|
Poll: Is there a problem with the player distribution in leagues?Yes (705) 76% No (121) 13% Dont care (88) 10% Other (8) 1% 922 total votes Your vote: Is there a problem with the player distribution in leagues? (Vote): No
(Vote): Yes
(Vote): Other
(Vote): Dont care
*changed the poll since last one sucked
I kind of feel like there should be another level above platinum. And no im not talking about invite only "Pro" level, but a public level. It seems like its really easy to get to platinum now and the skill differential between the top platinum players and the lowest players is really high, worthy of a league of their own.
I have a friend who has never played rts before, who qualified in copper just a month ago, but now qualified in platinum doing 1 base muta every single game. I basically taught him this strategy because it worked so well in lower levels, but now its beating people in platinum.
Another friend of mine qualified in silver after going 3-2. Hes good, but he plays random so hes a bit above average in every race, and he plays maybe a game a day on average. He managed to get up from silver to platinum in about 15 games.
Then theres obviously players that are extremely good, play all day, play tournaments, etc and some how they are in the same league as me and my friends. it doesn't make any sense to me.
|
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
|
United States7166 Posts
edit: what morrow said. the distribution feels even when it should be more like a pyramid
|
They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches.
|
I think platinum will mean more once the game is actually out.
|
I think it is a beta.
there will be a pro ladder after release so its not that important. and who cares if platinum is not that big a deal, top players will not play the #80 platinum players.
edit: On April 30 2010 02:06 HelloSon wrote:
They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches.
haha good idea -.-
|
|
|
+ Show Spoiler +They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches.
First class idea 
|
Change the placement system so that even if you go 5-0, the highest you'll get is gold. If you have the skills you'll climb to platinum eventually.
|
plat is like D+ right now
as the game develops it'll definitely even out more I think, especially with pro league.
|
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
yea good point, and i think i agree, i should of had that as a poll option
|
I'd prefer that they made the other leagues matter more instead.
Copper+Bronze = D
Silver = C
Gold = B
Plat = A
Not exactly like that, but same point, the highest league should be difficult to get into and it shouldn't be where the majority hangs out.
Right now it's more like Copper/Bronze/Silver/Gold = D-/D
Platinum = Anything above D+.
Might change for launch though so I don't even like commenting that right now :p
|
On April 30 2010 02:04 MorroW wrote:
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
This.
|
|
|
Calgary25980 Posts
I think people don't realize how hard it is to be good at RTS. This is no different than BW. Like I would be playing at B- making my usual mistakes and people would be shocked how bad I am, even if 99% of the viewers can't do it. It's the same here; running #1 in platinum, but being shockingly bad at the game.
|
United States7166 Posts
yeah what people have been saying is right. it feels like right now they have an even distribution when it should be more like a pyramid
|
the way the leagues are currently set up is fine. when the game is actually released, there's going to be way more players and inevitably those in the top tier will remain in plat while those undeserving will be pushed down. don't forget this is a beta guys.
|
platinum contains players from middle to maximum. Too high spread of skill in a league imo
|
Nope, there should just be practice league before copper because now copper league is covered with people who only played 10 matches or so. That should not be enough for such placement because if you have 200 copper leagues you'll have more upper leagues too. There should be some minimum activity for placement. In wc3 you could see only top 1000 players on ladder and you would lose points after some time if you're inactive, and here you only get bonus points rofl. So in this situation new players would come, they would force new leagues to open, but if they quit, leagues would not close and everyone would just move up in leagues.
And ofc you shouldn't be able to go into platinum with only placement matches.
|
We don't need a new league, they just need to make it more difficult to place/ get into platinum. They must have just let a ton of new people in since thelast wipe because when i finally did my placement matches the other night (after choosing the intermediate option for my placements) I was playing people who were building engineering bay first, and planetary defense in their main... when i dominated every one of my placements, i thought maybe the platinum people i would play would be decent, but it was the same garbage. i think you should only get into platinum if you choose the expert option, and win all your placements, otherwise you just have to earn your way in... I can imagine how people are playing in silver and gold atm because plat has been a joke since the last reset. (I am probably around a D+ player, and atm a D player would be able to get into platinum without a second though)
|
On April 30 2010 02:04 MorroW wrote:
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
the problem is the infinite amount of "leagues" not so much the rank. so like as copper/bronze/silver/gold are getting constantly promoted the game will continue to add on platinum leagues. i wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the number of platinum leagues are greater than the number of copper leagues.
in the end though, does it really even matter what league you're in if the game has a "secret" internal algorithm to set players up equally?
|
On April 30 2010 02:04 MorroW wrote:
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
Definitely this. It seems like everyone is in plat, so being in plat really doesn't mean anything.
|
How about another league that one cannot get to by doing placements, but by getting promoted from platinum? Would that work?
|
leagues are important but 1500 plat is a world of difference from 1100 plat.
|
I think the more Leages the better. Probably only till a certain amount but I find that the more leagues means closer matches and more accurate ranking
|
On April 30 2010 02:06 HelloSon wrote:
They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches.
This is the best idea, however blizzard would have to be careful how they go about setting it up. Usually when you get placed in platinum for the first time, you get a hefty bonus pool of pts as well, which do artifically inflate your actual rank by double. If they got rid of the huge bonus pool at the start, then they could have a cut off line at like 1700 platinum = advancement to the next league up, where only players capable of 1700+ can enter. This would allow the majority of struggling platinums to move up a bit as all of the upper echelon players get promoted past 1700.
I also think that if you dip below 1000 (which is the starting point) you should be demoted back down to the previous league. allow for 1-2 games max, which would drop you to 970ish, and then demote the person. There are alot of players sitting in platinum that are not even 1000 rated. These players should be demoted to increasee the skill level of gold, and remove the low skill from platinum.
|
On April 30 2010 02:19 DragonDefonce wrote:
leagues are important but 1500 plat is a world of difference from 1100 plat.
true this...It was easy at first but it's hard to gain more pts pass 1700...my w:l ratio dropped to barely 50% and i lose more pts than when I win...wtf
|
I'm guess Blizzard made it so each league has roughly the same amount of players, and for every player that moves up a player moves down. That's how relative scoring systems work usually. I'm guessing we're just underestimating how many people are really bad at sc2.
|
Lol, adding another tier isnt going to change anything. It will still be the same exact problem
It will be naturally fixed by adding more / better players
|
On April 30 2010 02:21 eXigent. wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:06 HelloSon wrote:
They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches. This is the best idea, however blizzard would have to be careful how they go about setting it up. Usually when you get placed in platinum for the first time, you get a hefty bonus pool of pts as well, which do artifically inflate your actual rank by double. If they got rid of the huge bonus pool at the start, then they could have a cut off line at like 1700 platinum = advancement to the next league up, where only players capable of 1700+ can enter. This would allow the majority of struggling platinums to move up a bit as all of the upper echelon players get promoted past 1700.
that doesn't solve the "problem", the issue is with points. so as soon as there's another cap (especially with bonus/rested point inflation) it's just going to be the new gold league.
the real change should be that whenever you're considered to move up a rank someone else should be considered to lose their spot. otherwise there will be infinite leagues at whatever the top league is called at the time
|
When they put more placements back in the game the skill level of platinum players will be a bit better. I didn't even try in my placements and I still ended up going 5-0. You need about 15-20 placement games where if you win you play a person with the same placement record as you. eg: 7-0 placement would play another 7-0 in their placements for their 8th game.
|
You do realize competition for the spots in platinum will grow harder once the game is actually released?
Also - if you're good enough, you're gonna play the best. It's not a random match-finding system where any user from a specific bracket gets paired up with any other user from that same bracket.
|
Once the game comes out it will be alot more normalized where you get placed in leagues, so i think this is only a problem because its the beta
|
I do feel like most platinum level players aren't that good.
Most platinum players I play and I beat easily I swear are gold and I am surprised when I see platinum .
I do hope when the games released it is a bit harder because right now its way to easy imo.
|
On April 30 2010 02:04 MorroW wrote:
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
Agreed. A lot of the leagues below Platinum are underutilised. So I think perhaps they should raise the requirements to qualify. Not just for the Platinum league, but also the other leagues as well.
|
Diamond league!
and international pro league with latency requirements
|
this is beta and like 99% of the players sub gold couldnt win a rnd battle.net game for their life. also you get alot of "yeah lucky placements im plat!" guys which will happen way way way less after release.
also people still figure out strats,basics and abuse OP stuff in every patch which often brings overall crappy 1trick players up fast.
|
I do agree that there is a large difference between the top tier platinum players and the more casual players such that its impossible to tell if a top 10 plat player is good, but really I don't think this is that big of an issue. The game is new and people are trying to figure out BO's yet, thus "copying" is impossible so a lot of good players in SC1 have the potential to be horrible in SC2 for a while if they cant think on their feet. I think once a larger player pool enters and proper BO's are established the differences between leagues will become quite obvious. Let alone if you think players in platinum are just horrible, well clearly you haven't seen players in the lower leagues....
|
I thought about this matter too and i came up with this solution :
Open Proleague for the top 100 Players with only 1 Division. Optionable more than 100 but only 1 division.
Setup some servers just for proleague so this one league/div can be entered from every gateway.
At least this way we could see and compare the best Players from all around the globe.
|
On April 30 2010 02:25 Clearout wrote:
Once the game comes out it will be alot more normalized where you get placed in leagues, so i think this is only a problem because its the beta
There're ~15k people playing at all times right now. That's not trivial. Blizzard will keep a top heavy system so that people can say "o, yeah, I'm in platinum" and be happy with the game. It's exactly why they implemented divisions so lots of people can say "o yea, I'm gold #1" or "I'm top 10 plat!"
|
United States24678 Posts
Lol what's with that poll in the OP??
Maybe I don't agree with any of those choices at all?
|
just LESS players in platin 
|
I remember reading they were adding Practice league (for less than copper players) and Pro league above Platinum. I cannot find it anymore through google, but I'm guessing it was on one of either starcraft2.com or battle.net. I read it while looking for information in how to move between leagues.
I'd also like to remind you that Blizzard generally isn't that good at the whole competetive ladder thing. They managed to pretty much destroy it in Wc3 with their 1.14 patch. After ten games you could face progamers, but the top10 of the ladder was the players that played the most games. (read up on ELL or whatever they called it if you're interested)
|
Should probably put this issue into petition form. There have been countless posts on TL and elsewhere (including some extensive ones by me) saying the top level leagues should not be on the list of leagues that can be directly placed into(placement matches don't say enough about skill), and the skew from high-level to low level leagues should be drastic compared to the current distribution. Right now placing platinum means pretty much nothing to anyone who isn't a new player. The league placements themselves should hold a lot of meaning. When you have to be top 3 in your division to be considered good(please don't correct this its an arbitrary number) theres a problem.
|
There should be less Platinum divisions thus making it harder to get promoted. Let's say there are 100 of each league from copper to gold but only 20 platinum divisions for example, when all 20 platinum leagues get saturated it will be harder to get into. Hence only the better players can advance and if you are currently in platinum it would also be easier to get demoted as the level of competition for the top league would be greater.
Option 2 could be just having the platinum leagues consist of only 20 players instead of 50 or 100 (can't remember what the max per league is)
|
Should the leagues just be based on percentage?
Like Plat is top 10%
Gold is the next 20%
Silver is the next 30%
Copper and Bronze are the remaining?
|
On April 30 2010 02:31 ColorsOfRainbow wrote:just LESS players in platin
this will never work because of how the placement matches are structured. the solution is either to add another rank or change the structure of how you are placed via placement matches.
|
On April 30 2010 02:34 Rotodyne wrote:
Should the leagues just be based on percentage?
Like Plat is top 10%
Gold is the next 20%
Silver is the next 30%
Copper and Bronze are the remaining?
Plat should be top 5% at most.
|
On April 30 2010 02:36 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:34 Rotodyne wrote:
Should the leagues just be based on percentage?
Like Plat is top 10%
Gold is the next 20%
Silver is the next 30%
Copper and Bronze are the remaining? Plat should be top 5% at most.
I agree
|
On April 30 2010 02:36 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:34 Rotodyne wrote:
Should the leagues just be based on percentage?
Like Plat is top 10%
Gold is the next 20%
Silver is the next 30%
Copper and Bronze are the remaining? Plat should be top 5% at most.
Blizzard must implement this now.
|
Plat should be top 5% at most.
Depends on the general SC population. A top 0.5% in WoW for example, simply means you're not retarded.
But I do agree the skill variation from bottom plat to top plat is probably bigger than copper to gold.
|
i have nothing but anecdotal evidence to back this up but it seems like if you start your placement matches very early after a wipe you're more likely to be placed in platinum (with a good score), since it is relatively unsaturated.
When I did my placement matches later even if I went 5-0 i'd end up in silver or gold. Some of it might depend on the opponents... Obviously if you placement match against 5 copper/bronze/silver players your score's not going to be very good.
But i'd also agree that you shouldn't be placed into platinum, but I also don't think it'd make much difference. Platinum skill seems to equal: I don't die to stupid cheeses, I know what units counter what and proper build orders. That's all you can really ask for from a corporate managed ladder.
An invite only ladder might be cool, but who would manage it? Seems like it'd just be automated that if you got to the top echelon of platinum you were moved into the 'pro' ladder.
|
Once more people are playing the game, this will even out.
|
|
|
if there was a fixed number of platinum divisions that were proportional to total active players, that would make sense. as the population of players increases a new platinum division could be added.
of course we dont know if thats the way it works now, but i think my friend is in like platinum division 77, which means theres at least 7700 players in platinum out of what, 15000+ active players?
thats like half of the players in platinum, if each division has 100 players.
|
I thought it was clearly established that the leagues ARE percentage based. With only the top 5-10% in Platinum. I just think that people vastly underestimate the interest in this game and even the size of the Beta.
Data:
"Launched in 1998 for PC, the original Starcraft has sold over 11 million copies worldwide, Sams said." (http://www.edge-online.com/news/blizzard-confirms-one-frontline-release-09)
Let's assume it sells have that much, so 5.5 million copies worldwide, which would be underselling it, I'd think. Let's say a fifth of those people play enough games to even place in 1v1. That's about 1 million people. The top 5-10% of that is about 50,000-100,000 players in Platinum.
That's why it seems like there's so much refuse in Platinum, because there will be. If for no other reason than the people at the bottom will artificially raise people at the top. Copper/bronze being a catch-all for the bottom 50% will be really really uncompetitive. But, yeah, because of just the sheer number of people that'll take up spots in the bottom leagues (even if they go inactive or never play), people will artificially be pushed upwards.
Edit:
On April 30 2010 02:44 daywiss wrote:
if there was a fixed number of platinum divisions that were proportional to total active players, that would make sense. as the population of players increases a new platinum division could be added.
of course we dont know if thats the way it works now, but i think my friend is in like platinum division 77, which means theres at least 7700 players in platinum out of what, 15000+ active players?
thats like half of the players in platinum, if each division has 100 players.
There were 15,000 players listed as active on Battle.net last night when I logged on. I'm not sure if that's just US servers or global. But that's just for last night. Battle.net is pretty saturated with accounts at the moment. And a lot of them are people that play 5 placement matches and then play custom games or just give up.
|
I think that a two fold approach should happen. 1 there should be a league above platinum for pro level players, 2 you should never be allowed to place higher than Gold rank. This way the highly skilled players will quickly rank out of gold into Plat or the pro league, and the above average players can populate gold league.
|
Why does everyone seem to think that in a beta of this nature, there won't be a great skill distinction? Being an invite based beta, we have a ton of well known SC1 players getting in somehow, we have TL-goers (and therefore, probably more competitive than most) doing anything they can to get their hands on a key. Then we have people from WoW and people who just randomly got a facebook contest key. If we were to be able to determine each players' skill properly then plot it out, we'll probably be seeing multiple peaks, probably rather far off from one another too.
Honestly I feel like this is something that will be addressed with more players entering. As long as Blizzard has a relatively sane standard for dropping people from leagues and there is a healthy amount of players. That said, not placing directly into Plat is an alright idea even if it just makes Gold the current Plat, if it suits peoples' ideas of having Plat as the highest rank.
That said, what is it that the OP is really asking for? Even though the thread started talking about a gap of levels within Plat, people quickly changed that to about the amount of players that should be in Plat. How does that really solve anything? Like the no placement into Plat idea, you are just having other leagues serve as what Plat is currently (apparently), a league with a great gap of skills because you can place in. I can't help but feel that people just want Plat to be more exclusive as to have greater bragging rights to be in Plat.
|
Totally agree with the op! Battle.net right now feels like an amp that only goes to 10.. imagine if it went to 11!
|
On April 30 2010 02:46 SichuanPanda wrote:
I think that a two fold approach should happen. 1 there should be a league above platinum for pro level players, 2 you should never be allowed to place higher than Gold rank. This way the highly skilled players will quickly rank out of gold into Plat or the pro league, and the above average players can populate gold league.
I agree with this. In the 5 placement matches I've faced 5 total noobs before and easily got placed in Plat, or facing 1 or 2 very impressive players and got placed in gold. It seems that anyone could very easily be placed in Plat if they got lucky and faced 5 noobs in all 5 matches.
|
Yea, I think the skill distribution should get better on release. As more people become familiar with the game, the skill cap will gradually increase.
I think we're just too used to the old ICCUP way of ranking where it was very hard to make it to blue ranks and above unless you're like top 1% of all players, which was a very high skill level. Keep in mind that certain strats like 1 base muta are still considered to be quite OP for certain matchups and abuse of these strats may be what's leading to the skill skewage. I mean, in many interviews, it's been suggested that Korean Zergs are showing dominance through turtling into muta strats, which have started to become more common in foreigner servers.
|
It's just the beta, once the player pool increases so too will the level of skill, pushing the players who are mid level platinum in the beta somewhere around middle gold. Really no need to stress over it right now.
|
There will be 80% of people in copper if we reduce the number of plat players.
|
it should be more difficult , i got in to plat by just spamming roaches , i was in gold before i got my own key but i cant say im in the skill level as orb , haypro morrow etc. seems like there are TOO many in plat atm..
|
On April 30 2010 02:50 Diaspora wrote:
It's just the beta, once the player pool increases so too will the level of skill, pushing the players who are mid level platinum in the beta somewhere around middle gold. Really no need to stress over it right now.
