 Rakanishu2 wrote:
Everyone who is against this idea, prepare to be countered:
Play custom or unrated.
Brother wants to play? Unrated
New Race? Unrated
New Strategy? Unrated
I'm expected they'll just gloss over this and argue with the others, but you can't say I didn't try. Or, Don't want to lose points to people better than you? Unrated that way we can both be bigots
Empiraclly more often than not it is the higher ranked players that whine the most about losing. Most of the players on the lower rungs of the ladder don't mind losing, they just want to have a fun time in the process. Getting absolutely demolished isn't fun to them.
I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but the poster you quoted at least has a point. Additionally, if you want to be hidden, then toggle the anonymous feature like every IM has such as MSN (I'm sure they'll have a "show offline" mode) (To the inordinate amount of people not understanding a show offline feature).
I'll pose this question. Would you 5 years from now rather have a larger more competitive community, or a more sheltered competitive community? By allowing the newbs to play other newbs more often than not it'll get them into the competitive spirit because they figure it isn't hopeless and they will eventually start to get better and better and have more interest in the game. This at least to me empiraclly has been emphatically seen in the MMO's I've played in. Many of the casual players once reaching Endgame (LotRO / FFXI) became hardcore oriented. Now, if the game started off that way there is no way that would have been the case.
It is an inconvenience however as I've said time and time again the Pro's of Real ID vastly outweigh the Cons.
|
On August 25 2009 14:13 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 11:38 BlackSphinx wrote:
Generally people will play a few unrateds before jumping into rated games, making it so there are always a great quantity of unrated games available. No problem with search times whatsoever.
This, IMO, would be perfect for SC2 too. Especially if they add thumbs down and thumbs up for matchups (like, say, I wanna play TvT and TvZ, but no TvP, or I just wanna practice TvZ)), like for maps in WC3 (you can choose to never play a map in WC3).
It would just make sense and would be a natural evolution.
The problem with unrated games is not the quantity of players, but the quality. Unrated is rarely played by those with established ratings, at least not in any significant numbers, and that makes it hard for higher level players to utilize it well. A B- Terran might have a C Zerg, or be practicing a new build that he plays like a C+, but if unrated is filled with Ds and D+s, he can't really effectively practice.
Ever stop to think that in SC and WC3 that not many people play Custom/unrated is exactly because they can have as many accounts as they want thereby allowing them to bypass the need to use such an outlet.
Now with Real ID more people looking for those things instead of playing on the ladder will be...guess where? Custom/unrated...bingo!
It's not going to be a problem in SC2 finding competitive unrated games for this reason (Real ID).
|
maybenexttime wrote: "In my opinion, the Blizzard ladder should, first and foremost, be a practice platform. Maybe they should have a separate ladder meant specifically for competition, with one acc per cd key allowed, where accuracy is of utmost importance. From my experience, the vast majority of players playing on the ladder do not care about such accuracy as much as Nony does, because they don't aim to reach top 100 or so - for them it's just a tool to get games quick."
Good idea, interestingly enough they are kindof doing this with wc3...with their automated tournaments. The thing I don't like about it though is the tournaments fall at awkward times and whatever. IDK how they would do it in sc2 exactly but I hope they do it better.
On August 25 2009 07:53 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Krikkitone, I think after a (few) year(s), this might work. The problem? At release, ANYONE who has played SC or WC3 before, and joins the noob league, is gonna stomp the people in it :-(
what the? and that's a problem because...? dude they can be like the WoW players' mentors, that's no problem at all.
On August 24 2009 09:10 Noah wrote:
It's amazing how so many in this thread is bashing Blizzard for something that isn't even done yet. If anyone here is dumb enough to think that Blizzard is going to let pro gamers get identified and harassed without anything to protect them then they deserve to get trolled.
Edit: I'm also happy to see there will be some anti-smurfing measures in this new b-net. Ideally you want to play in a ladder where you are as evenly matched with your opponent as possible, and as often as possible. This is the entire point of a ladder. Players who smurfs just to stomp newbies basically bypasses the entire point of having a ladder in the first place.
yeah...in wc3 for example there is a command like /dnd or something else maybe which makes it so no one can message you. of course you'll still get the chat from a game you're in.
which reminds me of another thing. what i wouldn't mind seeing is an ignore opponent thing for a 1v1. sometimes i see a player type in "from?" and i just want to turn them off immediately. so distracting and rude for them to say that, but that's probably a topic for another thread....
On August 25 2009 14:22 Aegraen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 14:13 TheYango wrote:On August 25 2009 11:38 BlackSphinx wrote:
Generally people will play a few unrateds before jumping into rated games, making it so there are always a great quantity of unrated games available. No problem with search times whatsoever.
This, IMO, would be perfect for SC2 too. Especially if they add thumbs down and thumbs up for matchups (like, say, I wanna play TvT and TvZ, but no TvP, or I just wanna practice TvZ)), like for maps in WC3 (you can choose to never play a map in WC3).
It would just make sense and would be a natural evolution.
The problem with unrated games is not the quantity of players, but the quality. Unrated is rarely played by those with established ratings, at least not in any significant numbers, and that makes it hard for higher level players to utilize it well. A B- Terran might have a C Zerg, or be practicing a new build that he plays like a C+, but if unrated is filled with Ds and D+s, he can't really effectively practice. Ever stop to think that in SC and WC3 that not many people play Custom/unrated is exactly because they can have as many accounts as they want thereby allowing them to bypass the need to use such an outlet. Now with Real ID more people looking for those things instead of playing on the ladder will be...guess where? Custom/unrated...bingo! It's not going to be a problem in SC2 finding competitive unrated games for this reason (Real ID).
that's what i've been trying to say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
