|
On August 25 2010 07:57 larjarse wrote:
I dont understand the point of relating a third party BW ladder with mostly highly skilled players with in depth knowledge of the game, to the SC2 official Battle.net 2.0 ladder. You need to sign up to use ICCup, and it connects you to a different server.
And if you really want to have a top level discussion with top level players, hit them up on a messaging program. In my opinion, creating topics that only allow certain people to participate BUT everyone to view is just shitty and elitist. TL is growing up, and some noobs will too, thats just how it's going to be. TL is a great resource for ALL SC2 players, but the more you already know, the less you are going to learn reading discussions in the strategy forum.
From an elitist standpoint, many diamond players just suck... However, there are millions of people on battle.net 2.0, so if you are in diamond league and crushing everyone, then feel good about it because you are one of the top SC2 players. It seems as if you are trying to compare a SC2 standard league [diamond], open to all who purchased the game, to an expert league where high level players typically play in tournaments that have large cash pool prizes. (For example, many cash prize BW tourneys accepted only players who have C or better, or something like that)
The real truth about Diamond League and the current state of the SC2 league system
The game is new, and there are ALOT of new players. Those really good at BW (esp those who have been playing for 10 years) are really good at SC2 and practically guaranteed to be a Diamond level player. The number of people who moved from BW to SC2 is a verrry small fraction compaired to the number of players who are playing StarCraft for the first time. This means there will be a big skill gap, even in the diamond league. Lower diamond players will be exponentially better than high level diamond players.
Ultimately due to the way SC2 works and find opponents for you in theory simply mass games get someone into high-Diamond regardless of their skill. I think the whole thing that should be taken away from the OP is quite simple, don't be afraid to discuss balance and theory but when a person who is better than you proves you wrong, accept it and more importantly learn from it. Also like was said before if you are even coming to TL regularly and posting you are probably already far better than the mass majority of players despite your rank and score. Essentially until the ladder really evens out and more and more pros start holding Diamond ranks from lesser players it should be accepted that it really has no bearing on a players skill. I mean in TL:A! the players who won weren't always in Diamond, and some of the non-Diamond players played far superior to most Diamond people.
|
On August 25 2010 07:17 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 07:10 gdroxor wrote:On August 25 2010 06:59 Chill wrote:On August 25 2010 06:47 gdroxor wrote:On August 25 2010 05:43 Chill wrote:On August 25 2010 05:31 dTox wrote:On August 25 2010 05:28 gdroxor wrote:On August 25 2010 05:00 B1nary wrote:On August 25 2010 04:53 gdroxor wrote:On August 25 2010 02:28 Dragonsven wrote:
Yet another post describing why diamond players are not good and only old school players should comment on anything. I was expecting a rule on post count by the end. You should realize this kind of elitism does not work and you will end up driving all the new posters away once the initial boost from SC2 ends. This. The comparisons are getting stale. No one is saying only old-school players should comment. The OP is saying that if something a top player says contradicts what you (or some 800-Diamond player) is saying, chances are, he's right and you're wrong. Do you disagree with that? New people come here looking for advice, not looking to give it. And it's not like the strategy forums comprises the entirety of TL. My issue is the need for the old guard to constantly revalidate their superiority ad-nauseum. Yes, many have been on the site forever, followed hundreds of BW games, seen the game evolve time and time again. I understand and respect that. What I don't understand is the recurring compulsion to put new members in their place. If you truly believe yourselves to be better, more seasoned players, then why do these threads keep popping up? One would wonder if some of the older members feel threatened by SC2 and its playerbase. Nail. Head. On. It's got nothing to do with new players. You inferred that. Edit: I actually find it scary how many new TL members are inferring that they are being slighted against when in reality it is criticism for 99.999999% of the TL membership. Edit 2: To take this further, if a new TL member is scolded by a veteran, it seems they ignore the criticism altogether and play the victim. Again - the issue is not criticism directly. It's rather obvious when someone new to the RTS scene who just qualified for silver says X, and a B+ iCCup player who is at the top of their diamond division and has been playing the beta since day one says Y, Y is the vast majority of the time correct. The issue I have is with threads like this. There is no point to them other than to point out the discrepancy between old and new players and making implications that one is inherently better than the other. Nobody is getting game advice. Nobody is being corrected on an errant thought on Protoss strategy. The only reason this thread exists is to draw a line in the sand. That is what I take issue with. Again, there's no reference to old nor new in the OP. Reread it. It all references rank and game knowledge. What it says and what it implies are similar enough. The OP doesn't need to spell out in clear language what he's trying to say, sort of a neat thing about language, that. But let's give him the benefit of the doubt. What was the purpose of the thread? Was it really to make an easy to follow handy dandy guide to what iCCup rank coincides with what position in diamond a person is? There's been plenty of threads either directly or indirectly comparing the two already. In fact, I'm pretty sure you said something during TL Attack (that I enjoyed) that was very similar, and I'm paraphrasing here - "Getting diamond in SC2 is the skill equivalent to logging on to iCCup". So this is not a new idea. The difference is that the OP actually wrote something in clear language and not a garbled mess of bad analogies. I read it and thought the intention was pretty clear - consider the person, their evidence and their content before their rank. I considered the iCCup analogy one that was made in passing, not the meat of the post.
