EPTplatinum isn't that good? - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
agleed.agleed
Germany110 Posts
| ||
|
Befree
695 Posts
I don't understand the other part of this discussion, though. I generally have judged people's skill in the past through comparison to other people's skill. I had thought goodness and badness was defined by a player's skill relative to other players. In this mind set, I have just naturally assumed the top ranks to define what is good. So this is why I find it silly to say that the top 10% (or whatever top % you choose) are bad. Your standard has no validity if it is not based in objective statistical data. | ||
|
Ironclown
United States73 Posts
to rank 50 Platinum. My first day I was placed in Plat because I got all noobs during placements. I feel a lot more accomplished having worked my way up to plat instead of just being stuck there. | ||
|
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
| ||
|
alfybet
United States57 Posts
On April 30 2010 03:44 3clipse wrote: This perceived problem is caused by two things we are used to: 1. Starcraft being a closed system of elites. Even the average D player on iccup would have been really, really good at the game in its infancy. We're used to the bottom of the competitive barrel still being pretty decent and the top being near flawless. With this being a whole new game and having an influx of non-rts players, the bottom is awful and even the top is still learning what they're doing, albeit ahead of the curve. The true skill of the competitive community is finally being reflected against a terribad general public and I'm fine with this. It's a great self-esteem boost for a mediocre bw player to be in a "high" sc2 ranking. 2. We're used to a ladder system that rises in an extremely sharp pyramid. I'm not sure what the distribution between leagues is exactly, but it's sure flatter than the madness of iccup. We're used to the highest ranks signifying progamer status (olympic, A+, A) and even the mid-ranks only comprising 3% of the population and taking a lot of skill and dedication to achieve. Of course a 1200 platinum != a 2000 platinum. If you're only interested in the absolute highest level play, a benchmark can be set at ELO. Call 2200 points A if you want. It's all fucking semantics, a system to differentiate skill does exist. Exactly. The ladder is fine for the most part, maybe the plat % can be decreased a little. The point is, people at TL have been used to a competitive-only ladder, whereas SC2 now has to include the other 90% of the population. If you really feel better with the ICCup way, just make some arbitrary divisions in plat rating: (2400+ = A, 2200-2400 = B, etc). Where A is the current skill ceiling (which is low right now). | ||
|
shiftY803
200 Posts
The basis of most game-oriented rating systems today is a logistic distribution. The modernized FIDE chess rating and the USCF for example assume that players' performances can be approximated this way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_distribution Now imagine you want to make a platinum league that is the top of 5 leagues, and it will encompass everyone who's performance is in the top 20% of players. Clearly, the players that are wayyyyy out there to the right are going to absolutely crush the players in, say, the 80th-percentile. Using chess as an example, it is the equivalent of a FIDE International or Grand Master playing a USCF Master. Now, the USCF master is by no stretch of the imagination bad, but his chance of winning against Magnus Carlsen is still almost zero. He (or she) is a strong player, but not world-class strong. Starcraft is no different. Unless you want to make 100 leagues, you are never going to get that top 1% or 0.5% of players together by themselves. Or I guess you could do invite-only leagues... but god only knows how they would set that up. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
imo Copper-Bottom (0-30%), 30% Bronze-Middle-Bottom (30%-60%), 30% Silver-Middle-top (60%-80%), 20% Gold-Lower Top (80%-95%), 15% Silver-Top (5%) As it stands its like 20/20/20/20/20 Which is dumb. | ||
|
nTooMuch
United States127 Posts
| ||
|
ROOTdrewbie
Canada1392 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
Sentient
United States437 Posts
IMO there are simply too many leagues. Players are either terrible at the game (don't even saturate minerals), decent (build an army and attack), good (understand the game mechanics and the deeper strategy), or great (proficient at micro/macro balance and multitasking). I haven't found anyone yet that falls outside these categories. If I could redo it, I would have Bronze/Silver/Gold/Platinum, where Platinum is the equivalent of the pro league. | ||
|
ItsBigfoot
United States432 Posts
why would they call it gold if all these kids aren't good? | ||
|
s2pid_loser
United States699 Posts
so its easy to end up in the wrong league from ur initial placement win/losses | ||
|
shinosai
United States1577 Posts
On April 30 2010 04:28 ItsBigfoot wrote: gold should actually matter, I dropped one placement match due to a comp crash, wound up getting out of gold in like 8 games just doing immortal pushes, gold kids are bad. why would they call it gold if all these kids aren't good? Because they are gold in comparison to other players, not to your mythological world of perfection. | ||
|
Haiy
Germany32 Posts
sry, i did not read the whole thread but it seems like nobody mentioned it yet. | ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
On April 30 2010 04:28 ItsBigfoot wrote: gold should actually matter, I dropped one placement match due to a comp crash, wound up getting out of gold in like 8 games just doing immortal pushes, gold kids are bad. why would they call it gold if all these kids aren't good? Because 1000 elo players are good? Obviously if you did so well the system is working since you got out of gold asap. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
On April 30 2010 04:28 ItsBigfoot wrote: gold should actually matter, I dropped one placement match due to a comp crash, wound up getting out of gold in like 8 games just doing immortal pushes, gold kids are bad. why would they call it gold if all these kids aren't good? When scaling ICCUP and Bnet, a D- is equivalent to about 1500 ELO platinum I'd estimate. Blizzard wants the game to appeal to all gamers, so they have to give seemingly good ranks to casual players that maybe play one game a week. | ||
|
Reborn8u
United States1761 Posts
| ||
|
Disastorm
United States922 Posts
| ||
|
Vattilega
United States52 Posts
| ||
| ||
