EPTI'm fine with that.
An Open Letter to Blizzard Regarding Divisions - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
I'm fine with that. | ||
|
BaltA
Norway849 Posts
| ||
|
omg.deus
Korea (South)150 Posts
On May 23 2010 21:12 Gibybo wrote: Really? Have you seen this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=126767 ? I mean turned off enough to the point that they won't continue playing the game. Competitive gamers will take the initiative as you have to make their own ranking system as well as tournament placings speak for themselves. There is no doubt in my mind that Blizzard is fully aware of the implications of their current ranking system. If their 'feel good' ranking system only makes 1 person continue playing that would have quit out of frustration then it is probably worth it in their eyes. I would love to have a global ranking system and feel that this politically-correct-feelgood-system is bullshit but Blizzard is not catering to the competitive community. | ||
|
danieldrsa
Brazil523 Posts
| ||
|
Noise
Australia47 Posts
| ||
|
Swagger
United States2 Posts
I'm so sick of having everything dumbed down so that we can all feel good about ourselves. It's already becoming like WoW and how everything that people once had and worked hard for were made accessible to all so that there was no individuality. I quit WoW once this happened. What's the point of playing when anyone and everyone can get everything? It takes away the fun for me and many others that I know. Many people that I've talked to want to see a ranking system. Many of these people are my irl friends who are in the copper and bronze league and STILL want a overall ranking system. They want to see where they're at overall so that they have motivation to get better and climb the rankings. You can keep the ranking system now, but somewhere on our profile they need to put a number representing our OVERALL rank. | ||
|
andyrichdale
New Zealand90 Posts
Add to that the ability to search any player's profile and view it regardless of whether they're online or offline. And a quick link to the top 100 of diamond league would be great too | ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
On May 22 2010 19:04 FrozenArbiter wrote: Signed a million times over. | ||
|
Jt4096
Australia78 Posts
I agree, I just had to wait so I could quote cool people. | ||
|
Enfold
United States110 Posts
| ||
|
RoboTeddy
United States1 Post
| ||
|
iSiN
United States1075 Posts
| ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
Btw is there any statement of blizzard why they did this divisions and leagues stuff? | ||
|
m3rciless
United States1476 Posts
On May 23 2010 20:17 ven wrote: I have no real problem with dividing the lower ladders into leagues as long as the top ladders have a proper one. At the moment it's a little bit too obfuscating but I think it's actually more manageable to assign a denominator to certain skill ranges than having some insane number that doesn't really hold any relative value anymore as soon as you hit the 4-digit mark. Look at iCCup for example. Most players will identify with their ladder rank and maybe their points but not their ladder position. The same thing could be done here. Add a few more leagues, get rid of the divisions in the top league and you're all set. Actually they already had a system exactly like that and - except for the smurfers which wouldn't be a problem anymore - it worked wonderfully. Warcraft 3's ladder only had the top 1000 players in it and that was far more than enough to hold everyone important. Back in 2005 or so before Blizzard screwed it up in an attempt to fix something that wasn't broken in the first place and levels still meant something the players who weren't in the top 150 or something like that also just compared each other via their ladder levels and everyone was happy. Excellent post. No divisions in diamond an a few more leagues is best of both worlds. Top players are happy because they are in the illustrious diamond with an absolute ranking, and everyone else is happybevause they get to be rank 5 in some division. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
On May 25 2010 00:25 m3rciless wrote: Excellent post. No divisions in diamond an a few more leagues is best of both worlds. Top players are happy because they are in the illustrious diamond with an absolute ranking, and everyone else is happybevause they get to be rank 5 in some division. Definitely. It's fun to work up the rankings, get a new shiny badge and metal, etc... and it's kind of neat that you play more games with people from your division, so that if they're at your level, you might start getting to know them. And to jockey with them for a higher rank in the division should be enjoyable. But once you're getting near the actual top, you should know where you stand. | ||
|
QueueQueue
Canada1000 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12248 Posts
