|
On September 06 2009 13:01 Harem wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2009 12:24 Kazius wrote:
I'll give a short view: I am a casual gamer. I rarely play and do not intend to play SC2 heavily, except at the level of the single player. I play approximately an hour a week. While a good player can waste 10 minutes so he can make a big star out of lurker eggs, that will be about 5% of the time I play a month gone. If this would never happen, my love of Starcraft would be greater, I'd probably play more, and be a better player, but there would always be someone who is that much better. But quite frankly, I can't be bothered.
I think this feature is great. Smurfing sucks for a player like me, and I'd like to always play someone at my level. Want to check out new builds? Play a casual game against friends, clanmates, whatever. Playing against players worse than you will never be able to teach you how viable a build is. Going 7pool against noob protoss players would work. If you're good enough, it'd work every time. Have you learned anything from that? http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/intrigue/Day90006PlayAgainstWorsePlay.mp3
If you actually Listened to the mp3, you would notice he concludes with...
...if you are playing player Slightly better than you and slightly worse then you, you will be Skyrocketing in improvement...
That is what smurfing prevents, and that it is what a one account based AMM helps....You always are playing people slightly better than you or slightly worse than you. (even if you play someone at your exact skill level, they will be slightly better than you in somethings and slighty worse than you in others)
|
This discussion makes no sense.
Win/loss doesn't matter anymore.
All that counts is your rank on the AMM ladder... which for all we know might (may, will) have a complex formula behind it to eliminate outliers.
On a basic level, it would pay more attention to your recent performance, eventually making those shameful first games from back when you massed templars to storm a cc scroll off and vanish from your record.
As for outliers, if you play at a high level consistently for 100 games and then lose in the first three minutes 5 straight times, the game could well chalk it up to the 'little brother effect', indeed drop you to newbie rank but propel you back up at high speed when you start winning again.
It could even take into consideration the race you've been playing and decide that since you're a god at terran and useless at zerg, it'll take into account your terran rank anyway. After all, you'd only switch to zerg if you're better with zerg than terran after some practice and you can't find out just by stomping on newbies.
|
it was in WC3, worked out damn well, this is just the natural step forward. good thing 
|
|
|
On September 07 2009 07:21 Brother Laz wrote:
This discussion makes no sense.
Win/loss doesn't matter anymore.
wins/loses may not matter , if they are not shown , that's fine....as long as an indicator of skill is, along with a non concealment system for that indicator.
|
Sweden33723 Posts
I'm pretty sure you will be able to see someones exact stats by clicking the statistics tab. It's retarded if they don't show wins AND losses, especially when they have such a solid statistical profile for wc3 (check the ladder profiles of people over att battle.net, really detailed stats - like what heroes were most used, how often you win for every map vs every race, with every hero, how much you win depending on if you went solo hero, dual hero, tri hero etc.. good stuff).
|
as long as they give those stats for people who have to go through a couple levels of fluff, or have to be on friends lists and such like that, until then you just get thier basic ranking/skill level
|
Sweden33723 Posts
.. -- Why?
Looking at statistics is fun, and a pretty nice tool when determining balance (especially of maps). These stats are public in WC3, why not in SC2? They are also public on ICCUP.
|
After reading some posts, this sounds pretty fun can't wait
|
this is great.
anyone who doesn't like this system either doesn't understand it or are ego-whores.
this system is best for: every player improving their skill, and protecting newer players from having a repeatedly aweful experience with this game.
the only players it hurts are players who like to have useless and meaningless shiny records with high win percentages.
anonymity issues will be handled. it's blizzard.
|
On September 09 2009 09:53 FrozenArbiter wrote:
.. -- Why?
Looking at statistics is fun, and a pretty nice tool when determining balance (especially of maps). These stats are public in WC3, why not in SC2? They are also public on ICCUP.
Well, what they could do is to not show win% in the ingame tab and instead just on the B-net page. That will lower a lot of the stigma concerning win percentages.
|
I like multiple iccup acounts
|
On September 09 2009 14:20 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2009 09:53 FrozenArbiter wrote:
.. -- Why?
Looking at statistics is fun, and a pretty nice tool when determining balance (especially of maps). These stats are public in WC3, why not in SC2? They are also public on ICCUP. Well, what they could do is to not show win% in the ingame tab and instead just on the B-net page. That will lower a lot of the stigma concerning win percentages.
assuming their AMM system works as intended (and i'm expecting it to be better than war3), it will be rare for people to diverge from 50:50. Not that you won't see players who DO have better win/loss ratios, they will just be so rare that i don't think anyone will care about it - when 90% of players you see have between 45-55% win percentages, the stigma will disappear.
|
It isn't fun to get stomped by a comparative pro when you're a newb. Good move on Blizzard's part. I applaud.
|
On September 09 2009 06:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:
I'm pretty sure you will be able to see someones exact stats by clicking the statistics tab. It's retarded if they don't show wins AND losses, especially when they have such a solid statistical profile for wc3 (check the ladder profiles of people over att battle.net, really detailed stats - like what heroes were most used, how often you win for every map vs every race, with every hero, how much you win depending on if you went solo hero, dual hero, tri hero etc.. good stuff).
got screenshots? i don't remember blizzard doing this...though i've seen some pretty wild stuff in custom obs maps...
|
|
|
holy crap i've played on a lot of different ladder maps compared to you!
different races too...but i guess that's my style. this is only for the current season, right?
lol at getting twice as much experience in a 6 win 13 losses with night elf on cherry wood compared to orc 8 wins 0 losses on icey battleground
not sure why blizzard doesn't try to make new and more balanced maps because of this feature...that's right i remember this all now but because blizzard doesn't do anything about it anymore nowadays the feature is kindof pointless...eh...maybe we should protest more about the imbalances! but no one complains about echo isles they all love it but i went 4/0 with human on it, it's too easy for humans... ah i know mine's a poor example but there might be better ones out there...or maybe i'm just an idiot but whatever...i know the map well enough to know it's one of the worst ladder maps out there. they only like it because it lets the games go by really fast.
|
Sweden33723 Posts
I dunno if that account is Nitro68 - becauseofyou is the #1 ranked player on Northrend 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