This belief is misguided. When the game is released, more people will play. More people playing = more people slated into Platinum. The only way the "bad" players in platinum get pushed out for "better" players is if there is somehow a gigantic group of really really good players that don't have beta at all. Which is certainly possible, but I don't know if it's true it's going to naturally correct as much as everyone thinks it will.
Full disclosure: I'm not in the conversation for platinum right now at all, I'm just reasoning through the math of it all to help explain how I understand the system for others to understand it better.
|
On April 30 2010 02:49 jstar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:46 SichuanPanda wrote:
I think that a two fold approach should happen. 1 there should be a league above platinum for pro level players, 2 you should never be allowed to place higher than Gold rank. This way the highly skilled players will quickly rank out of gold into Plat or the pro league, and the above average players can populate gold league. I agree with this. In the 5 placement matches I've faced 5 total noobs before and easily got placed in Plat, or facing 1 or 2 very impressive players and got placed in gold. It seems that anyone could very easily be placed in Plat if they got lucky and faced 5 noobs in all 5 matches.
And you know what? The chances of you getting 5 noobs is fairly good. This is a beta, it isn't even an open beta, and the player pool is nowhere close to what retail will be. Even within this group there are further divisions. People who visit liquidpedia and get an alright sense of BOs will do alright randomly with just some basic skills. When I first started playing on my friends' account in Gold, I was winning left and right just because people don't know BOs. Come on. Give it time for people to actually learn things and for the amount of players as well as the skill range they represent to even out more.
On April 30 2010 02:53 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:50 Diaspora wrote:
It's just the beta, once the player pool increases so too will the level of skill, pushing the players who are mid level platinum in the beta somewhere around middle gold. Really no need to stress over it right now. This belief is misguided. When the game is released, more people will play. More people playing = more people slated into Platinum. The only way the "bad" players in platinum get pushed out for "better" players is if there is somehow a gigantic group of really really good players that don't have beta at all. Which is certainly possible, but I don't know if it's true it's going to naturally correct as much as everyone thinks it will. Full disclosure: I'm not in the conversation for platinum right now at all, I'm just reasoning through the math of it all to help explain how I understand the system for others to understand it better.
That's also rather misguided, because you are assuming a fairly normal distribution of player levels. I'd say for us to look at icc ranks and get an idea for distribution, but honestly that doesn't have much meaning either in a new game. It takes time rather for such things to settle. Also, once you have a greater player pool, that difference in skill level will relatively easily observed by just plotting out the people at ranges of points, it wouldn't be too hard to implement a new league then if the concerns of the OP here is true.
|
Honestly, if you can sustain D+ on ICCUP, that's a pretty significant achievement when thinking about EVERY possible person who plays Starcraft. Most D+ players would thrash 95% of b.net players in 1v1s on reasonable maps. Now that we have Battle.net 2.0, EVERY SC2 player is in one place, so those D+ players really do deserve to be platinum, as they're still better than 95% of other players.
Therefore, time to go try to break 3k points! FIGHT FIGHT.
|
|
|
They NEED more layers. Iccup had 14 layers of skill, and Iccup's skill gradient is much more condensed than battle.net's. They honestly need at LEAST ten layers in order to make the playing experience more accommodating.
|
Myth 2 had a great ranking system. I can remember trying so, so hard to get up another ranking...
|
Oh wow I forgot half my point,
So, I think the division system is completely reasonable right now. I have a friend who, honestly, is completely horrendous at RTS games. He was put into the copper division. However, there, he has great competition! It's amazing how often he messages me excited that he played a really epic, awesome, rewarding game. So, I'm curious if the silver/gold/bronze leaguers have a similar experience too! From what I've heard, it seems to be the case.
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us.
|
I got to plat with pure mechanics, build orders be damned.
I don't expect to see much change in the distribution from beta to release. I would like to see platinum be more narrow, though. Silver and Gold feel largely useless: if you're bad you're copper/bronze; if you're good you're plat. You might get stuck in silver/gold for a little bit if you e.g. lose to cheese, but plat is inevitable. You always seem to gain so much more than you lose at those ranks.
|
On April 30 2010 02:54 Day[9] wrote:
Honestly, if you can sustain D+ on ICCUP, that's a pretty significant achievement when thinking about EVERY possible person who plays Starcraft. Most D+ players would thrash 95% of b.net players in 1v1s on reasonable maps. Now that we have Battle.net 2.0, EVERY SC2 player is in one place, so those D+ players really do deserve to be platinum, as they're still better than 95% of other players.
Therefore, time to go try to break 3k points! FIGHT FIGHT.
I'm glad you say that because that describes exactly my situation^^. And I felt bad being in plat.
|
On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us.
woo
Did you read my post or do you actually have some information about this? I'm trying to google it but can't find any source for it.
|
On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
Oh wow I forgot half my point,
So, I think the division system is completely reasonable right now. I have a friend who, honestly, is completely horrendous at RTS games. He was put into the copper division. However, there, he has great competition! It's amazing how often he messages me excited that he played a really epic, awesome, rewarding game. So, I'm curious if the silver/gold/bronze leaguers have a similar experience too! From what I've heard, it seems to be the case.
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us.
Hmm I went to a ludum dare jam last weekend and the designers I met there were struggling a lot in the lower divisions and getting frustrated.
|
Agreed, I just entered beta and went straight up to plat with 5-0 in placement matches. Obviously I'm still a newb and will have an hard time there.
|
One thing I would like is to be placed for each race. I never play terran or zerg because I don't wanna drop down in rating and be faced with shitty players when I do play protoss. If i could be placed in plat when im playing toss and gold or silver with terran or zerg would be awesome.
|
A lot of people worry far far far too much about where you get placed coming out of placement matches. Cheese all you want for 5 matches to get Platinum. Then you play people that your cheese doesn't work on, you lose again and again and again until you drop down. Then you either adapt and improve, or you just go on cheesing until you fall low enough where it works 50% of the time.
Stop worrying about where you go after 5 games after a reset, of course it's a crapshoot. But likely, release ladders will run a LOT longer than the beta ones do, so reset placement won't come up very often at all. So worry more about where you end up after like 50 games, or 100, not where you end up after 5. Then talk about whether you think you ended up in the proper place for your skill level.
If you're not where you think you should be. Tell Blizzard. They're asking for feedback on this ladder mechanic.
|
Canada9720 Posts
it depends heavily on who you play during your placement matches. i ran into some tough opponents and got stuck in silver (lol), and I was a C SC player. i think it was primarily due to the reset, though. since then i've moved into gold and i'm cruising through the gold division
|
On April 30 2010 02:58 olof wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us. woo Did you read my post or do you actually have some information about this? I'm trying to google it but can't find any source for it.
It's been confirmed a long time ago. I can't even remember the source, but you can use the search function on team liquid. Apparently, all the replays in the pro league will be uploaded online automatically. Etc etc...
|
On April 30 2010 02:16 nybbas wrote:
We don't need a new league, they just need to make it more difficult to place/ get into platinum. They must have just let a ton of new people in since thelast wipe because when i finally did my placement matches the other night (after choosing the intermediate option for my placements) I was playing people who were building engineering bay first, and planetary defense in their main... when i dominated every one of my placements, i thought maybe the platinum people i would play would be decent, but it was the same garbage. i think you should only get into platinum if you choose the expert option, and win all your placements, otherwise you just have to earn your way in... I can imagine how people are playing in silver and gold atm because plat has been a joke since the last reset. (I am probably around a D+ player, and atm a D player would be able to get into platinum without a second though)
very true. i just got my beta invite and played won my 5 and got placed in plat league.. i am not that good and still havent even seen all the maps.. ive been practicing but there is no way someone that is just startin to play sc2 should get in to plat. everyone that goes 5-0 should be placed in gold then earn the right to move forward.. im sure after i start playin more ladder games ill get dropped down to gold but it was just to ez. gone from never playin to top league.. seems kinda weak.. i would have liked to work my way to that lvl but it is only beta..
|
I don't know why people complain about this... do you really want to wait 10 minutes to be matched? This is the best SC2 has to offer in a convenient 1 minute wait time. If you want better you'll have to play in a long tournament or find friends who are really awesome to custom with. I doubt there's anyone who isn't able to benefit (someone who never loses) from the SC2 ladder system.
|
I think most people are overstressing the placement matches. Someone else played my placement matches during all the profile-switching hooplah after the patch and put me into Silver. A day later I had been promoted all the way back to Platinum.
|
^That has happened to me too, but quickly got to gold from win streaks. The gold to plat transition was weird though. I won 5 games in a row, next day played 2 games, lost both, on the 3rd game lost again to a slightly unfavored opponent due to bad play, but got promoted to plat after a lose streak.
|
i hear that high rank plat players always say that the distribiution is fine and the oppenents are with simllar skill lvl so i realy dnk what's the prob with it...maybe going up to plat is easy but get in high rank is hard from what i know... :-/
|
After teh 5 placement matches, you may or may not be where you belong, based on luck, but after youve been playing soem time, i feel that the matchmaking system works ok.
Eveen though there seems to be alot of bad plat players
|
the distribution is bad atm but i agree with the people saying that with launch itll be a better spread.
|
On April 30 2010 03:06 Legendary- wrote:It's been confirmed a long time ago. I can't even remember the source, but you can use the search function on team liquid. Apparently, all the replays in the pro league will be uploaded online automatically. Etc etc...
Ah. Good to hear I'm not just guessing then..
Don't like the sound of replays being uploaded automatically. Not at all..
|
This thread kind of reminds me of WoW arena posts in a way. You've actually got some people in here saying that top 10 platinum players aren't that good. I'm baffled. Sort of like the people in WoW that once said "2k+ is noob". 2k+ was the top 5% of the entire playerbase.
Likewise here, if all the leagues are divided equally, then platinum is the top 20%.... top 10 of platinum is top 2% of all players. You're saying top 2% isn't that good? The elitist is strong within you.
I think that a pyramid scheme may work better than an even distribution in live, just due to the absurd amount of people that will be playing the game. No doubt that there will be something like 40,000 platinum divisions. But again, platinum is not doing a bad job of measuring skill right now. If someone bad is in platinum, it just means that the majority of top players are not good. If the majority of top players are not good, this is NOT a problem with the platinum league. It is a problem with the players. Over time this will change, and those undeserving will of course be knocked down.
|
It's really based on perspective.
2k is very very easy to get for some players, for others they're stuck at 1500 forever.
|
On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
Oh wow I forgot half my point,
So, I think the division system is completely reasonable right now. I have a friend who, honestly, is completely horrendous at RTS games. He was put into the copper division. However, there, he has great competition! It's amazing how often he messages me excited that he played a really epic, awesome, rewarding game. So, I'm curious if the silver/gold/bronze leaguers have a similar experience too! From what I've heard, it seems to be the case.
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us.
This is not the result of the divisions. The matchmaking doesn't care about your division, only about your internal rating. I was silver for a while after bad placement matches and before I was promoted to gold (and then plat) I was bashing platinums. So it doesn't matter if there are 2 leagues or 200. The matchmaking won't get any better or worse because of that.
Leagues only serve for one purpose: to be able to tell people how good you are. Right now platinum is somewhere from the very best players to something quite far from the top players.
So if I ask someone for their league and they say platinum, I could either bash them easily or get owned. More leagues would help here.
But I don't promote adding 5 new leagues. I'd just like the number of platinum players to be smaller. That way you would know that someone is pretty good if he is in there. It's not that important to have a fine granularity at the lower levels.
|
So much that I would like to see get changed in sc2 that I dont even know where to start, this is one of them but I would focus on more serious issues in the game then this. Im not gonna bring up a bunch of stuff but if I had to say something about this issue, I would say they should add another league or reduce the points earned from games. Just a tought.
|
More arbitrary ranks to make us feel good! I'm not necessarily being sarcastic XD. If day[9] is accurate with the whole, D+ is top 5% of bnet, there is kind of a problem, as iccup had a huge skill differential between the different letters. So if were squeezing everyone D+ and above into a single metal, we don't feel like we get to climb somthing fun like the alphabet. Numbers are great, but they don't have the same ring as Diamondillium or Diamondium.
Of course, our wish for ever more elite distinctions will further alienate new players, so maybe a comprimise in the form of achiements or somthing would be satisfying.
No, I still want my fictional metals.
|
As a Silver player I think most Platinum player I meet are really good. Not necessarily the same level as Pros but significantly better than my level.
|
^That has happened to me too, but quickly got to gold from win streaks. The gold to plat transition was weird though. I won 5 games in a row, next day played 2 games, lost both, on the 3rd game lost again to a slightly unfavored opponent due to bad play, but got promoted to plat after a lose streak.
This happened to my freind. He was #2 in gold, went on a short winning streak, then lost 2 games in a row to platinum players. He got promoted to platinum after the losses, and it was funny because he was technically ranked #1 in his division, at least for a short while.
|
United States4126 Posts
As of right now, because of how the system works, the skill level required to get into platinum has been lowered a lot since the beginning of the beta. Right now, because there's so many noobies just getting into the game, it makes getting into platinum much easier because their placements become easier overall. A silver player before the previous reset could now be in platinum because he ran into more people that were of lower skill level than him.
As an extreme example, imagine a server where everyone is B-A rank on iccup. Obviously, the skill level required to get into platinum is extremely high, relative to the rest of the world's skill level. The skill level of each league right now is determined by the players on the server, not by bnet. Whether that needs to change is up to debate.
|
There is also only 5 placement matches for some weird reason which gives a really random league placement depending on your strat/opponent in those few games.
10 placement (like earlier in beta) gave a little bit more fair placement for the players.
|
Proleague will fix this. No worries from my end.
|
I agree with this thread. I'm not very good at all, highest was B in iCCup, and yet I recently reached number 1 in my platinum division just from massing games. But then again, this is beta. When the actual game comes out, I assume the skill distribution will be more apparent.
|
On April 30 2010 02:14 Chill wrote:
I think people don't realize how hard it is to be good at RTS. This is no different than BW. Like I would be playing at B- making my usual mistakes and people would be shocked how bad I am, even if 99% of the viewers can't do it. It's the same here; running #1 in platinum, but being shockingly bad at the game.
Man this can't be said enough.
I mean, before I got the beta I would notice a lot of mistakes being made by plat players all the time. Then I got the beta and placed in... silver. whoopdeedoo.
People are just so used to watching pro level replays that anything less than that feels like kindergarten to them. We just tend to take for granted the sheer amount of effort it takes to practice hard and play at a high level.
|
I'm sure iccup will get involved in sc2 and the skill level can be changed from there
|
There's a pro league that's going to be invitation and super competitive above platinum. If Blizzard wants to make platinum "competition and non-casuals" rather than the top 10% that's fine, as long as the Pro league extends a few more invitations to the more serious full time player.
|
I think making more placement matches would work. Something like 10 or so and the more in a row you win the harder opponent they match for you. Have to get 10/10 to get high plat, 9/10 low plat, lower gold ect.
I think it would weed out a lot of the people that are in higher divisions that only got their cause they were matched vs easier opponents all 5 games.
|
On April 30 2010 03:30 GaMeOfFeAr wrote:
I agree with this thread. I'm not very good at all, highest was B in iCCup, and yet I recently reached number 1 in my platinum division just from massing games. But then again, this is beta. When the actual game comes out, I assume the skill distribution will be more apparent.
this is the perfect example of the wrong mindset.
B icc is like best 0.01% of all bw players. if you adapt to sc2 well and spam games you are most likely top 0.1% again in sc2.
esp since the pool of players consists of so freakin many terrible terrible player and just beeing up2date with current strats gives a huge edge.
compared to other teamliquid people its not something super special. compared to the rest of the playerbase its damn amazing.
i mean if i win 2 games more im like top 10 too in my plat division (but its fairly new. only like 5 days old). but geez i suck. i lose so many games to totally crappy players cause im bad. but when i see some of my silver/gold friendlist guys play i see that the skill difference is still very very noticable.
|
another problem is that all the users here are experienced with the game and comparing being platinum with pro-gaming.
But the percentage of people on TL.net are maybe 10-20% of the the SC2 beta players, and for the rest achieving silver is quite an effort. For example my brother and his friends are fairly new to RTS and are having a great but challenging time in Silver/Gold and it seems to work just fine.
But nonetheless I think there should be a fixed amount of platinum leagues and people just get promoted/demoted by result.
|
On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
Oh wow I forgot half my point,
So, I think the division system is completely reasonable right now. I have a friend who, honestly, is completely horrendous at RTS games. He was put into the copper division. However, there, he has great competition! It's amazing how often he messages me excited that he played a really epic, awesome, rewarding game. So, I'm curious if the silver/gold/bronze leaguers have a similar experience too! From what I've heard, it seems to be the case.
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us.
I'm placed in mid-silver level and I feel the same way as your friend. I mainly have well balanced matches where I can see if I do well then I win. If I screw up then I lose. Every once in a while I'll get thrashed by a gold or completely own a bronze player but it definitely evens out very well. I like the matchmaking system in the middle of the field. It feels right.
|
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.
|
The ladder system is absolutely terrible. It places people randomly in a league and they have to work themselves up or down. If someone happens to be lucky and get in Plat, they can just stop playing and secure the spot. It should be like ICCUP where people work their way up. That way, we know who is ranked higher than who. There's no point to having a ranking system if people are just put randomly.
|
For me, I was sorta struggling in plat. I'm probably bad though. T_T~
|
On April 30 2010 03:30 GaMeOfFeAr wrote:
I agree with this thread. I'm not very good at all, highest was B in iCCup, and yet I recently reached number 1 in my platinum division just from massing games.
B on iccup was not very good eh?
What i think a lot of you are forgetting is that iccup was VERY competitive and only the most hardcore even knew about it. Also, anyone playing on iccup were playing a game that had been out a very long time. There were very few people on iccup who hadn't been playing SC for at least a few years.
The ranks below plat are to look out for the 99% of normal people out there that would have never played on iccup at all. Just think of platinum as the iccup league and then worry about your ranking within plat.