On May 23 2010 20:17 ven wrote: I have no real problem with dividing the lower ladders into leagues as long as the top ladders have a proper one. At the moment it's a little bit too obfuscating but I think it's actually more manageable to assign a denominator to certain skill ranges than having some insane number that doesn't really hold any relative value anymore as soon as you hit the 4-digit mark. Look at iCCup for example. Most players will identify with their ladder rank and maybe their points but not their ladder position. The same thing could be done here. Add a few more leagues, get rid of the divisions in the top league and you're all set. Actually they already had a system exactly like that and - except for the smurfers which wouldn't be a problem anymore - it worked wonderfully. Warcraft 3's ladder only had the top 1000 players in it and that was far more than enough to hold everyone important. Back in 2005 or so before Blizzard screwed it up in an attempt to fix something that wasn't broken in the first place and levels still meant something the players who weren't in the top 150 or something like that also just compared each other via their ladder levels and everyone was happy. I sort of have a different take on this. On the one hand, you really are just another face in the crowd beyond a certain ranking, virtually to the point where it's meaningless. The gains and losses in a global ranking system on the low end cause you to jump tens, hundreds, even thousands of places up or down the ladder. It's not really relevant where you stand unless you're among the top players, which of course most people are not. Therefore, to maintain interest, realistic relative goals were created. I totally understand why they did it and personally I'm for it. It's much easier and more enjoyable to follow bread crumbs sometimes. If you had to take a trip across the US and some people are flying but you're walking, you're not going to reach your destination overnight like those other people. Therefore, you need to plan out each night how far you're going to travel, what supplies you'll need for the day, which town you're going to sleep in, until you eventually cross the entire country (we'll call this the Forrest Gump allusion, for better or for worse). Now, the beefs I have with the system are related to browsing the top players, but again this is something that may be rectified when the new pro league is created. The ranking in your division is also less meaningful since they removed the top 8 as being tournament qualifier positions, so there's less of a sense of achievement there. You can call the current implementation "catering to the casuals" if you like, and to some extent it is, but you also need to wonder whether seeing an absolute rank would be any more meaningful to your goals as a player, and it's arguable that it would be just as meaningful or less meaningful unless you're in the top percentile. To respond to your War3 reference, I thought the levels were inflated as a result of how the matchmaking system worked, where it searched for opponents based on level difference. If the top players were level 10-12 and everyone else was level 5-6, a very poor player could fight a top player. That's not effective matchmaking. However, by thinning out each level they are more likely to pair players who are closer in skill. If SC2 matchmaking works as I've guessed, more dynamically based on the population as a whole rather than arbitrary breakpoints, that's a much better system. | ||
|
commanderchobo
Canada53 Posts
thats how it was on the wc3 ladder, i remember being like man i had a good day today i got level 25 and am ranked 400th! im awesome! | ||
|
Spidinko
Slovakia1174 Posts
Most of TL community wouldn't be affected because we wouldn't be players at the bottom. Still, you have to think about bad players as well. They just want to have fun and compete with players of their own skill level. Serverwide ranking would just keep telling them they suck and that they are better of playing Sims. I would propose something else, though. Let's say that they will show current rankings of top, say, 10000 players. Or any other compromise would be good. They have to think about all players, even those with tactics such as 6 drone/probe/scv FE. | ||
|
jodogohoo
Canada2533 Posts
On May 25 2010 00:57 commanderchobo wrote: i wont lie. i laddered to get like top 10 in my division by just playing games, but the fact was i had no real desire to ladder since being first in division 65 is so meaningless. id rather be place 780 out of 1000 people then number 6 in division 65. thats how it was on the wc3 ladder, i remember being like man i had a good day today i got level 25 and am ranked 400th! im awesome! yeah, that shit was awesome, from being unranked into like the top 1000, and then realistically working your way down that number, feels good | ||
| ||
you are great 