I think gold should be what casuals strive for, while the hardcore should be in plat striving for pro league or just high rank plat.
|
I felt the same way as the OP, but there's some excellent points made in this thread for the current system. With the addition of the pro league, the truly great players will rise out of platinum and the bnet 2.0 ladder should have a good thing going.
|
I don't think its that bad tbh, I mean theres always going to be a big difference between being in plat and being in the top 5 of one of the better divisions. Honestly who cares, you are matches purely on ELO anyways.
|
Im currently top 10 in like the last plat dev(64?) and i was only d+ rank in sc so it really is too easy if someone like me gets into plat easy =( sorry to say it.
|
The Division system is fine, especially for lower ranked players. Platinum IS bad if you're good. Most platinum contenders are the D/D+ people that you smashed. So if you're decent at this game and play it at all, you'll be high up in your platinum division.
|
"Im currently top 10 in like the last plat dev(64?) and i was only d+ rank in sc so it really is too easy if someone like me gets into plat easy =( sorry to say it."
no its not because like someone stated above 70% of the beta player dont even know what iccup is..
|
My friend who was a solid e in iccup is in plat. I don't know what the % of people are in each div but i think that it should be changed so its a higher standard.
Have to keep in mind that theres a lot of inactive accounts in lower leagues though
|
Well try to remember that it used to be 10 placement matches, and not 5 - and it will probably go back to 10 again. And remember that match making will be better with the more people playing...
I mean at this point it doesn't even go into who is better...its just who got lucky in the first 5 matches... not only that but if you have a good build you can do vs one race you can go far with that.
I think we should hold back until release to say platinum sucks
|
i think the reason why there are so many people in plat is because of how easy it is to move up ranks as opposed to move down.
|
United States47024 Posts
On April 30 2010 03:18 spinesheath wrote:
But I don't promote adding 5 new leagues. I'd just like the number of platinum players to be smaller. That way you would know that someone is pretty good if he is in there. It's not that important to have a fine granularity at the lower levels.
I would argue that granularity is more important at the lower levels, simply because of the visibility of the players that are actually good. You don't need the game to tell you that Idra or Nony are Platinum. You know that they're good and having a division that's small enough that all the players in it are good players that you'd know by name anyway is worthless. The granularity matters for the lower-mid level players that want a sense of what they're up against, and aren't good enough yet to feel their own improvement, and need a measure based on who they're playing against.
|
On April 30 2010 02:12 Ighox wrote:
I'd prefer that they made the other leagues matter more instead.
Copper+Bronze = D
Silver = C
Gold = B
Plat = A
Not exactly like that, but same point, the highest league should be difficult to get into and it shouldn't be where the majority hangs out.
Right now it's more like Copper/Bronze/Silver/Gold = D-/D
Platinum = Anything above D+.
Might change for launch though so I don't even like commenting that right now :p
Most people that play BW on bnet are going to be worse than a D-/D Iccup player.
I would suggest something like Silver would be at ~D/D+ level, having Bronze be around D/D- and anything below D- being Copper. The amount of players between B- to Olympic on Iccup are probably less than the amount of D- to D+ players. You could have Gold be around C- to B- and plat be B to A ish. Just my 2 cents. Remember, you'll still have low level plat (around B) and high level plat (A) so it wouldn't be a huge issue, I just think low level plat should be > than high level gold.
|
it's all about the points. with 100+ games, your ELO is pretty close to the points which are displayed ingame. if you want to get above 1500, you have to be really good, because that's right around the mark where you lose more for losing than you win for winning (against equally skilled opponents), so massgaming wont help anymore.
|
Yes to the poll. 5 games is obviously a terribly small sample of a players skill. I'm guessing this is for beta purposes though.
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.
|
I just worked my way up the ladder from Bronze (had amazing opponents in placement matches T_T )
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.
|
i dont really care. i mean if they want, they oculd make only 1 platin league and yiz would still have the points. so whats the problem with newbies in platinum? if they suck, they will lose points and drop ranks. i dont get the problem, is it because people cant say "hey im platinum progamer" ???
|
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).
|
I don't know what all this talk is about pyramids... so I am going to go a bit nerdy on you. Statistics is sort of what I do. Anyway...
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.
|
I think the issue is that blizzard doesn't have a distribution curve. Platinum should be the top 5%, but its literally the top 20% :/
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.
|
I think it should level out eventually. As more of the weaker platnium players continue to lose to better ones, they will drop down to gold. Usually I have a healthy mix of easier opponents and better opponents.
|
its not a big deal imo, if you are at the bottom skill level of platinum you will be matched agaisnt gold rank players a lot... isn't that how it works? Its not like being in platinum league automatically places you agaisnt all the 2000 pts players
|
I really think you can't do league placement by percentages. The problem is that a very large amount of people don't have a competitive mindset at all and can't be ranked according to skill-level because they don't play to win and are clueless about the game. I also think that only for the highest league besides the pro-league (since that will have only a very minor amount of people) the league should be very small, so that it's a real accomplishment.
|
I don't consider myself a great player, but it was fairly trivial to get myself near the top of my platinum league. I have terrible mechanics, and I can't micro or multitask to save my life, but I do understand how the game works. Lately all I've been doing is amassing zealots and sentries and doing a timing push when +1 attack finishes, and it's given me a >50% win rate. I've come across many lower rated players, even some bronze players who have been quite decent, but all that seems to differentiate platinum from the rest is that platinum players pay attention how the game works.
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.
|
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?
|
yes its like the placement matches arent even viewing skill jus seeing if u win or not
so its easy to end up in the wrong league from ur initial placement win/losses
|
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.
|
blizz said, that there will be a semi- pro league(league without invite but above plat).
sry, i did not read the whole thread but it seems like nobody mentioned it yet.
|
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.
|
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.
|
I think there is some issue with matching people in different leagues, I'm bronze and I often match gold players. So I'm willing to bet ppl from platinum are matching as low as silver. Maybe it's just the points system that needs a tweak. Other games that have a worldwide rank system seem to handle this kind of thing a little better.
|
Is ladder even important in the first place? I think most console competitive games don't have ladders and they do just fine. I think the most important things are just tournaments and matchmaking. For example, do players in south korea become famous due to their ladder ranking or just due to them playing well?
|
Platinum is not the top 20%, it doesnt even have as many divisions as any other leagues. The PROBLEM now is that, Those that are skilled RTS players are more likely to find their way into the Beta. Once the game is released you'll be blown away by the sheer size of gold and below. And yes, I agree there are so many Plat players but thats only because its the beta and people havnt fully figured out the game yet, hell, i did not see 1 damn templar in sivler, 1 burrowed w/ moving roach in gold, and hardly any nukes in low plat. Really i feel like the entire ladder is just a bunch of forum reading noobs who go marauder/stalker/roach EVERY game. It has to be true because i know i dont belong in plat, my apm is a measly 55. The leagues are full of conventional laymen competiting tosee who can be the most conventional the fastest.
|
Yeah. We do. I should be in platinum but a team mate messed me up hard. But if I were in platinum, all the pros would mess me up! I think its a good think I was put in gold but there has to be a league above platinum. Some people are just too good..
|
If I am able to get to #1 plat then Its way too easy
|
On April 30 2010 04:36 Disastorm wrote:
Is ladder even important in the first place? I think most console competitive games don't have ladders and they do just fine. I think the most important things are just tournaments and matchmaking. For example, do players in south korea become famous due to their ladder ranking or just due to them playing well?
They have leaderboards for console gamers.
|
I agree a new league should be added, but I think it should be at the very top. Similar to a pro league where the requirement for promotion is extremely staggering. As far as platinum distribution feeling even as opposed to a pyramid, I believe in one of the blizzard interviews they said that it's % based? so as people get better and better it will raise the requirement(like higher MMR) to get into platinum? I'm not sure if I'm remembering this correctly or even at all however.
|
Only read 3 of the 7 pages but I would point out, and I've said it before... I think once RETAIL hits, it's going to change things a bit. I think Blizzard's system works much better when there are many more players around. The resets also have effected the ladder and the placements. Not to say you're wrong or there isn't an alternative solution, but I do feel it might be a bit early to start saying there is something wrong... I think we need to see it in action with alot more players!
|
There needs to be like 3 levels above platinum.
I'm number 1 in my division easily and I was only C- iccup.
|
As other people have stated already it's mostly a beta problem with the limited playerpool and frequent resets, come release it'll work out fine.
|
Yes, here's the problem:
![[image loading]](http://i44.tinypic.com/e96lud.png)
(Not to scale, obviously)
This wide skill gap reduces the feeling of competitiveness within the platinum divisions. The league distribution should keep the skill gap within each division roughly the same; this can be done with a more pyramidal shape.
Edit: This is a problem with their system, not just the fact that it's beta. The player pool will grow and people will get better over time, but the same general skill distribution will remain, unless we start hitting skill ceilings, which would be horrible. (SC1 essentially has an infinite skill ceiling.)
|
On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
Oh wow I forgot half my point,
So, I think the division system is completely reasonable right now. I have a friend who, honestly, is completely horrendous at RTS games. He was put into the copper division. However, there, he has great competition! It's amazing how often he messages me excited that he played a really epic, awesome, rewarding game. So, I'm curious if the silver/gold/bronze leaguers have a similar experience too! From what I've heard, it seems to be the case.
I'm delighted that there's going to be a pro-division, a division for ze giganerds among us.
I feel as if that your buddy holds the general outlook of most lower-ranked players. Even though there are a lot of fraggers that are considered to belong to a "lower rank", competition is more fierce to improve and move up in the ladder in say bronze or specifically silver.
When I was in silver, I found the games to be a lot more dynamic and other members of community a lot more social in-game when dealing with strategy and gameplay. Playing in <1500 platinum, however, it seems like there are more people that gimmick build/proxy or critique play and BM when it works or BM when it fails.
|
On April 30 2010 02:24 Thrill wrote:
You do realize competition for the spots in platinum will grow harder once the game is actually released?
Also - if you're good enough, you're gonna play the best. It's not a random match-finding system where any user from a specific bracket gets paired up with any other user from that same bracket.
Except it won't because there will be even more garbage players and blizzard seems to distribute people into leagues evenly, so if anything there will just be more garbage players in platinum, not better.
|
Seems quite easy to get into platinum. They really need to tighten up the restrictions on it. As it stands, if you can beat WoW players, you can get into platinum, and that's not right.
|
On April 30 2010 04:50 Tinithor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 02:24 Thrill wrote:
You do realize competition for the spots in platinum will grow harder once the game is actually released?
Also - if you're good enough, you're gonna play the best. It's not a random match-finding system where any user from a specific bracket gets paired up with any other user from that same bracket. Except it won't because there will be even more garbage players and blizzard seems to distribute people into leagues evenly, so if anything there will just be more garbage players in platinum, not better.
Those garbage players would most likely get bunched up in the Copper to Silver leagues anyway. I am sure Blizzard will raise the bar for Platinum once the game is out.
|
I think they should just get rid of the divisions. It's stupid because I can luck out and get a shitty Platinum division where I'm ranked #1, and then there's someone like Nony in another division who's also ranked #1. I mean sure we all know that Nony is a better player than I am, but if it was another player without such a good reputation, there's no way to know who's for sure the better player (without finding this person on the internet and asking them for some games or whatever).
I hate the divisions idea, I don't know what purpose it serves other than making shitty but lucky players think they're better than they are. If not zero, I think there should only be like 3 divisions, 10 tops.
I think they should have closer mimicked ICCup's ladder system. It works, because when someone is A, you know they're fucking good (unless they abused their way there, but there's admins to catch that)
|
It's the average player skill that determines the difficulty of getting in platinum. This skill got inflated by the huge number of beta invites going out. This means that you don't have bad players in copper, you have new players who are figuring out the game in copper. It will be even worse at release, with literally milions of people playing the game online with most of them having no idea at all how to play online save for the tutorial blizzard is making for them. Then with time it will get better. Anyway i'm getting pretty even matches in platinum, i'm not very good but as long as i get matched with similar opponents i don't care about my league, the system works. This means the systeam already differentiates between high plat and medium plat, and if you're a pro you'll get in the invite only in release. I think it's a good job done by Blizzard.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On April 30 2010 02:03 daywiss wrote:Poll: Is there a problem with the player distribution in leagues?Yes (705) 76% No (121) 13% Dont care (88) 10% Other (8) 1% 922 total votes Your vote: Is there a problem with the player distribution in leagues? (Vote): No
(Vote): Yes
(Vote): Other
(Vote): Dont care
*changed the poll since last one sucked I kind of feel like there should be another level above platinum. And no im not talking about invite only "Pro" level, but a public level. It seems like its really easy to get to platinum now and the skill differential between the top platinum players and the lowest players is really high, worthy of a league of their own. I have a friend who has never played rts before, who qualified in copper just a month ago, but now qualified in platinum doing 1 base muta every single game. I basically taught him this strategy because it worked so well in lower levels, but now its beating people in platinum. Another friend of mine qualified in silver after going 3-2. Hes good, but he plays random so hes a bit above average in every race, and he plays maybe a game a day on average. He managed to get up from silver to platinum in about 15 games. Then theres obviously players that are extremely good, play all day, play tournaments, etc and some how they are in the same league as me and my friends. it doesn't make any sense to me.
It's the BETA for God's sake. Lets give Blizzard some feedback regarding units, unit composition, timings, cost/effective stuff, maps, things like that. How can u think about being in the right spot at the ladder of a Game in its Beta Testing Process? Doesn't make sense at all.
It is safe to say that when SC2 comes out you'll have plenty of time to show up your skills.
We already know that there are going to be 2 more Divisions in the ladder. Practice (before Copper) & ProLeague (with invitation only), plus you'll be able to play in other servers (Europe/Asia). Don't worry about your current spot in the ladder. Pretty sure your not even that good 
|
I'm not really feeling divisions system as really i'm in division 138 of gold wow i feel so accomplished imange when the game is released and it shoots up into like division 789 kind of defeats the purpose of creating the illusion that you are moving up in rank.
|
I haven't played the beta yet so maybe I'm over simplifying things but why not just make the ranking system similar to iccup?
|
Plat has been getting more and more watered down with each new invite wave. It'll keep getting worse as more and more people join. I don't think there's anyone who likes the division system.
|
On April 30 2010 04:55 danbel1005 wrote:It's the BETA for God's sake. Lets give Blizzard some feedback regarding units, unit composition, timings, cost/effective stuff, maps, things like that. How can u think about being in the right spot at the ladder of a Game in its Beta Testing Process? Doesn't make sense at all. It is safe to say that when SC2 comes out you'll have plenty of time to show up your skills. We already know that there are going to be 2 more Divisions in the ladder. Practice (before Copper) & ProLeague (with invitation only), plus you'll be able to play in other servers (Europe/Asia). Don't worry about your current spot in the ladder. Pretty sure your not even that good
By giving feedback on how the League and laddering system works in BETA, we can help Blizzard make it work better when the game launches. What do you mean it doesn't make sense to be in the right spot in the ladder of a game in beta? It makes perfect sense. Your spot in the ladder should determine how good you are at the beta. It's pretty straight forward.
With all of these stupid divisions it's impossible to tell who really deserves to be #1 in a Platinum division and who doesn't. In the grand scheme of things, I probably don't belong even in Platinum league but since the reset I'm at a steady #11 in my division. It's stupid. Players like me shouldn't even be within 20 spots of someone who is a professional RTS gamer like Idra.
|
i really do think this need to change. even if i get to rank 1 in my division uhhh rank 1 in division... 86 platinum? yeah that sure is an accomplishment.
What we need is a server wide ladder and limited platinum divisions so that you actually have to compete for your slot.
|
On April 30 2010 04:55 semantics wrote:
I'm not really feeling divisions system as really i'm in division 138 of gold wow i feel so accomplished imange when the game is released and it shoots up into like division 789 kind of defeats the purpose of creating the illusion that you are moving up in rank.
The divisions are not ranked. Division 138 is no better than Division 789.
|
On April 30 2010 04:59 guitarizt wrote:
Plat has been getting more and more watered down with each new invite wave. It'll keep getting worse as more and more people join. I don't think there's anyone who likes the division system.
I guess you are the voice of everyone... Good to know. It is a split decision on who likes it and who doesn't.
|
Edit: Oops. Accidentally quoted my post instead of editting it.
Please delete this.
|
why does the league matter when there's ELO ?
the high ELO plays in platinum gets to play other good players, that's all that matters.
|
On April 30 2010 02:57 Day[9] wrote:
Oh wow I forgot half my point,
So, I think the division system is completely reasonable right now. I have a friend who, honestly, is completely horrendous at RTS games. He was put into the copper division. However, there, he has great competition! It's amazing how often he messages me excited that he played a really epic, awesome, rewarding game. So, I'm curious if the silver/gold/bronze leaguers have a similar experience too!
In response to this, here's my story:
I was given access to an extra account of my friend's right after the most recent reset: because I suck, I got placed into Silver. Silver seemed to be right around my skill level - I was averaging around rank 20-ish, and having decently rewarding games, and was having fun.
Then, after the most recent wave of invites, I was finally given my own betakey, and ran through the placement matches again: I went 4-1, 2 of those wins came from people who disconnected 5 minutes in, so I got placed into gold.
Gold is definitely way way above my skill level for the most part, I'm ranked 85/100 last I checked. However, despite losing most of my games, I'm having a lot more fun. The games tend to be way way more epic and more exciting, whether because of the higher skill level or because I've just had some very lucky games. I'm also watching my replays, and noticing exactly what I'm doing wrong, and learning a lot more about my game and ways to improve it.
As an example of a great game I recently played: it was me as T vs a Z opponent on Incineration Zone. I opened up going standard OC opening, planning to transition into banshee play. He chose to go for a LOT of banelings backed up by some roaches and hydras, and went the backdoor route. Like a fool, I failed to notice the backdoor until the rocks fell and about 24 banelings sacked my main's OC and a ton of supply depots. Fortunately, I had expanded and was mining well off an extra base, so after I cleared out my main, I chose to go Marine + a few tanks for support + LOTS of banshees, and started running around sniping drones with the banshees while keeping him occupied with the marines and tanks. This continued for a while until he finally managed to gather enough forces to raze my expansion (even with the harass, he was gathering way more resources than I was). I had rebuilt my CC in my main, but was pretty much mined out, and when my nat went down most of my SCVs did too. I killed off the force he'd sent and figured, well, it's now or never, so I took the rest of my forces (about 30 rines, 2 medivacs, 3 tanks, and roughly 8-12 banshees) and rolled down the backdoor route directly into his main.
Banelings took out about half the marines right off the bat, but the rest stimmed and managed to snipe all the hydras he had left, meaning that my banshees killed his roaches while they were occupied with the rest of my marines and the tanks. I then proceeded to raze his main while he took what few hydras he had left and threw them blindly at the cloaked banshees. I killed most of them before he got an overseer there, and I had critical mass so the rest of the hydras couldn't do anything. Unfortunately, he had chosen to put his most important tech (hydra den + hive) at his nat, so I moved over to kill it quickly before he could get defenses up.
I knocked the hive down to half health, but my biggest blunder of the game was failing to notice the 4 sporecrawlers morphing directly under my banshees. When I finally noticed them, I tried to focus them down, but then finally had to run away with only 4 banshees remaining. However, he was pretty much out of drones by this point, but to balance that out I had 3 SCVs left mining off of 2 nearly-empty mineral patches and 1 gas.
He then used the last of his resources to pull together one last small army, while I madly built as many marines and tanks as I could (which wasn't very many) and brought the banshees back. The final battle took place at the backdoor ramp to my main, and I finally ran out of forces while he still had about half of his mixed roach-hydra force left. GG.
So that's an example of the games I've been having recently. Have I been losing a lot? Yes, but it's been so much fun, I haven't really cared. Will I get demoted to Silver? Probably, but I'm enjoying it while it lasts 
|
On April 30 2010 04:37 Hafriken wrote:
Platinum is not the top 20%, it doesnt even have as many divisions as any other leagues.
how do you know how many platinum leagues there are in comparison to other leagues? i know there are at least 77 platinum divisions(probably more), that seems like a hell of a lot of divisions considering blizzard has said they want about 15000 active players.
If there was an even distribution among leagues, that would mean there are at LEAST (7700 * 5) = 38500 players registered for the beta that have done their qualifiers in the 2 weeks since they reset. that is a huge number of players, particularly because its just on one continent.
i suppose it could be feasible that there are almost 40k beta keys out in NA alone, but that number seems really high to me. but the point is it doesnt make sense for each league to have an even distribution of players, imo it should be more like a bell curve.
|
I like the idea of placement matches, but I don't think you should immediately be able to hop into platinum. Like you should at best be put into gold, then work your way into platinum. Then hopefully platinum would be less of a joke. Also I agree on percentage based. Here is how I think the leagues should be divided, with the specific percent of players in each.
Plat = 10%
Gold = 15%
Silver = 20%
Bronze = 25%
Copper = 30%
|
I think it's fine. TL's view is skewed because if you come to TL you're almost certainly in the top 10% of all players. 90% of TL should be in platinum and 90% of TL is.
I have no data to support this, but my guess is that the distribution of players between leagues is pretty even (so copper has approximately the same number of people as platinum). I think this is much more reasonable than making the leagues bottom-heavy (like ICCUP, for example, where half of everyone is D) which is what you'd be doing if you want more differentiation at the top.
|
The system seems ok to me. I agree with Day[9]'s posts.
|
I have no drive to ladder with the current system, in WC3 I had this huge list of the top 1000. If I was stuck at the bottom I had this huge drive to improve to get into a high rank. With the SC2 system, I'm part of a division with only 90 players. Even though plat is the highest division, there are so many of them, laddering for a high rank, in my one small division is just unappealing to me.
I just play with people from the practice partner thread, more fun than most games I get on ladder and I just have no ambition to ladder.
|
Platinum is the new D.
I would like to see a cap on the number of platinum divisions and thus players upon release but until then I'll just take free points off of platinum rank 50s
|
The divisions are not ranked. Division 138 is no better than Division 789.
A high ELO is harder to achieve in the newer divisions because of the way AMM works. In division 61, when I was 1100/#4 in the div, I was paired against Win 3 times in a row, who was 1850, number 2 in division 9. That imbalance is lessened over time, but it still remains significant.
Also... while the divisions are directly ranked some are obviously harder to get to the top of because of the non-random way players are placed into divisions. Earlier divisions on average tend to be populated by more of the better players. If you can't figure out why, its not really my problem, but there it is.
|
5/5 win people should be placed in platinum but blizz should add a diamond league, you shouldnt be able to get in that diamond league with 100% win in placement match, you should be able to get in the diamond league only from the platinum league first...
its an idea plz dont hate...
|
i personally was shocked at how easy it was to get into platinum. i didn't follow SC2 at all before getting my beta key (to the point where i was shocked to find out during a game that lurkers no longer existed) and was even scared at first to participate in placement matches for fear of getting placed in copper.
then i went like 8-0 in my first 8 games doing some reaper rush shit a friend told me of. of course 5 of those games were placement matches but the last 3 were against other plat players. im currently top 20 in my division with under a week total of sc2 experience. though i hate to admit it, i was not that great a BW player. there is something wrong with the division making system.
|
On April 30 2010 05:22 Klapdout wrote:
I have no drive to ladder with the current system, in WC3 I had this huge list of the top 1000. If I was stuck at the bottom I had this huge drive to improve to get into a high rank. With the SC2 system, I'm part of a division with only 90 players. Even though plat is the highest division, there are so many of them, laddering for a high rank, in my one small division is just unappealing to me.
I just play with people from the practice partner thread, more fun than most games I get on ladder and I just have no ambition to ladder.
i think this is an important point to make. once you get to plat, you know you cant move anywhere else, theres less drive to keep playing, even if you do get to the top of your division, you have no reference to anyone else outside your division, so theres no way to judge your skill among all players.
I think it would be really cool if division 1 was higher than division 2, etc. so you get placed in division 30, you know you can still move up, and where you are relative to the rest of all players.
|
I would love to see a proleague implemented into the release version of SC2. I know blizzard has said this was a possibility already, but does anyone know if they said it would be regional or worldwide?
Also, I'm indecisive about whether or not blizzard should re-examine the league distribution. SC2 is really the first rts I've played seriously. I went into the beta knowing nothing but build orders I learned watching streams and ended up being placed in gold. I worked hard and played a lot and was eventually placed in platinum, but I felt, and still feel, like I'm not nearly as good as a lot of other players out there. I guess what I'm saying is I feel like ATM platinum is for players who know what they're doing in the game in terms of bos, counters, etc. Not everyone is amazing, but we all know what's going on for the most part.
Perhaps blizz will change league distribution percentages when the game is actually released and more people are familiar with the game.
|
On April 30 2010 02:14 Chill wrote:
I think people don't realize how hard it is to be good at RTS. This is no different than BW. Like I would be playing at B- making my usual mistakes and people would be shocked how bad I am, even if 99% of the viewers can't do it. It's the same here; running #1 in platinum, but being shockingly bad at the game.
I totally agree. You really do see the difference between silver and copper if you are at that level. As the newbies learn the ranks will scale upwards, that's how it worked with BW ladders.
|
On April 30 2010 05:15 daywiss wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 04:37 Hafriken wrote:
Platinum is not the top 20%, it doesnt even have as many divisions as any other leagues. how do you know how many platinum leagues there are in comparison to other leagues? i know there are at least 77 platinum divisions(probably more), that seems like a hell of a lot of divisions considering blizzard has said they want about 15000 active players. If there was an even distribution among leagues, that would mean there are at LEAST (7700 * 5) = 38500 players registered for the beta that have done their qualifiers in the 2 weeks since they reset. that is a huge number of players, particularly because its just on one continent. i suppose it could be feasible that there are almost 40k beta keys out in NA alone, but that number seems really high to me. but the point is it doesnt make sense for each league to have an even distribution of players, imo it should be more like a bell curve.
There are 100+ divisions in all of the others.
|
Well I guess just because I'm a nerd I'd like to see more metals make the cut to add more leagues. Or maybe start branching into precious stones above platinum. The only limit is if it becomes too confusing to tell one league from another.. There's no question that platinum has a better connotation than gold even if you don't know the ranks, but where would titanium fit? Scandium? Carbon fiber league?
Or nanotubes. They're the future Can you imagine being in the Nanotube league? Friggin' pimp.
Without a clear and easy view of progression it will get confusing real quick. ICCup's letters were simple and powerful at explaining who holds the higher rank. But darnit they are boring!
|
This thread is everyone either sharing an uninteresting anecdote about how they're wrecking crappy platinum players or flaunting weird blade55555 dragonkiller69 elitism.
The ladder system has issues. Blizzard's said it in every Q&A. On top of that, as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, people just aren't that good at the game yet. It's interesting this is even being discussed before the release of the game. Already all this posturing and shoulder bolding.
The best idea I've heard mentioned is to make a league in which you don't place, but get into by dominating your platinum division. But people will complain about that, too, since these dominating players are beating the "crappy" players from their platinum division, who beat those "crappy" people from gold, and so on down the line. The only way the ladder, with its current system, will satisfy the better players who want to play against equal skill levels is either a) people come remarkably better at the game or b) rising and falling on the ladder is concerned with more than just wins/losses, having an intelligent A.I. that interprets your in-game data.
|
ya less people to plat would be better tho.
so many newbs on plat nowadays.
|
On April 30 2010 02:54 Day[9] wrote:
Honestly, if you can sustain D+ on ICCUP, that's a pretty significant achievement when thinking about EVERY possible person who plays Starcraft. Most D+ players would thrash 95% of b.net players in 1v1s on reasonable maps. Now that we have Battle.net 2.0, EVERY SC2 player is in one place, so those D+ players really do deserve to be platinum, as they're still better than 95% of other players..
I'm so glad you pointed this out. So many people do not acknowledge the skill levels of lower Iccup players. As a low iccup c- player, i put a decent amount of work into getting where i got to in BW, and am proud of that achievement.
|
The third set of placement matches I played put me in silver somehow, but now I just play plat opponents and usually win, I think the problem is just in the low number of placement matches, 5 isn't a good gage of skill
|
On April 30 2010 04:34 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Not even close.
|
On April 30 2010 05:05 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 04:55 semantics wrote:
I'm not really feeling divisions system as really i'm in division 138 of gold wow i feel so accomplished imagine when the game is released and it shoots up into like division 789 kind of defeats the purpose of creating the illusion that you are moving up in rank. The divisions are not ranked. Division 138 is no better than Division 789.
I never said that it was all i'm saying is that when you have so many divisions the illusion that you're any good is gone when you move up in your division as they don't reorganize the divisions and make them even quality etc when you lack exclusivity such as rank which it seems rather easy to get up to plat rather had to get demoted you lessen the quality.
|
I honestly prefer just one bigass division that incorporates everyone, and having a rank (aka rank 1 or rank 10, etc.). After the game's out, people start to know what rank is good or not. For example you could be ranked like 500 and be considered an extremely good player considering how many people are playing the game, since other "decent" players would be upwards of like 3,000 - 5,000 assuming that they keep the continents split.
|
There is no need of a new league. Right now there are a ton of new players who may have randomly gotten into platinum. Eventually the good will separate from the bad and be set in there proper league.
|
The problem with trying to rate platinum at this stage is that there is a very small player base and the matchmaking has been rigged to make games start faster. It is not uncommon for platinum players to play against gold, silver and even bronze at this stage. I play with as many if not more people not in my league than I do in my league. Blizzard rigged the AMM to expand the search very very quickly to get games started.. This means you are not playing people at your skill at all times. And if you are in the top division (Plat) this means that statistically you have a very high chance to be playing against someone in a lower skill range than you, which keeps your rank high enough to stay in platinum even if you shouldn't be.
Once the game comes out I am sure the skill level of each division will seem a lot more static.
|
On April 30 2010 02:14 Chill wrote:
I think people don't realize how hard it is to be good at RTS. This is no different than BW. Like I would be playing at B- making my usual mistakes and people would be shocked how bad I am, even if 99% of the viewers can't do it. It's the same here; running #1 in platinum, but being shockingly bad at the game.
Lol, I'm 7th in Divison 3 Platinum post reset, with a 150ish pt gap between 7th and 8th place. 51-36 (ICK) and I was C- (more of a high D+ user) at best in Brood war. I think it's too viable to mass game to get high rated. Although I don't wanna take away too much credit from myself, I did beat some tough players to get there :p
|
A new league wouldn't help what was pointed out and what i also said in my previous reply. This is a new game after all, not an expansion for bw, so there's lots of players who are not just low skill, but who are trying the game out for the first time. Really there's going to be this huge mass of noobs in the first months, all dedicated players will end up in platinum. Then once the mass gets bored and leaves, average player skill will improve drastically and platinum will start to be harder. Do you think starcraft1 at the beginning was better ? It was actually way worse :D
I need to reiterate, the system still takes your ELO into account, and you're matched against any player on bnet with similar skill, independent of division/league. So if you're really high in your league you will get matched with similar elo players from other divisions, and the competition is still there. Just check websites that mantain a ladder with the ratings of players from all plat divisions and you know what your place is. A good suggestion might be to have this exact feature officially added to bnet.
|
I just wish they would do away with leagues and do straight rank. 1-however many play. Just do ranking that way, none of this division mumbo jumbo. I am like ranked right under Tasteless in plat but I am pretty much fucking terrible at the game. Hows that?
|
absolutely. plat needs to have more higher skilled players, or less lower skilled players
|
Obviously what's needed is a new division between platinum and the invite pro division. Something with a name that says you-cant-enter-unless-sc2-is-your-life....-almost. Maybe something like...Unobtanium
|
I think this is a problem with trying to create "leagues" based on skill in the first place.. Someone might be copper for 5 games but quickly move up to Gold/Platinum just based on copying a build order from a replay or seeing how others play on ladder and figuring it out on their own.
|
I was D+ on SC BW Iccup and I'm mid range plat right now (rank 40-50ish) if that is any measure of league skill. Granted I have invested a lot of time into watching streams and learning the game before i even had a key.
|
i was a C-/D+ player in brood war and now i'm in silver league in sc2 beta.
i think thats about right.
|
On April 30 2010 06:31 Owarida wrote:
I just wish they would do away with leagues and do straight rank. 1-however many play. Just do ranking that way, none of this division mumbo jumbo. I am like ranked right under Tasteless in plat but I am pretty much fucking terrible at the game. Hows that?
I imagine tasteless plays more on asia due to lag?
|
Well, I'm currently ranked 30 Platinum and I'm not that good, so I guess there is something wrong...
But I'll probably just lose more games and get demoted soon...
|
On April 30 2010 02:04 MorroW wrote:
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
Yeah I agree... I feel like gold division should be similar to that of like c+/b- of sc1 while play is more like B+ and up... Also I think bronze and copper players are pretty damn close in skill... So maybe move it down even more and make silver players more equivalent to what C- and C would have been.
|
On April 30 2010 06:40 FarbrorAbavna wrote:
Obviously what's needed is a new division between platinum and the invite pro division. Something with a name that says you-cant-enter-unless-sc2-is-your-life....-almost. Maybe something like...Unobtanium
Adamantium will be better
I prefeer the pgt/iccup rank system...
|
Being on TeamLiquid has blinded you on just how good a D+/C- player is. I mean, you think you suck, but you were probably better than 95% of BNet in Brood War. The ICCUP ratings were ranking a very small subset of players very specifically, and just really can't be compared to the wide-scope of these divisions.
|
On April 30 2010 05:53 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 04:34 Chairman Ray wrote: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. Not even close.
You mean higher right? I'd say a D-/D player would max out around 1800 or 1900.
|
i like how new people are comparing copper/bronze to D
when D level Iccup was yeeeeears ahead of anything in copper in this beta.
|
I agree. I'm ranked in Plat and I KNOW that I shouldn't be. I'm hardly Gold material.
|
I feel like they need a few more leagues so that the mega nerds can separate themselves better. I think these players pay more attention to their ranking than casual players in general and should have a few leagues that separate the great from the greater and the greatest.
Something like
copper 0-30%
bronze 30-60%
iron 60-80%
silver 80-90%
gold 90-95%
platinum 95-99%
diamond 99-99.9%
professional - invite top 0.005%
top 0% should be unobtainium league
|
On April 30 2010 06:48 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Being on TeamLiquid has blinded you on just how good a D+/C- player is. I mean, you think you suck, but you were probably better than 95% of BNet in Brood War. The ICCUP ratings were ranking a very small subset of players very specifically, and just really can't be compared to the wide-scope of these divisions.
You're right, also it's important to note that CauthonLuck was only a C- player in BW iirc. Many of the top SC2 players atm wern't big BW players, although they dabbled.
|
They should make it a pyramid with specific percentages of player base in each. This would allow the numbers of players per division to fluctuate with total number of players. Something like:
plat 3%
gold 7%
silver 15%
bronze 25%
copper 50%
|
i cannot say anything about platinum leagues...
but as far as im concerned my placement matches were like 50:50 (2:3 and then 3:2) because im stupid enough to lose to a bunch of cheesy stuff or keep forgetting antiair. i was playing silver for a few days and got promoted to gold were im having some epic matches not coming from the RTS genre..
|
Im on silver, i dont play much but sometimes they are terribly noob and sometimes they rape me.
i think we need to wait a while for the system to distribute players better
|
On April 30 2010 06:56 Tump wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 06:48 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Being on TeamLiquid has blinded you on just how good a D+/C- player is. I mean, you think you suck, but you were probably better than 95% of BNet in Brood War. The ICCUP ratings were ranking a very small subset of players very specifically, and just really can't be compared to the wide-scope of these divisions. You're right, also it's important to note that CauthonLuck was only a C- player in BW iirc. Many of the top SC2 players atm wern't big BW players, although they dabbled.
Great, now idiots will use this to "definitively" prove SC2 will always be noobier than BW. :p
|
I've posted this in a thread before, but D- on iccup is like copper to gold and platinum on sc2 is like iccup's D to Olympic. It's such a huge spread. I have RL friends who were D-/D+ who're 1500+ in platinum sc2. People who've NEVER taken a game off me after hundreds of 1v1's in sc1 and 2.
They deffinately need to make it very difficult to get into platinum (compared to how it is now) and people who are inactive need to be demoted or something. So many people who are 5-0 just sittin in the ladder in EVERY division inflating it. There's probably an average of 15 (or less) 'active' people in each division with the higher number divisions having fewer and the lower number divisions having more.
One of my friends is in division 88 and he's 1st with 1088 rating. Kinda makes the ladder system seem retarded and out of place and when that happens a 3rd party like iccup is going to be needed to swoop in and rescue the system.
|
When the game goes retail and the player base grows exponentially and the ladder isn't being reset every other day and people will only have one account things will stabilize within the ladder. Till then it's beta and all they really care about is game balance and their quick match system working. At the end of the day no one will take anyone seriously who is in plat and has a 5-0 record and unless you have a substantial amount of games under your belt you rank will matter very little in the LONG term.
Again people are being very short sighted when they say things like "platinum isn't that good?". Blizzard cares about ranks and placement in the LONG term not within 1,2,3,4 weeks into the ladder season but, 2-3 months into it.
|
On April 30 2010 07:03 starcraft911 wrote:
I've posted this in a thread before, but D- on iccup is like copper to gold and platinum on sc2 is like iccup's D to Olympic. It's such a huge spread. I have RL friends who were D-/D+ who're 1500+ in platinum sc2. People who've NEVER taken a game off me after hundreds of 1v1's in sc1 and 2.
They deffinately need to make it very difficult to get into platinum (compared to how it is now) and people who are inactive need to be demoted or something. So many people who are 5-0 just sittin in the ladder in EVERY division inflating it. There's probably an average of 15 (or less) 'active' people in each division with the higher number divisions having fewer and the lower number divisions having more.
One of my friends is in division 88 and he's 1st with 1088 rating. Kinda makes the ladder system seem retarded and out of place and when that happens a 3rd party like iccup is going to be needed to swoop in and rescue the system.
If you think Blizzard is going to allow a third party launcher/ladder while the Blizzard ladder is running (and profitable) I've a got a bridge I can sell you.
Also segregating the community would ultimately have a negative impact on both
|
Stupid thread.
The league system has obviously been introduced to make it easier for newer players to get started and to give them goals. This is good for top players in the long term because it makes a bigger community of people who actually play competitively.
It's fairly obvious that anyone who knows how to play reasonably will be in platinum. Just use your rating as a comparitive benchmark rather than your league and rank.
The fact that the matchmaking system finds games for us, means that we dont need divisions like we did on iccup. Because on iccup you had to match yourself. It doesn't matter anymore.
|
On April 30 2010 06:48 PanzerDragoon wrote:
Being on TeamLiquid has blinded you on just how good a D+/C- player is. I mean, you think you suck, but you were probably better than 95% of BNet in Brood War. The ICCUP ratings were ranking a very small subset of players very specifically, and just really can't be compared to the wide-scope of these divisions.
QFT.
|
Anyone who played on iccup had at least reasonable skills with SC1. You have to remember that the majority of people playing SC2 haven't played iccup and are considerably worse than even a D- iccup player. Saying that D level players should be in copper when I'd argue even a D level iccup player is in the top 10% of StarCraft players worldwide isn't fair. Playing on iccup almost was the platinum league of SC1, and the D/C/B/A levels within iccup were the differences between being a 1000 platinum player or a 2000+ platinum player.
|
On April 30 2010 04:42 Polemarch wrote:Yes, here's the problem: (Not to scale, obviously) This wide skill gap reduces the feeling of competitiveness within the platinum divisions. The league distribution should keep the skill gap within each division roughly the same; this can be done with a more pyramidal shape. Edit: This is a problem with their system, not just the fact that it's beta. The player pool will grow and people will get better over time, but the same general skill distribution will remain, unless we start hitting skill ceilings, which would be horrible. (SC1 essentially has an infinite skill ceiling.)
That's actually quite a perfect illustration of the issue. I daresay it is rather to scale
Sometimes in plat I run massive winning streaks with no effort, other times I get massively raped in losing streaks where the games aren't even close at all.
Completely defeats the purpose of this "matchmaking system" if my opponents in plat have such a huge skill differential. I'd rather get paired with people that are my level instead of wasting my time with either complete tards or people that completely rape me
|
idk about you guys but my placement matches have been an absolute joke so far. I kept getting real newbies at the start, I thought it was because I always chose 'experienced' rather than 'veteran' when you first hit multiplayer, but this recent reset I picked 'veteran' and it was just as bad. Played 4/5 matches against players who obviously have never played any sort of RTS game before and I won with no effort at all.
and as far as leagues go, I remember when accounts kept getting reset I wanted to have some ladder off-race fun so I played my placement matches with terran(a race I'm quite clueless with) and got into silver- later on when I switched to my main race I found most players there were at pretty much the same level as the ones I kept getting in plat.
this is the only time I've been in silver, pretty much all of my other experience is in platinum, and in platinum the people I play against are either too strong or just plain bad. one player would be very random, make silly decisions and make ridiculous mistakes while the next will have monstrous control(compared to mine), better game sense, and would outplay me on every level.
theres just such a contrast, maybe its just my luck, but it can get very frustrating, you have a few easy wins against higher ranked plat players then you get your ego shatters into pieces when someone in gold completely schools you haha
|
I got up to high D+ in Iccup with around 400 games played.
With 400 games played in SC2 and many many resets (more often than seasons in ICCUP) I'm now 35-20 1300 ELO in platinum with flying units giving me major headaches. : / I posted a replay and someone couldn't believe I was top 20 just because opposing flying units wrecks my mind.
I think if it had been as easy to play back to back games in SC:BW as it is in SC2 I could have made C- in the same time I had wasted changing/resetting my god damn ports on my pos router/finding games etc.
Most people on this website are pretty freaking good at RTS games compared to the rest of the population that will play the game. I'd expect most people to make it to platinum with solid macro, timings and build orders that have a purpose. You might be Gold if you have issues controling your army and macroing and Silver if you're struggling with coping with dynamic situations and you have macro like halfway there.
If you can really excel - like C+ and up then you'll have just a higher ELO and that's fine.
|
You're missing the POINT.. Everyone is discussing the errors in the system, allowing worse players to reach top 20% on the ladder.
What about the obvious fact that SC2 requires less skill, and noobs who figure out some easy-to-manage build can easy win over a great D+ to -B gamer who's not building the exact right counter units that game. The reason many noobs are reaching platinum level is because every once in a while they beat a great player who didn't build the right units, by A-moving into him with a marauder/roach/immortal ball.
You can't save yourself with great micro after you've made an error in your build in SC2, like you could in SC1. SC2 is all about builds, and that's something even an AOE player can manage to pull off every once in a while.
|
Comparing a D/D- SC1 player to SC2 ranks doesn't mean anything.
A HUGE reason why good sc1 players were so good is because there are so many stupid game bugs and build complexities that take a long time to learn without help. Things like building a proper wall off for each spawn on each map etc are extremely important in SC1 and things that even avid SC fans didn't fully understand.
Platinum should definitely be harder to get into though. You probably shouldn't be able to get into platinum with just placement games. Make people work there way up from silver. Rank them up quick to gold if they are dominating and make platinum a pretty difficult league to make.
|
Platinum should probably be impossible to get into simply from doing your placement matches. I know for a fact I should not be in platinum(or whatever qualifies as the highest placement one can enter into) just because my placement opponents were terrible*.
*The best of them went three gate offense...and by three gate, I mean three gateways. Despite his having researched warp gate tech, he decided never to upgrade.
|
On April 30 2010 09:59 Bosu wrote:
Comparing a D/D- SC1 player to SC2 ranks doesn't mean anything.
A HUGE reason why good sc1 players were so good is because there are so many stupid game bugs and build complexities that take a long time to learn without help. Things like building a proper wall off for each spawn on each map etc are extremely important in SC1 and things that even avid SC fans didn't fully understand.
So, advanced techniques and builds that raised the skill ceiling is a bad thing?
I think a lot of people won't see what's happening to SC2 before it's too late. Everyone is happy about the great graphics and units, and drool over the fact that Blizzard successfully recreated some of the units we love into beautiful 3D graphics. What's actually going on is a regression in RTS video games that is completely unnecessary.
"Kiting" with 30 marauders is equivalent to controlling two zerglings in SC1.
|
On April 30 2010 09:52 Perfect Balance wrote:
You're missing the POINT.. Everyone is discussing the errors in the system, allowing worse players to reach top 20% on the ladder.
What about the obvious fact that SC2 requires less skill, and noobs who figure out some easy-to-manage build can easy win over a great D+ to -B gamer who's not building the exact right counter units that game. The reason many noobs are reaching platinum level is because every once in a while they beat a great player who didn't build the right units, by A-moving into him with a marauder/roach/immortal ball.
You can't save yourself with great micro after you've made an error in your build in SC2, like you could in SC1. SC2 is all about builds, and that's something even an AOE player can manage to pull off every once in a while.
yea I definitely agree with this sc2 is just more about a build and attack move and macro as best you can. i mean grante of course theres levels of it but its no where near what bw was like and i wass it alot
|
It should definitely be harder to get into platinum because I am D+ in bw and after 10 games of experience I got into plat due to the reset
|
On April 30 2010 09:52 Perfect Balance wrote:
You're missing the POINT.. Everyone is discussing the errors in the system, allowing worse players to reach top 20% on the ladder.
What about the obvious fact that SC2 requires less skill, and noobs who figure out some easy-to-manage build can easy win over a great D+ to -B gamer who's not building the exact right counter units that game. The reason many noobs are reaching platinum level is because every once in a while they beat a great player who didn't build the right units, by A-moving into him with a marauder/roach/immortal ball.
You can't save yourself with great micro after you've made an error in your build in SC2, like you could in SC1. SC2 is all about builds, and that's something even an AOE player can manage to pull off every once in a while.
I think a better explanation to what you're noticing is that counters are now numerical and no longer mechanical. Instead of using the right unit to have a MICRO advantage, its now more towards using the right unit.....period. Micro is important, but arguably much less important since the damage system is such a big rock paper scissors clusterfck. Who cares if you can micro away from a shot if getting hit means 200000 bonus damage?
"Terrible, terrible damage."
|
Either more ranks need to be added or MorroW's idea needs to be taken in to consideration in my opinion. There really is quite a difference in skill between different platinum players.
|
I guess with 12 pages it has already been said and I cba to read every single reply but one must consider especially if you come from broodwar that the skill level on iccup was not a good example of skill distribution in a competitive game.
You have to realize that in broodwar right now, everyone who has not had the energy to play the game intensively for many years have left, and any new player trying to learn it is discouraged by the insane skill level there. It would be like removing all the copper-gold players from sc2 at the moment and then divide the platinum players only over the five ranks with the worst platinum player being copper. Then you would start to get closer to the kind of average level that broodwar has at the moment.
Obviously this is going to change though as players get better and better. I do agree though that platinum should not be attainable through placement. I actually don't think gold should be attainable through placement either.
ALSO consider though that the leagues are not meant to be a substitute for ladder rating. There is supposed to be a skill difference within the leagues thats why there are 100 places in most divisions and people will range from 700 rating to 2000. If you make the leagues too narrow then it gets too frustrating to adjust to a new league because likely you will get promoted and then loose a few games and be demoted right back down again. It is actually necessary for #100 platinum players to be around the skill level of #1 gold players otherwise the advancement curve gets choppy.
|
just use your ELO to measure your skill against others...not to the fact you are in plat...
obtaining high ELO seems to be very hard as you gain less pts for winning and lose a lot of pts when you lose :/
|
On April 30 2010 10:13 The6357 wrote:
just use your ELO to measure your skill against others...not to the fact you are in plat...
obtaining high ELO seems to be very hard as you gain less pts for winning and lose a lot of pts when you lose :/
Except its not ELO
|
It will even out eventually. There are only a small amount of people in the beta, so when the game actually comes out there will be a lot more people in the game. The population will blow up to such an amount that it will be very difficult to stay in the league you are originally placed in. Placement matches will then have more value. Because if you have noticed in this game placement matches go from copper, bronze, silver, gold, and platinum. People may win in copper, they go to the next, but lose to bronze then play another bronze until you win and get to silver or you lose and play another copper until you get in the top 10. It is also based on other smaller stats, but if you notice that's how placement matches go. Leagues will get so hard that people new to the game will be in copper easily. So
Also that is how the placement matches find your league, I've tested 3 times for all my placement matches when the server has been reset and so far it has gone copper, bronze, silver, gold, platinum. Once you lose you have to win the next and that's the league you will be placed in. So I believe it will balance out.
|
On April 30 2010 10:04 Perfect Balance wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 09:59 Bosu wrote:
Comparing a D/D- SC1 player to SC2 ranks doesn't mean anything.
A HUGE reason why good sc1 players were so good is because there are so many stupid game bugs and build complexities that take a long time to learn without help. Things like building a proper wall off for each spawn on each map etc are extremely important in SC1 and things that even avid SC fans didn't fully understand. So, advanced techniques and builds that raised the skill ceiling is a bad thing? I think a lot of people won't see what's happening to SC2 before it's too late. Everyone is happy about the great graphics and units, and drool over the fact that Blizzard successfully recreated some of the units we love into beautiful 3D graphics. What's actually going on is a regression in RTS video games that is completely unnecessary. "Kiting" with 30 marauders is equivalent to controlling two zerglings in SC1.
I didn't say anything about the high skill ceiling being bad. It just is a lot more difficult to learn the game when a ton of the things such as patrol micro, making dragoons not retarded, and building placement are extremely difficult to learn. Most people, such as myself, didn't dedicate time to learning SC1 because learning these things is extremely tedious.
In SC2 we are all starting at the same point. There is nobody with 5-10 years of time learning these bugs and nuances long before we started.
|
The higher numbered platinum divisions are so easy. A D- player in SC1 is fully capable of getting into them. I got my beta key two days ago and went 10-0 in 1v1 and 2v2 placement matches with zero experience, and got placed in platinum in division 86 or something ridiculous like that. The people I'm playing are just bad.
They just need a division above plat, or only place people in gold if they go 5-0, then let them fight their way into plat.
Edit: Main problem is probably that the ladder should be a pyramid shape (way more copper divisions than platinum). That way it would automatically be tough to get there.
|
i barely played sc:bw or wc3 and ive only played maybe 100-200 sc2 beta games total, but im a rank 1 platinum player. there's something wrong about that.
|
news flash, 99% of people in sc2 suck
|
On April 30 2010 02:06 HelloSon wrote:
They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches.
Blizz will be introducing this after launch afaik; a pro-invite league.
|
That's not really a news flash.
And personally, I agree with Morrow's idea as well as just an additional higher league. Whichever proves to be better. The primary focus though is that the current "highest league" is far more common than it should be.
Though maybe the proleague will alleviate the issue, who knows.
|
On April 30 2010 10:44 Fontong wrote:
The higher numbered platinum divisions are so easy. A D- player in SC1 is fully capable of getting into them. I got my beta key two days ago and went 10-0 in 1v1 and 2v2 placement matches with zero experience, and got placed in platinum in division 86 or something ridiculous like that. The people I'm playing are just bad.
They just need a division above plat, or only place people in gold if they go 5-0, then let them fight their way into plat.
Edit: Main problem is probably that the ladder should be a pyramid shape (way more copper divisions than platinum). That way it would automatically be tough to get there.
Adding another layer of the ladder is not going to pull better players out of a hat. I think most people are missing the point here. It is not a lot of "bad" players in platinum because the ladder system is broken, its because there are not enough "good" players yet in the beta. Again comparing to sc/bw ladders with people with 10+ years experience to people with 10 weeks experience is kind of futile.
I would suggest that someone screenshot this thread because in 10 years we are going to have a good laugh about how people thought platinum was easy back in the day.
|
On April 30 2010 11:29 ymirheim wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 10:44 Fontong wrote:
The higher numbered platinum divisions are so easy. A D- player in SC1 is fully capable of getting into them. I got my beta key two days ago and went 10-0 in 1v1 and 2v2 placement matches with zero experience, and got placed in platinum in division 86 or something ridiculous like that. The people I'm playing are just bad.
They just need a division above plat, or only place people in gold if they go 5-0, then let them fight their way into plat.
Edit: Main problem is probably that the ladder should be a pyramid shape (way more copper divisions than platinum). That way it would automatically be tough to get there. Adding another layer of the ladder is not going to pull better players out of a hat. I think most people are missing the point here. It is not a lot of "bad" players in platinum because the ladder system is broken, its because there are not enough "good" players yet in the beta. Again comparing to sc/bw ladders with people with 10+ years experience to people with 10 weeks experience is kind of futile. I would suggest that someone screenshot this thread because in 10 years we are going to have a good laugh about how people thought platinum was easy back in the day.
And you missed the point of my edit.
I know there is a limited amount of good players. Why do you think I posted that the divisions should be in a pyramid? So that the betters players at the top are more concentrated because there are less platinum divisions, and thus the level of skill required to get in one will be far higher.
|
Too many elitists here complaining. If you have a problem with platinum not being leet, then you should also have a problem with gold not being 2nd most leet. I thought the leagues would be an even distribution from the get go, and i don't care. Getting 1500 ranking is more important than getting a 1100 ranking.
|
On April 30 2010 11:40 Fontong wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 11:29 ymirheim wrote:On April 30 2010 10:44 Fontong wrote:
The higher numbered platinum divisions are so easy. A D- player in SC1 is fully capable of getting into them. I got my beta key two days ago and went 10-0 in 1v1 and 2v2 placement matches with zero experience, and got placed in platinum in division 86 or something ridiculous like that. The people I'm playing are just bad.
They just need a division above plat, or only place people in gold if they go 5-0, then let them fight their way into plat.
Edit: Main problem is probably that the ladder should be a pyramid shape (way more copper divisions than platinum). That way it would automatically be tough to get there. Adding another layer of the ladder is not going to pull better players out of a hat. I think most people are missing the point here. It is not a lot of "bad" players in platinum because the ladder system is broken, its because there are not enough "good" players yet in the beta. Again comparing to sc/bw ladders with people with 10+ years experience to people with 10 weeks experience is kind of futile. I would suggest that someone screenshot this thread because in 10 years we are going to have a good laugh about how people thought platinum was easy back in the day. And you missed the point of my edit. I know there is a limited amount of good players. Why do you think I posted that the divisions should be in a pyramid? So that the betters players at the top are more concentrated because there are less platinum divisions, and thus the level of skill required to get in one will be far higher.
No that was exactly my point, the system right now IS a pyramid afaik. Atleast I was under the impression that platinum was a much smaller percentage of the total number of players than gold and silver is.
|
i think it will turn out fine on realease because if people get a lucky streak into platinum they will just be pushed down after a certain number of games and the leagues will balance out after 100 ish games from the player
|
How about this:
A "elite" tier ladder, only accesseable by people in platnium who have consistently won. This would run concurrently to the normal ladder, and would allow very high ranking players to guage their strength among themselves.
|
How about this:
A "hardcore" ladder, if you lose, you get reset back to copper.
|
I just wish there was a way to filter rank when you make a game like how sc1 iccup was. HOnestly I had more trouble in platinum than I did in bronze. When I first got the game, I played like 3 good players in placement, then recently with the reset, I got 5 noobs and ranked 27 plat just like that.
|
On April 30 2010 13:36 nexusil wrote:
How about this:
A "hardcore" ladder, if you lose, you get reset back to copper.
I like the way you think.
An eternal KING OF THE HILL, with one man on top...
|
Well, If you cheese your way to platinum division and do not stand a chance to play a standart game, this is how it goes. If you aren't any good at normal play, atleast you should be good at cheese. If you're not, then there is nothing left to say.
|
How about seasons, where you all start off at a basic rank (lets call it D) and then progressively move up the more games you win, you get points for winning and as you increase in ranks you lose more points every loss so it becomes harder to obtain the higher ranks.
Iccup FTW.. wish blizzard would implement a system that clearly works.
|
Haven't read all the replies but I read some and I like the idea of the top league (whether it's platinum or another level) being one that you can't get into from your placement matches. You have to earn it by doing well in the 2nd to top league.
|
^That is essentially what the pro league will be.
I think it's more likely the people at TL are just at the top of the ladder. When it comes to forming a new league type for across the board placement, the deciding factor is how many people are available for the new league. IMO it's not enough to justify a new league type. Plus there's no real downside to the current system - you're still matched with other top players. As for this "special league you have to earn your way into"..... uhmm.. yeah, it's called pro league.
|
there are 4 leagues, so platinum could be just top 25%, that's still a lot of players
|
Ranking is serious buisness?
|
Canada8031 Posts
On April 30 2010 13:49 XeliN wrote:
How about seasons, where you all start off at a basic rank (lets call it D) and then progressively move up the more games you win, you get points for winning and as you increase in ranks you lose more points every loss so it becomes harder to obtain the higher ranks.
Iccup FTW.. wish blizzard would implement a system that clearly works.
This is how also how ELO works. If you play someone better than you, you get more points for a win and lose less for a loss. If you play someone worse than you, you get less points for a win and lose more for a loss. The difference between Blizzard's system and iccup lies in the algorithm used as well as where the cutoff is for each league.
Really, the perceived problem could probably be solved just by raising the ELO cutoff for platinum. This would essentially raise the average skill level of platinum players.
|
On April 30 2010 02:06 HelloSon wrote:
They should have a league above plat that you DON'T get placed in; you have to earn the right to get in. That way people can't just be placed in this league with a bunch of easy placement matches.
i hope this system will be gone the same time as the beta, and they use something like iccup
|
On April 30 2010 12:51 ymirheim wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 11:40 Fontong wrote:On April 30 2010 11:29 ymirheim wrote:On April 30 2010 10:44 Fontong wrote:
The higher numbered platinum divisions are so easy. A D- player in SC1 is fully capable of getting into them. I got my beta key two days ago and went 10-0 in 1v1 and 2v2 placement matches with zero experience, and got placed in platinum in division 86 or something ridiculous like that. The people I'm playing are just bad.
They just need a division above plat, or only place people in gold if they go 5-0, then let them fight their way into plat.
Edit: Main problem is probably that the ladder should be a pyramid shape (way more copper divisions than platinum). That way it would automatically be tough to get there. Adding another layer of the ladder is not going to pull better players out of a hat. I think most people are missing the point here. It is not a lot of "bad" players in platinum because the ladder system is broken, its because there are not enough "good" players yet in the beta. Again comparing to sc/bw ladders with people with 10+ years experience to people with 10 weeks experience is kind of futile. I would suggest that someone screenshot this thread because in 10 years we are going to have a good laugh about how people thought platinum was easy back in the day. And you missed the point of my edit. I know there is a limited amount of good players. Why do you think I posted that the divisions should be in a pyramid? So that the betters players at the top are more concentrated because there are less platinum divisions, and thus the level of skill required to get in one will be far higher. No that was exactly my point, the system right now IS a pyramid afaik. Atleast I was under the impression that platinum was a much smaller percentage of the total number of players than gold and silver is.
Oh really? Is there a link where Blizz says that? Not that I don't believe you or anything, I'm just interested to see what the stats are like if they exist.
|
imo, they shouldn't have platinum (or metal-coding) at all. Just have everyone on a straight, no-frills Elo-like rating system. You should know exactly how good someone is by their rating, and that's all you ever need to know.
If it's good enough for chess, it's good enough for SC2.
edit: p.s., Elo is a name, it isn't an acronym. just fyi.
|
On April 30 2010 15:01 oolon wrote:
imo, they shouldn't have platinum (or metal-coding) at all. Just have everyone on a straight, no-frills Elo-like rating system. You should know exactly how good someone is by their rating, and that's all you ever need to know.
If it's good enough for chess, it's good enough for SC2.
edit: p.s., Elo is a name, it isn't an acronym. just fyi.
I agree the ratings should be consistent across divisions. You could still have division names though, they would just correspond to rating ranges (The same way that chess has masters, experts, class A, etc.) But it would be nice to see someone's exact elo before a match. Just having something saying "slightly favored" is annoying.
|
On April 30 2010 02:39 jstar wrote:Depends on the general SC population. A top 0.5% in WoW for example, simply means you're not retarded. But I do agree the skill variation from bottom plat to top plat is probably bigger than copper to gold.
this. remember folks, top 0.5% only means you're better than 199 out of 200 people. that's not that great considering how many noobs there are at starcraft. if i was only top 0.5% at any game i would never let anyone know about it. it'd be embarrassing
top 5% for platinum is just way too much.
|
On April 30 2010 15:01 oolon wrote:
imo, they shouldn't have platinum (or metal-coding) at all. Just have everyone on a straight, no-frills Elo-like rating system. You should know exactly how good someone is by their rating, and that's all you ever need to know.
If it's good enough for chess, it's good enough for SC2.
edit: p.s., Elo is a name, it isn't an acronym. just fyi.
It's also annoying to have every other word bleeped out with this new battle.net 2.0 made to satisfy the parents of 12 year-olds. Somewhere along the line Blizzard forgot who mattered. It's ridiculous how much you type is turned into $@#(!.
The metal coding system is in the bag of stuff that's there to be new or hip or better when it actually rolls back the clocks on a lot of what was genuinely good.
|
On April 30 2010 04:42 Polemarch wrote:Yes, here's the problem: (Not to scale, obviously) This wide skill gap reduces the feeling of competitiveness within the platinum divisions. The league distribution should keep the skill gap within each division roughly the same; this can be done with a more pyramidal shape. Edit: This is a problem with their system, not just the fact that it's beta. The player pool will grow and people will get better over time, but the same general skill distribution will remain, unless we start hitting skill ceilings, which would be horrible. (SC1 essentially has an infinite skill ceiling.)
this is exactly why the leagues should be pyramid'd (coined!).
great graph btw. it's hard for people to see this in their heads.
|
The reason platinum is so horrible (or rather the overall skill level) is because of the demographic playing the beta right now. 90% of the people playing the beta now will probably play UMS and single player only anyways. Imagine if the bottom 90% in the beta were gone. Suddenly the top 1% becomes the top 10% or something and you have a much more elite top tier.
I'd like to see the league equivalent skills be something like this:
Copper = total noobs to rts
Bronze = total noobs who have beaten single player
Silver = e/d- level noobs
Gold = d/d+ level players
Platinum = c- and higher players
Pro = b and higher players
That seems like it'd be a sensible system. The skill gap between players at the top tier will take a long time to grow. I don't think we'll even have these differences between b and a level players at all for a long time.
I also feel like it makes sense that anyone with solid fundamentals and decent knowledge of BOs can be platinum. However the low plat players will be ones who have very 1-dimensional games (c- players who got there by doing allins). Right now I think even mid and reasonably high plat players are those bad c- allin players.
My two cents anyhow.
|
On April 30 2010 05:29 j4vz wrote:
5/5 win people should be placed in platinum but blizz should add a diamond league, you shouldnt be able to get in that diamond league with 100% win in placement match, you should be able to get in the diamond league only from the platinum league first...
its an idea plz dont hate...
diamond is for smashing on mortal kombat 1. they already decided there'd be a 'pro league' for placement above platinum.
|
On April 30 2010 16:31 Floophead_III wrote:
The reason platinum is so horrible (or rather the overall skill level) is because of the demographic playing the beta right now. 90% of the people playing the beta now will probably play UMS and single player only anyways. Imagine if the bottom 90% in the beta were gone. Suddenly the top 1% becomes the top 10% or something and you have a much more elite top tier.
Without any stats to back it up you're just spewing bs, logic dictates that the people who have gone out of their way to get the multiplayer beta are generally more interested in competitive RTS and should be better players.
|
Another problem with divisions is that you don't know who's winning. Sure you could compare the elo ratings but you really shouldn't have to. Just make it a pyramid with one divison at the top. Sadly I don't think it'll happen.
|
It definitely needs more leagues. In ICCUP there are 12 different ranks, and even though it practically ignores the skill levels of more than 90% of stacraft players, which would all have D-, despite having wildly different skill levels(i.e. you could have a D- having 100% win rate against lower D- players, if everyone played on ICCUP), and still there's a huge difference between A and A- or D and D+
In SC2 there are several leagues for what would be D- players and the total is just 5 differnet leagues... obviously there would be a huge difference between low plat compared to a top plat, just like between top and low golds.
There needs to be a huge amount of leagues, in order to have players with similar skill levels in each, just adding a diamond league will not change things at all, you will have to come up with at least 20 different league names and that may not even be enough considering player skill variance is huge and it will probably increase over time.
That's why I was suggesting making the league number matter. Platinum 1 should be strictly better than platinum 100, but they also shouldn't be strictly better than platinum 2 or the skill variance would be way too small, i.e. one win would launch you from last to first in your plat division and players would have to change division every game to match their current skill rating.
|
Not sure if this was posted yet.
"In the future, there will be a "Pro League" composed of the top players in the ladder. Players will be invited to the "Pro League" using the same methods that determine current promotions between leagues. This league will not be divided by divisions and will have a set number of participants each ladder season. For the best players, this will be where they can see exactly how they compare to the other top competitors." - Blizzard poster
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=24401857779&pageNo=1&sid=5000#7
|
I like the idea of a pyramid setup for the leagues. I don't think that's implemented now - if it was, there would be better players in platinum, and this is just not the case at all.
The demographic bit is flawed because people who sign up for the sc2 beta are inherently more interested in the game than the average noob; and 90 percent is an exaggerated number to begin with. I think the real issue is an overwhelming majority of people suck at starcraft, especially in the united states.
|
On April 30 2010 02:14 Roniii wrote:
Unobtainium league FTW
Probably the best suggestion I've ever read.
|
|
|
On April 30 2010 04:42 Polemarch wrote:Yes, here's the problem: (Not to scale, obviously) This wide skill gap reduces the feeling of competitiveness within the platinum divisions. The league distribution should keep the skill gap within each division roughly the same; this can be done with a more pyramidal shape. Edit: This is a problem with their system, not just the fact that it's beta. The player pool will grow and people will get better over time, but the same general skill distribution will remain, unless we start hitting skill ceilings, which would be horrible. (SC1 essentially has an infinite skill ceiling.)
I don't think your graph is accurate.
A bad copper player could never win against an average bronze player, yet the skill difference in your graph is only marginal. A good gold player could easily beat an average platin player, but your graph shows a pretty big skill difference. I think the biggest skill differences are both in copper and in platinum level, because in those leagues you'll find the absolut best and absolut worst players.
It should more look like that:
![[image loading]](http://i42.tinypic.com/i3e6i1.jpg)
As already mentioned there will be a Pro League for the best anyway.
|
My only real problem with this system is that everyone is in this tiny random group of people and it's hard to see how you are doing overall. Why not just rank everyone on the same ladder in a straight-forward manner? If you want to prevent bad players from playing good players, fine keep the leagues. But at least withing the league, have an easy way of telling how you're actually doing.
|
The pro league is nice but there still needs to be another league above plat and below the pro league. Maybe diamond league? The skill range of plat right now is super wide compared to any other league it seems like.
|
the real platinums are the 1400-1500+ players imho and especially with over 60 % win ratio
|
Sc2 is a bit more like wc3 in that you can win more games through cheese. It makes the metagame more interesting and rewards guts/gambles. Wc3 pros lost all the time to no name players. Being able to go on the forums and say "look I beat grubby with tier 1 firelord tower!" is good for the game imo. People who don't have all day to practice will still be motivated to play.
They should still allow normal players to play against the pro league, you'd see them win at a decent rate.
|
On April 30 2010 02:04 MorroW wrote:
i think it would be better if they just made so fewer ppl got to be plat rather than adding a new rank
Since there's a good difference between copper and bronze and bronze and silver etc. I really disagree with that.
|
I'm really glad that bad players can find good and even games but the problem is that within the platinum league it's one of the biggest skill differences I have ever seen. Low platinum you can play with your mouse only doing retarded shit and still win. Then if you jump up to 1600 points you suddenly play with the top % and it becomes very difficult. I really think it needs to be more like a pyramid. Like iccup not many % played from B- and up but there was a VERY distinct difference between each rank up there same as it was on the lower ones. Right now platinum kinda covers everyone decent and upwards and it's simply doesn't work.
The division crap should be removed in platinum too once the game is released everyone in platinum could care less about being no1 in a division with no good players, it's so uneeven right now between different divisions some have great competition and others only have like 1-3 good players. Or you could make it so that the divisions are stacked in platinum instead of being the same.
|
I've been ranked from bronze to platinum over various resets. Whether there needs to be a rhodium league or whatever can't really be determined by the beta population. I get matched against players up to gold from bronze and down to silver from plat, and the quality of the games are rarely determined by the league of my opponent. I think, as has been said, once the release happens and we have an actual player base, the leagues will make more sense and have a better distribution. Of course if it doesn't, then there should be something to fix it up.
|
While I'm reasonably new to competative play myself, I thought I'd just add my sentiment here.
I recently qualified for silver, I started the beta as copper, got to bronze the reset after. I know this makes me a skillless newbie, and yeah thats completely true. However the way I got into silver troubled me a bit. The first 3 matches I played against people who thought a hand full of marines/zerglings/zealots were an awesome attack force around 8 minutes in. The 4th game my opponent tossed (more on this later) and the 5th game was over before it started, atleast for me.
On the 4th game I checked up the player that "had to leave" around 30 seconds into the game. As it turned out the 3 matches before me after the latest reset he lost aswell. All 3 of them under 30 seconds. Now thinking this was just a fluke I went into that 5th game and I started as Favored. Awesome I thought. Up untill I got my ass bunker rushed like the newbie I am and lost within 5 minutes. Which was kind of odd. I checked up this player and he had lost his first 5 placement matches within 30 seconds aswell and then began a winning streak against copper/bronze players. Then it dawned on me... Achievement whores. Owh yeah I got placed into silver while I probably should have been bronze because of achievement whores.
Personally I found it sad that a former plat player would go the lenght of getting achievements by boosting "new" players to higher ranks first, then demolishing them for points after the placements. So I hope they put a far bigger minimum game cap on when one can even start getting achievements.
On the other side of the court (you plat's out there) A common complaint is that the leagues are too similar in size. However also think about it this way, what if plat was really just the top 2-5%? Would you be willing to wait ages to even get an equal level matchup? Or would faster games just be better even if you face off against a lower ranked platinum player? Ofcourse I realise that the league placement should be a reflection of your skill and you feel that lesser players in the same league diminishes your percieved skill. But as others have pointed out; once it goes live and a huge amount of "real" plat players enter the scene all the bad plat's will be pushed down to gold, all the bad golds go to silver, and I get to try my hand again in bronze or copper ;-).
As Day[9] would say:
Think about it!
|
On April 30 2010 19:37 PainBall wrote:
the real platinums are the 1400-1500+ players imho and especially with over 60 % win ratio
I think my division has one person over 1400, maybe two; nobody is over 1500.
The problem with pulling numbers out of your ass is they're never useful.
|
Am I the only one who is getting a somewhat sad vibe that people on here need to feel like they're worth something? Does it really matter if someone who you can beat 8 times out of 10 is in the same league as you? Do you really need the ability to say "I'm in ____ league!" to validate yourself?
Just play the game, get better, have fun, and win. Who the hell cares what league you're in?
|
On April 30 2010 21:20 Craton wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 19:37 PainBall wrote:
the real platinums are the 1400-1500+ players imho and especially with over 60 % win ratio I think my division has one person over 1400, maybe two; nobody is over 1500. The problem with pulling numbers out of your ass is they're never useful.
eh he's kinda right. As a C- (non all in... lool) Zerg there is a vast difference between 1000-1300 Plat and 1500+ and just because your sample (division) of 100/5000 doesn't contain anyone over 1400 might actually move to make his point even further.
Not to mention I think that you're all kinda of missing the point. Things like Platinum League, Gold League and so on don't actually physically exist. They are just labels, if they didn't exist the skill levels of players wouldn't be any different. This is just an argument over how you want to label things, it has very little to nothing to do w/ the actual distribution of skill. This is because players are the ones w/ skills and not ladder systems. Regardless of how you label or organize them, the top 10% is the top 10%.
The reason so many platinum players suck is because most people in general suck. The top 10% of Iccup is vastly different than the top10% of Battle.net (Bnet2 has more people online at any time now, than Iccup has ever had). Most of us TL/Iccup/SC1 crowd are in that top10% even if your barely D+
I think ELO is the far more important aspect here. I don't like the ambiguity when comparing say a 2100 Gold player to a 1400 Platinum player. This is the biggest flaw in this system in my opinion. There isn't a clear indicator of where the line is drawn.
|
On April 30 2010 16:58 cartoon]x wrote:
The demographic bit is flawed because people who sign up for the sc2 beta are inherently more interested in the game than the average noob; and 90 percent is an exaggerated number to begin with. I think the real issue is an overwhelming majority of people suck at starcraft, especially in the united states.
Being intrested in the SC2 beta does not make one a awesome player though ;-) There are heaps of people, including myself, that are intrested but appear to be playing blindfolded with both hands behind the back and sound off. Atleast when you compare it to the platinum players. And while this is a competative Starcraft site, don't forget that a part of those newbie players might just pick the game up for the singleplayer and are just biding their time in the copper/bronze leagues. If you remove these players from those leagues then the bottom of silver/gold/platinum would fill in that gap in turn (bottom bronze to copper, bottom silver to bronze etc) which in turn picks off the bottom platinum players and raise the average platinum skill by a bit.
|
^you should learn to think in trends instead of reducing everything to specific, isolated examples which land you confused and constantly refuting evidence. Demographics are statistical, and statistics should be thought about in trends.
On April 30 2010 18:45 Evelynn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 04:42 Polemarch wrote:Yes, here's the problem: (Not to scale, obviously) This wide skill gap reduces the feeling of competitiveness within the platinum divisions. The league distribution should keep the skill gap within each division roughly the same; this can be done with a more pyramidal shape. Edit: This is a problem with their system, not just the fact that it's beta. The player pool will grow and people will get better over time, but the same general skill distribution will remain, unless we start hitting skill ceilings, which would be horrible. (SC1 essentially has an infinite skill ceiling.) I don't think your graph is accurate. A bad copper player could never win against an average bronze player, yet the skill difference in your graph is only marginal. A good gold player could easily beat an average platin player, but your graph shows a pretty big skill difference. I think the biggest skill differences are both in copper and in platinum level, because in those leagues you'll find the absolut best and absolut worst players.
A good gold player should not be able to beat an average platinum player, and this is only the case because the placement methods of 5 games is not incredibly accurate. However, as things start to shake out over 100 games or so the gold players who should of been in platinum will move up, & vice versa for the crappy platinum players; then an average or even a low platinum player should beat a top ranked gold player. At least that is assuming the leagues are sorted in a logical manner ...
What is more, once the game goes live there will be a ton more people searching - I would expect blizzard to revise their parameters for who we match in games. When this happens it's plausible top 10 platinums will get paired with other top 10 platinums, instead of with rank 40 platinums. It may even be that the distant pairing is a direct result of unavailable peers - blizzard did say the search tool starts with immediate peers and branches outward as the search progresses. Also, as the game is played we will see the skills of players increase relative to the skills of ourselves... many of us study the game rather intensely and it has accelerated our learning curve.
|
It will probably even out after release but regardless you shouldn't be able to qualify into platinum after 5 games...its not exactly hard to win 5 placement games against random people. I got the beta 2 days ago and I won all my placement games in like 10 min now I'm rank 20 platinum. Against true top 20 platinum people I would get annihilated cause I'm really not that great lol...maybe mid level gold at most if the ranking system was truly accurate.
|
When the game is released there will be the "Proleague":
|
On April 30 2010 02:14 Zelniq wrote:
yeah what people have been saying is right. it feels like right now they have an even distribution when it should be more like a pyramid
I don't think you guys are getting it right.
The situation we have now is like having ranks only up to A- on ICC.
Some may argue that the solution is to make A- harder to reach, but that would obviously make one of the lower ranks very stretched when it comes to skill levels.
If you make plat harder to reach, there will be a bunch of one sided games in gold.
If you push it further down - there will be a bunch of one sided games in silver.
You get the point.
I just don't believe how many of you agree that the solution is to make platinum harder to reach, like there's a chance in hell that only 5 leagues will be enough to separate players into pools of equal skill, when ICCup had 13!!(14 if you count the late addition 'noob rank' ) and people were STILL complaining about the jump from B+ to A- iirc.
Obviously a level above Platinum is the solution.
|
I thing how to do some turnaments on battle.net and first 3 places go to some new diamond or kinda that lague.tournament should be just for members of platinum, or just make some turnament in gold if u want to get to platinum...
|
Would it help to limit the leagues people can be placed into after their first 5 games? Have it sort of like so:
Veteran: Platinum (5-0 / 4-1), Gold (3-2 / 2-3) or Silver (1-4 / 0-5)
Experienced: Gold (5-0 / 4-1), Silver (3-2 / 2-3) or Bronze (1-4 / 0-5)
New to RTS: Silver (5-0 / 4-1), Bronze (3-2 / 2-3) or Copper (1-4 / 0-5)
It would counter things like my own situation where after the first reset I chose experienced, played 3 silver and 2 bronze players and ended up in platinum because I went 5-0, a pretty bizarre result in my eyes.
|
Get rid of the divisions; I cannot phantom a more annoying system.
|
I'd like to know how that setting even affects placement matches. I selected Veteran the last 2 or 3 times and still fought people who barely knew what RTS meant in my first games.
On April 30 2010 21:46 Motiva wrote:
I think ELO is the far more important aspect here. I don't like the ambiguity when comparing say a 2100 Gold player to a 1400 Platinum player. This is the biggest flaw in this system in my opinion. There isn't a clear indicator of where the line is drawn.
I agree with this. I'd like to have an easier time distinguishing ability, but right now everything is very nebulous, both intra-plat and inter-division.
|
|
|
I honestly can't wait when retail comes and the same people complaining about getting into platinum is so easy not being able to remain there in the long term. News Flash guys, 5 placement matches aren't meant to TRULY determine your skill, just to give you an easier starting point if you come into the game with previous skill. It was not so long ago people complaining that 10 placement matches were too much.
We'll be seeing many "I was in Platinum in beta and now I can't get out of silver" threads I suspect.
|
Yeah I wouldn't expect this to be the final version of this ladder. It is kind of fun though, lose a game lose 2-5 points win a game and gain like 20-42 depending on rested points. More placements is the answer. I said it before and I will say it again. 15-20 is all that you need, if you win your placement game you face someone doing them that is the same record as you, so your last game could be a 14-0 vs a 14-0 game. This would only work though if they made time frames to get your placements done for an upcoming season, if you miss the time frame you start in copper for start of the season.
|
In response to the post above.
We don't want platinum players starting in copper because they missed the pre-season placement. I wouldn't be surprised if many players skipped the placement and just went to own noobs in copper. Blizzard is trying to stop good players from owning noobs. They don't want to give them an easy way to play against them on the ladder.
|
On May 01 2010 03:33 Zack1900 wrote:
In response to the above post.
We don't want platinum players starting in copper because they missed the pre-season placement. I wouldn't be surprised if many players skipped the placement and just went to own noobs in copper. Blizzard is trying to stop good players from owning noobs. They don't want to give them an easy way to play against them on the ladder.
What is the difference from throwing your placementsÉ (for some reason É =`s a question mark on my keyboard...) If the system works well you won`t stay in a league that you are too good for very long.
|
On May 01 2010 03:35 Kralic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2010 03:33 Zack1900 wrote:
In response to the above post.
We don't want platinum players starting in copper because they missed the pre-season placement. I wouldn't be surprised if many players skipped the placement and just went to own noobs in copper. Blizzard is trying to stop good players from owning noobs. They don't want to give them an easy way to play against them on the ladder. What is the difference from throwing your placementsÉ (for some reason É =`s a question mark on my keyboard...) If the system works well you won`t stay in a league that you are too good for very long.
look in "Control Panel", then some sort of "Language" option, then set your keyboard language to English Canada (US), or English US (without Canada).
|
*wishes it was just a copy of iccup ladder system*
|
On April 30 2010 21:35 Kishime wrote:
Am I the only one who is getting a somewhat sad vibe that people on here need to feel like they're worth something? Does it really matter if someone who you can beat 8 times out of 10 is in the same league as you? Do you really need the ability to say "I'm in ____ league!" to validate yourself?
Just play the game, get better, have fun, and win. Who the hell cares what league you're in?
It's not for bragging rights, it's that this contributes to the matchmaking system being broken. More even matches would be more fun instead of half the matches being completely rape one way or the other.
On May 01 2010 05:23 leetchaos wrote:
*wishes it was just a copy of iccup ladder system*
ICCUP ladder + a placement match system + single accounts per cdkey = win.
|
On May 01 2010 05:29 zomgzergrush wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 21:35 Kishime wrote:
Am I the only one who is getting a somewhat sad vibe that people on here need to feel like they're worth something? Does it really matter if someone who you can beat 8 times out of 10 is in the same league as you? Do you really need the ability to say "I'm in ____ league!" to validate yourself?
Just play the game, get better, have fun, and win. Who the hell cares what league you're in? It's not for bragging rights, it's that this contributes to the matchmaking system being broken. More even matches would be more fun instead of half the matches being completely rape one way or the other. Show nested quote +On May 01 2010 05:23 leetchaos wrote:
*wishes it was just a copy of iccup ladder system* ICCUP ladder + a placement match system + single accounts per cdkey = win.
I agree with this, wholeheartedly. The way ICCUP does it is not just great, nay, excellent. It seems like Blizzard is trying to do something similar (with a grading system), but it doesn't look to be working, at least not in the beta as far as Platinum is concerned.
What is the difference from throwing your placementsÉ (for some reason É =`s a question mark on my keyboard...) If the system works well you won`t stay in a league that you are too good for very long.
The difference is that if the player is required to throw some games, it would at least require more effort, which could be a deterrant. I'm not saying it'll work, but it may help.
Overall, I'm wondering
1. Why do they have several divisions of each rank?
2. Why don't they have a unified ELO stat?
I thought at first it might be to make casual players not feel like they suck as bad, but being placed in Copper league is no different than having an ELO of 325 when players start with 1000.
It just makes no sense to me.
|
I despise ICCUP's ladder system.
The bottom is way too clogged: there is too much skill variance among D-level players. Part of this is the problem that everyone starts at D so you get people who aren't actually D level stomping on people who are. Thankfully this is largely only a problem at the start of each season. Even without that though, there's ridiculous skill variance at D level. Now, maybe there's this same degree of skill variance at other levels; I wouldn't know because I'm D, but the fact that I can't log on ICCUP and expect to get a reasonably competitive game is a lot of why I stopped playing BW. I also think that there are just way too many players at D level (someone posted stats some time ago showing nearly 50% of all accounts with games played are D-level, and well over 50% are either D or below).
Admittedly this would be solved by a good matchmaking system that differentiates among players in the same rank better (whereas ICCUP has zero matchmaking system). ICCUP's ranking is not a good way to do this though, because:
You rank up if you win 1/3 of your games at D level on maps of the week. ICCUP rewards mass gaming far more than it rewards actually being good until you get to higher ranks. This leads to the interesting conclusion that anyone who belongs at D level (wins 50% of the time against D level players) actually isn't D-level ... if everyone just massed games you'd have everyone ranking up until you have almost no one at D or D+ or anywhere until you hit the rank where you need 50% winrate to stabilize.
I've always thought that people just played on ICCUP because it's all there was. I've never thought it was a good ladder.
|
On May 01 2010 05:40 Dromar wrote:
I thought at first it might be to make casual players not feel like they suck as bad, but being placed in Copper league is no different than having an ELO of 325 when players start with 1000.
It just makes no sense to me.
Because metals are shiny and people like shiny things more than small numbers.
|
TossFloss
Canada606 Posts
D+ outranks ~66% of ICCUP. Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=99016
Blizzard needs to either slice off the top 25-30% of Platinum into another league (pro league?) OR implement some regular re-shuffling of divisions to evenly redistribute the top 30% of platinum players across divisions.
|
We all play starcraft for fun, and most of us TLers play for the competition, we wouldn't care about this site if we didn't. I'm sure that we would like to think that we are in the top 10% and that we should be the only ones in a specific league because a lot of people in lower plat just don't seem like D+ players in ICCup.
I think that all players should get a chance to get their butt utterly destroyed by a top plat player just so they know how far they have to go to really be good. The only way to get better at the game is to play people better than you. Because we are on the top end of the curve, we feel like we shouldn't be playing chobo newbs, and we should only be grouped with the best, and play with the best.
I enjoy a game where I get my ass kicked, I add that person to my friends list, and they help me improve my game. It's happened a few times, and its really improved my gameplay. I have done the same thing with a few people who I completely destroyed, and they are getting better, and have more fun playing the game now. If the ranks were more isolated, this probably wouldn't be happening so much.
Regardless, once you get to top level play, you just play against the top players in custom games anyways because you have to hammer SPECIFIC techs, timings, and BOs out vs specific other tech timings and BOs. You can't practice that stuff against random platnium ladder players.
That said, we definitely need a few of non-placement grades that are achievement based (not the game achievements, score achievements) after platinum. Hopefully, these top non-placement grades still pairs you up with people who are platinum, so you can have more social experience with players, because camaraderie is important in a game like SC2.
Help a fellow newbie plat out, teach him how to play so you and the rest of us can play against more highly skilled players.
|
On May 01 2010 05:50 crate wrote:
I despise ICCUP's ladder system.
The bottom is way too clogged: there is too much skill variance among D-level players. Part of this is the problem that everyone starts at D so you get people who aren't actually D level stomping on people who are. Thankfully this is largely only a problem at the start of each season. Even without that though, there's ridiculous skill variance at D level. Now, maybe there's this same degree of skill variance at other levels; I wouldn't know because I'm D, but the fact that I can't log on ICCUP and expect to get a reasonably competitive game is a lot of why I stopped playing BW. I also think that there are just way too many players at D level (someone posted stats some time ago showing nearly 50% of all accounts with games played are D-level, and well over 50% are either D or below).
Admittedly this would be solved by a good matchmaking system that differentiates among players in the same rank better (whereas ICCUP has zero matchmaking system). ICCUP's ranking is not a good way to do this though, because:
You rank up if you win 1/3 of your games at D level on maps of the week. ICCUP rewards mass gaming far more than it rewards actually being good until you get to higher ranks. This leads to the interesting conclusion that anyone who belongs at D level (wins 50% of the time against D level players) actually isn't D-level ... if everyone just massed games you'd have everyone ranking up until you have almost no one at D or D+ or anywhere until you hit the rank where you need 50% winrate to stabilize.
I've always thought that people just played on ICCUP because it's all there was. I've never thought it was a good ladder.
That's true.
Mass gaming will get you up to B- before you actually have to win half your games. Then with map of the week I think you can squeeze a bit more out too.
And I guess I didn't mention this in my post before, but I do like the auto-matchmaking to place players in an approximate rank from the beginning.
|
just got my key
after 1 hour practice on the very easy ai
i go 4-0 placement atm and im baaad, really
average apm peaked in game 4 with 41..first game i was under 30 avg
wonder if im gonna end up in platinum and loose everything now
|
The highest rank w/e it is, platinum or if they make a new one, should not be part of placing. If you get 5-0, you should be placed in the 2nd to top rank, gold for now. Everyone needs to play to get into platinum or the top. It just makes more sense that way so you won't see at bunch of 5-0's in the platinum ladder.
|
I just don't want the entire ladder system minus 5% to cater only to the casual player. Competitive players should have multiple leagues. Division size should be increase significantly and/or more leagues should be added, among other major changes. If they indeed want this to be THE E-sport, they are going to have to give the players who treat it as such their own distinguished 'channels' within the ladder system. The best way to do that aside from tournaments (which Blizzard damn well better be planning ) seems to be to give them more exclusive leagues.
|
On May 01 2010 05:50 crate wrote:
I despise ICCUP's ladder system.
The bottom is way too clogged: there is too much skill variance among D-level players. Part of this is the problem that everyone starts at D so you get people who aren't actually D level stomping on people who are. Thankfully this is largely only a problem at the start of each season. Even without that though, there's ridiculous skill variance at D level. Now, maybe there's this same degree of skill variance at other levels; I wouldn't know because I'm D, but the fact that I can't log on ICCUP and expect to get a reasonably competitive game is a lot of why I stopped playing BW. I also think that there are just way too many players at D level (someone posted stats some time ago showing nearly 50% of all accounts with games played are D-level, and well over 50% are either D or below).
Admittedly this would be solved by a good matchmaking system that differentiates among players in the same rank better (whereas ICCUP has zero matchmaking system). ICCUP's ranking is not a good way to do this though, because:
You rank up if you win 1/3 of your games at D level on maps of the week. ICCUP rewards mass gaming far more than it rewards actually being good until you get to higher ranks. This leads to the interesting conclusion that anyone who belongs at D level (wins 50% of the time against D level players) actually isn't D-level ... if everyone just massed games you'd have everyone ranking up until you have almost no one at D or D+ or anywhere until you hit the rank where you need 50% winrate to stabilize.
I've always thought that people just played on ICCUP because it's all there was. I've never thought it was a good ladder.
Like I said, factor in the placement matches + single account per key + no clearstats and suddenly the 9999 koreans spamming new accounts grinding builds at D level are gone.
|
Russian Federation124 Posts
i agree with the decision to make the plat and gold devision harder to get into, forcing population of silver and copper increase
|
Yeah, seeing entire Platinum divisions filled with people at 5-0 is a load of crap.
|
On May 01 2010 06:12 Rucky wrote:
The highest rank w/e it is, platinum or if they make a new one, should not be part of placing. If you get 5-0, you should be placed in the 2nd to top rank, gold for now. Everyone needs to play to get into platinum or the top. It just makes more sense that way so you won't see at bunch of 5-0's in the platinum ladder.
this, i like the fact of having to earn your way into platinum via ladder, going 5-0 in placement is way too easy
|
What difference does it make? As one of the top people in my platinum division I've played almost exclusively against players who are good. I've played husky a few times, mio twice, and a bunch of players who are unknown to me who are way better than those people and who crushed me. I've also played a few games where I completely decimate my opponent, but those games are rare. Almost all of my games are with other people who are at least challenging and I have a decent chance against (i.e., my winrate against them is probably between 40%-60%). Who cares if there are a bunch of terrible players in platinum that I won't ever play against? It doesn't harm me, and it lets them feel good about themselves.
|
|
|
platinum division 51 rank 9.... almost only 5-0 players there
damn this last game he left almost at once when my scout got to his base, all the other 4 was 30 minute ones
now i must prepare to loose alot and jump down to gold pretty quick
cant be good with just 5 placement matches when even i can do 5.0 !
|
I think the problem is Bronze/Copper players aren't likely to play much, so it feels very top heavy. So user distribution should look like a pyramid, and the games played should come out roughly equal across all leagues.
|
On May 01 2010 06:23 PJA wrote:
What difference does it make? As one of the top people in my platinum division I've played almost exclusively against players who are good. I've played husky a few times, mio twice, and a bunch of players who are unknown to me who are way better than those people and who crushed me. I've also played a few games where I completely decimate my opponent, but those games are rare. Almost all of my games are with other people who are at least challenging and I have a decent chance against (i.e., my winrate against them is probably between 40%-60%). Who cares if there are a bunch of terrible players in platinum that I won't ever play against? It doesn't harm me, and it lets them feel good about themselves.
The significance there is that leagues themselves should hold some meaning to the competitive player. Casual players should feel good about getting into silver.
|
Would be nice if saying "I'm platinum" at least meant something... or almost meant something you know... Like what if you could say you're platinum and people would be know you're a decent player.
Right now being in Platinum means you could be the best or very bad, but less bad than WoW noobies.
|
I'm in Gold with 6-1 and likely would have landed in Platinum if it wasn't for a disconnect on my part. Which is kinda hilarious because I am a 50 apm Random player and was D rank in Broodwar, so I expected to get into Bronze. This isn't quite right I guess
Here's my proposal to improve the placement mechanics: have players give a self estimation before going into placement matches. Say I estimate my skill to be Silver level. Instead of starting out against complete noobs, my first two opponents are Silver players. Should I beat them both, maybe the matchmaking mixes in a Gold player, and so on. Your rank should not only depend on your record over your first 5 games, but also on the quality of your opponents.
Also, I agree with the people who say Platinum should not be reachable by only placement matches.
|
On April 30 2010 06:48 PokePill wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2010 05:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 30 2010 04:34 Chairman Ray wrote: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. Not even close. You mean higher right? I'd say a D-/D player would max out around 1800 or 1900.
A D- player would max out around ~1200 in platinum. Realize that a D- on Iccup was often times worse than the average Bnet player. A D player might be considered better than the average bnet player, but NOT by much.
|
The leagues will balance out when vanilla is released
|
With persistent accounts (no resetting) and matchmaking, the iccup ladder system seems near flawless to me. I just want to play people who are the same skill as me. A system like iccup would facilitate that best.
|
YEs there is an FING problem, I am a gold player #4 and im playing a plat player right now first one ive played, and ive defeated him i have 90% of my bases no peons though and no air, he has a command center in the corner of the map and has been afk for like 2 hours he just comes back and says ill bbiab WTF this is stupid and in my opinion this dude should get banned sure you can lift off but i think blizz would agree this is a gross misuse of the mechanic
edit: heh sorry for the rant
|
IMO (as many have said) Plat should be very difficult to get into
I think they should require far more than 5 games to get into plat league
Although it may be tedious at first but I think it would be best for creating a more competitive upper league w/o so many waste of time games
Perhaps if we go 5-0 in our placement matches, maximum placement would be gold and be required to be re-evaluated after 25 games
(this will be better for release while in beta it may be annoying since there are more frequent resets)
|
Rhodium is the only metal more expensive per mass than platinum.
Then you also have gold Iridium, Osmium, Ruthenium, and etcs.
|
I'm in the Amex black card division.
You know, the like 5 pound thick-ass black card?
yah...
|
This just seems like a horrible-horrible thread. There are alot of people out there that don't visit teamliquid to get up-to-date information about new sc2 strats everyday. I've been plat since the beginning of beta, but I don't think anything is wrong with the system at hand. I wouldn't mind a change, but I think the system fits, and when the game is released it will be fine. Why is everyone complaining? Half the people in plat here prob won't be in plat a month after the release of the game with the influx of new players.
|
United States4126 Posts
On May 01 2010 13:48 Batssa wrote:
This just seems like a horrible-horrible thread. There are alot of people out there that don't visit teamliquid to get up-to-date information about new sc2 strats everyday. I've been plat since the beginning of beta, but I don't think anything is wrong with the system at hand. I wouldn't mind a change, but I think the system fits, and when the game is released it will be fine. Why is everyone complaining? Half the people in plat here prob won't be in plat a month after the release of the game with the influx of new players.
Actually, with so many new players entering at the release, the skill level required to get into plat will be lowered a lot more. Why? Because of all the people who will buy the game, there's going to be a LOT more new players than seasoned RTS players, filling up the lower leagues and pushing everyone else into plat. With the system as it is now, more noobs make it easier for any general person to get into plat.
I have a friend who was silver before the last reset, and after the reset, he got into platinum because he said his placement matches were so much easier.
|
Actually, with so many new players entering at the release, the skill level required to get into plat will be lowered a lot more. Why? Because of all the people who will buy the game, there's going to be a LOT more new players than seasoned RTS players, filling up the lower leagues and pushing everyone else into plat. With the system as it is now, more noobs make it easier for any general person to get into plat.
I have a friend who was silver before the last reset, and after the reset, he got into platinum because he said his placement matches were so much easier.
I did say a month after release, maybe give it two to three months. Plat will include players that are really good, and players that aren't so great... but just better than the tier below them. I don't get why everyone is up in arms about this.
|
When the game is released to the masses, the skill level of platinum will drop. That is obvious and shouldn't require an explanation. Also, it will stay this way for much longer than 1 or 2 months. Probably more like 1 or 2 years, maybe longer.
|
This is my first RTS, and only played the beta for a few weeks, started in bronze and now in plat, so there is clearly something wrong. I think recently its been alot easier to get into plat because of all the new players getting into the beta. But still..
|
On May 01 2010 13:30 Prometheus2011 wrote:
I'm in the Amex black card division.
You know, the like 5 pound thick-ass black card?
yah...
Nu uh.
|
yeah I realized this, it took me about 30 games total from just starting out and I am now in platinum.
|
When the actual game is released, I expect platinum league to be much more competitive. Right now, you can easily get top 10 plat with just one good cheese B.O. and maybe 40 APM as long as you play enough.
|
I don't think we should judge it on how it is now.
|
I think the ranking system is pretty legit. I've always been ranked well in 1v1 and generally have around a 1:1 win:loss ratio. Its not perfect though, for example me and my buddy where able to rank platinum 2v2 even though I'm not all that good and he is actually pretty bad. The promotion thing is a little weird too, at one point I was in a gold 2v2 league with a buddy and we were not doing so well, sitting down at around the 80's, and then we got our shit together, tweaked our start a little, won like 5 games in a row, got up to place 30 or something, and then got demoted to silver???? Overall I think its better than like any other internet match up system so far though.
|
I think that the league system isn't there for the better players but for the bad players. A noob will basically see it as it being 4 skill levels, he might start out in copper and after a short bit of playing he ends up in bronze! That is one third of the way to platinum!!! to him that would seem like a huge leap which is good for getting people hooked. Once they are hooked they can live with working for their rankups but at first it is good to have this handhelding.
Everyone decent will end up in platinum, but seriously do any of you guys really need this? I mean, the copper->bronze->silver->gold->platinum is basically the steps a noob have to climb before he can play, a tutorial if you will.
|
On May 01 2010 06:39 Mr.E wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2010 06:23 PJA wrote:
What difference does it make? As one of the top people in my platinum division I've played almost exclusively against players who are good. I've played husky a few times, mio twice, and a bunch of players who are unknown to me who are way better than those people and who crushed me. I've also played a few games where I completely decimate my opponent, but those games are rare. Almost all of my games are with other people who are at least challenging and I have a decent chance against (i.e., my winrate against them is probably between 40%-60%). Who cares if there are a bunch of terrible players in platinum that I won't ever play against? It doesn't harm me, and it lets them feel good about themselves. The significance there is that leagues themselves should hold some meaning to the competitive player. Casual players should feel good about getting into silver.
Competitive players can find meaning in their rating within platinum. Do competitive players really need blizzard to put them in a different league to feel good about themselves? I would be more satisfied personally with just a straight up elo rating system and no rating divisions, but casual players obviously want different divisions.
|
On May 01 2010 12:35 sprockets2000 wrote:
YEs there is an FING problem, I am a gold player #4 and im playing a plat player right now first one ive played, and ive defeated him i have 90% of my bases no peons though and no air, he has a command center in the corner of the map and has been afk for like 2 hours he just comes back and says ill bbiab WTF this is stupid and in my opinion this dude should get banned sure you can lift off but i think blizz would agree this is a gross misuse of the mechanic
edit: heh sorry for the rant
lol you didn't win, and he didn't lose anymore than you did.
It's a draw.
|
I agree, I did my placement matches and went 2-3. I didn't realize the hotkeys would be so different and it took a few games to figure things out. I haven't played many games but I am going against platinum players right now that are really bad. One protoss tryed to sneak a probe into my base after my scv was already building my depot, then when I killed in his warping pylon he went outside my base to set up a cannon "contain". Only problem was my base had 2 entrances and my scouting scv built a factory in his base. His strategy is a grade 2 strat and there is no chance of success with this in broodwar or sc2. He was ranked ~40 in a platinum division.
|
Many people here are, frankly, being elitist. Others have said this, but people must realize that anybody who played on ICCUP was at least in the top 10% of BW players. Not to mention that the way ICCUP was designed drove newbies away. When I first got into ICCUP, I was owned by people ranked D-, needless to say I just waited for SCII. Now though, I started in copper, but have made my way to the top of bronze, and I am now on the verge of hitting silver. In ICCUP, gaining rank was nearly impossible, even after I played +300 games in a 3 month time period. I never had competitive matches in ICCUP, now I actually have epic and fun games. Remember, SCII is not all about the top players.
|
I wrote up a long post about the problems I see with this system on the official beta forums, but the stupid character limit cut off like 2/3 of it so I posted it here instead. I voted yes, which should be clear to anyone who reads my little manifesto about leagues:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=122886
|
There will be pro-league which will be above platinum right ?
Anyone knows how will be possible to get there ?
|
On May 02 2010 04:47 Rabbet wrote:
I agree, I did my placement matches and went 2-3. I didn't realize the hotkeys would be so different and it took a few games to figure things out. I haven't played many games but I am going against platinum players right now that are really bad. One protoss tryed to sneak a probe into my base after my scv was already building my depot, then when I killed in his warping pylon he went outside my base to set up a cannon "contain". Only problem was my base had 2 entrances and my scouting scv built a factory in his base. His strategy is a grade 2 strat and there is no chance of success with this in broodwar or sc2. He was ranked ~40 in a platinum division.
Hahaha I think we have played the same guy before. I've played probably 5 guys that are in the plat division that just have a gimmick to win. I literally played a guy that tried to 6 pool me and when it failed he immediately quit.
|
I have this sneaking suspicion that when the game is released and all the people that never got into beta get it, they will flood copper and bronze league and then gold and platinum will feel more like their supposed to.
|
On May 02 2010 06:09 scott desu wrote:
I have this sneaking suspicion that when the game is released and all the people that never got into beta get it, they will flood copper and bronze league and then gold and platinum will feel more like their supposed to.
That's exactly what I'm thinking
|
It seems to me beta keys have been going out at a faster rate than ever before. I got placed in bronze my 2nd time placing(1st time i got silver) Took me like 18 wins to make it to silver, got placed immediately in the top 10 of my silver division which about 80% of is new players fresh from their placement matches. Even though i am ranked 10th I have the best win loss ratio for my number of wins. I actually have better record ( more wins and fewer losses) than the #1 in my div. He must just have more rested points than me.
What blizzard needs to work on is the favored system(my opponent is always favored) And I think when you are at a low level of points a win or loss streak should move you more quickly between leagues. Say once you've played 15-20 games your position will be more concrete.
|
Depends whether Platinum is percentage based or a fixed number of players. If it's like the top 1000 players then it'll get progressively more competitive post-launch, but if it's like the top 10% or something there should just be more and more platinum brackets -- and the top 10% of those won't even play each other that often.
|
I think it's silly you can get placed directly in platinum. You should just start at the lowest and work your way up. Right now its like:
5-0 placement = plat
4-1 placement = gold
3-2 placement = silver
etc...
The problem is 4 out of your 5 placement matches are usually against people that have zero clue what they are doing. As long as you have a basic understanding of the game or a canned BO you are going to win 5/5 most of the time. The system then places you in plat when you really don't belong there.
If you go 5/5 in placement matches then the best you should get is silver and then you have to work your way up through silver/gold to plat. This would stop the platinum divisions from being bloated with all of these 5-0 inactive teams.
|
I went 4-1 and was placed in platinum. I lost to a bronze player (ninja banshees everywhere !!) but defeated two gold players. But I agree that platinum shouldn't be placed directly.
|
It might even out but there certainly has to have some limit in the platinum division to make it worthwhile.
I just got beta 1 week ago (Friday, when soon they had the reset), but I did play some offline SC II. Before reset I went 4-1 and got into Gold. After reset I only got into bronze. Today I went Platinum; lulz noobies.
Just to explain why I'm laughing: I played minimal SC I (and that was a while ago too + I mostly did 20 min no rush if ya kno what i meann). Now I figured to make SC II my new game and in a week I was able to become platinum with minimal experience. Now mind you, I have extensive background in games (not RTS though), but there is no reason I should be platinum within a week and I will have NO problem maintaining it. Overall counting all the games this week + any game in any division, I've played about 70+ games (including non-ranked). Took about 50 to grind into platinum from bronze.
As you can see its my first post and I am just now leeching into the SC communities ( hi! ). And I am good at games, but shizzle, it shouldn't be this easy. In addition, people shouldn't be crying too much about placement matches, but rather worry about how saturated Platinum will get.
|
I'm terrible, but I'm in platinum. Worse, I'm not even the worst guy in Platinum. I just got 10pool-mass ling'd as Terran. When I repaired the wall and killed literally 20 zerglings with marauders behind the wall, and then moved out with 6 marauders, he instaquit. Really?
|
As long as you have 100 different divisions (more like thousands once it goes live) it's not going to matter what league you are in, or even what your rank is in your division.
The only thing that DOES matter is your hidden rating, which is of course funny to think about (the only thing that really tells you how good you are is the one that's hidden).
Whether or not they allow only 5% of the population into platinum or 20%, there's still going to be wide gap in skill. Just be satisfied that when the game is live, there will be a much larger pool of players to pull from, so you won't spend as much time playing platinum baddies like me. Sure, we'll still exist and we'll still be in platinum, but we'll just be playing other less excellent players like ourselves.
The only thing that they absolutely need to fix is to make placement take 10-20 matches. Winning 4-5 games in a row isn't that difficult, especially when the ladder first gets reset and every one is considered to be a silver player by default.
|
Does it matter what you place in? Won't most people be playing in online ladders anyways like Iccup? ....
|
On May 03 2010 13:29 JreL209 wrote:
Does it matter what you place in? Won't most people be playing in online ladders anyways like Iccup? ....
Not unless Blizzard allows non Bnet servers, which they don't seem particularly inclined to do.
|
On May 02 2010 06:09 scott desu wrote:
I have this sneaking suspicion that when the game is released and all the people that never got into beta get it, they will flood copper and bronze league and then gold and platinum will feel more like their supposed to.
you mean they will flood copper and bronze then all the noobs who are currently in copper and bronze will flood platinum.
|
Platinum is going to be even less skilled once the game is released.
There will be an influx of terribad players filling up the copper and bronze leagues, and everyone who has played beta will essentially be "bumped up" in rank to make room for the newbies.
My friend is terrible at SC2. Hes never played BW and he has 20 APM, and hes only played SC2 for 2 weeks. Hes in platinum.
Personally I think the proleague is not enough to solve this problem. I'd like to see a system more like ICCUP, where the higher ranks have less overall players. That way, getting to Platinum or Gold would actually mean something.
|
Once people start mass gaming 1v1 ladder(retail), you will see skill separate much like iccup.
The pool(which is still extremely small) is skewed quite a bit due to all the WoW newbs who have never played a RTS game before.
|
would it be a terrible idea to not be able to place in platinum? I.E. highest you can get placed(after your 5 games) is gold. Then from there depending on your next (arbitrary number let's say 25) you're re-evaluated and then get placed into platinum?
|
Here is my little story.
I played my placement matches, won 5/5 and got placed in plat. This is basically because i have watched so much sc2 online before i got my key that i knew what to do and what to build. Anyway, in one day i managed to go from plat to rank 2 copper league.
I have only been playing for about 4 days and have 35 wins 38 loss, AND i am playing people in silver league.
Maybe i do belong in copper league but blizzard just can't make their mind up. I constantly vs people in silver league. Unfair?
|
On May 03 2010 14:41 Amuze wrote:
Here is my little story.
I played my placement matches, won 5/5 and got placed in plat. This is basically because i have watched so much sc2 online before i got my key that i knew what to do and what to build. Anyway, in one day i managed to go from plat to rank 2 copper league.
I have only been playing for about 4 days and have 35 wins 38 loss, AND i am playing people in silver league.
Maybe i do belong in copper league but blizzard just can't make their mind up. I constantly vs people in silver league. Unfair?
Sounds like ur the zerg who 4 pooled me into being placed in gold league... I'm 1.5k rating which would put me top 10 platinum in division except i stick at #1 gold for eternity
|
Making it so you can't get into platinum until you've crushed a certain amount of silvernoobs / goldnoobs would kind of defeat the purpose of leagues... Besides, people saying there's a big skill difference in platinum have clearly never seen silver or lower people play.
Plat is seriously the top 10% of battle.net, even though for an ex-iccup player it doesnt seem that way, because if you think being "noob" means being D/D- on iccup, you need to realize sc2 has a totally new type of noob and D- players are pretty damned gosu in comparison
|
I want to get some good games vs top plat but don't won't to spend the few hours of grinding. Needs to be more leagues. Something like top 2% above plat and under pro would be good. Top 2% is a lot of players when you think about the millions of sc players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