I also think, just like you, that the basic message behind what Saracen said in the OP, is just what you detailed in the last post. (To the opposite of 250 posts in this topic that say. ''totally agree with the OP, diamond doesnt mean much'' which is obviously not the message contained in the OP)
I have two problems though if that is truly what Saracen tried to explain.
1. I think that ''consider the person, their evidence and their content before their rank'' is a pretty open statement that nobody in his right mind would not agree with. With that said, I have to ask myself what is the purpose of this topic.
There are two points to this. First, I feel like this is simply a topic to state the obvious. I could just go and start a topic about ''Cheesing every game doesnt increase your skill as a player''. If you think about it, this statement is true, and most people would agree with it, so why would I go start a topic about that ? What is the use of saying something that is generally accepted by the vast majority of people. (The fact that they do it or not is irrevelant, just as people will still keep posting crap posts in strategy saying they are 100% sure its good because they have 500pts in diamond, people will keep on cheesing and think they are good.)
Second part to this is the fact that this was created as a TOPIC in the sc2general forum
I wouldnt have mind if he actually wrote a blog about this. I dont like when people write just to state some very obvious things, but if its in a blog I guess its not so bad. The big problem is that he did this in a topic on the forums, place where it should be discussed. (Whats the use of discussing something that is so largely accepted ?)
I also dont understand the need for a title such as ''The truth about Diamond League'', if the point of this topic was simply to warn people to be careful when reading/writing strategy discussions and to give a bit more attention to posts made by higher level players.
On August 25 2010 07:41 I_Love_Bacon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 06:43 TurpinOS wrote:On August 25 2010 06:33 I_Love_Bacon wrote:On August 25 2010 05:52 Saracen wrote:On August 25 2010 05:30 Scorcher2k wrote:On August 25 2010 05:14 Saracen wrote:On August 25 2010 05:02 Jayrod wrote:
While I agree understanding the game doesnt mean you have to be a top player its for different reasons... reasons that make sense. Take a look at ANY professional sport. Even if I have never picked up a basketball in my entire life, I can understand the game, and theoretically could become the greatest basketball strategist in the world. For this reason, its quite possible that a Computer (E) level player could understand Broodwar more than a B+ or something... let alone in starcraft 2. This is not true at all (especially the comparison you made). It's one of the more common sentiments that's floating around these forums, and it's only there to make less-successful players feel better about themselves. But it's really not true. In this game, there's nothing that can replace experience. Not by watching Day[9], not by watching replays, not by watching livestreams. I really don't know what else I can say to convince you of this. All of the top players know this, and its people who believe otherwise that keep them from posting on these forums. Teamliquid is all about promoting open discussion and getting viewpoints from lots of different people. But it's people who believe they are master strategists but who put zero effort into the game that kill discussions. Because even though they think they know what's going on, the truth is they don't. They don't know timings. They don't know production capabilities. They don't know about responding to situations given limited information. The game's a lot different when you're playing it than when you're watching it. So you're saying that it is impossible to study a game in order to understand it? You really need to get the elitism in check. Why are you trying to single out players who by normal standards are good at this game and actually do understand it much better than the vast majority of the population to feel like shit instead of simply focusing on the know-it-alls who assert their opinions as fact. You know, the people crying "boo hoo elitism" are getting even more annoying than the alleged elitists. Yes, I am saying you have to play the damn game in order to understand it. Is it really so hard to come to terms with this concept? Is it really so hard to see that if you don't macro and micro properly, you're not going to be able to comment well on the viability of certain strategies since there are going to be flaws in your experience that dilute your perception of what works and what doesn't? Is it so hard to believe that no matter how many Day[9] dailies or HD/Husky commentaries you watch, you'll never have valuable insight to give unless you actually play the game? Here's I'll give you a little analogy to help you out. Let's say you love computer programming. You read every single book you can get your hands on about it. But you've never touched a computer in your life. Do you honestly think you're going to be able to write good code? Absolutely not. I promise you if you spend one ounce of the time you dedicate to theorycrafting and then whining when your ideas get shot down and complaining about elitism to actually sitting down and playing the game, you would understand what I'm saying. I really hate to break it to you, but there's no such thing as "strategizing on a diamond level" when your mechanics are stuck in silver. Believe it or not, these things go hand in hand. With experience, you gain both, not just one or the other. There's no such thing as mindless macrobots who just pump out units and win but don't understand what they're doing. Nor is there such a thing as a master strategist who is only held back by a lack of fundamentals. You would realize this if you actually played the game. Let me tell you something. I respect bronze, silver, and gold players who work hard to get better at the game. I respect platinum and diamond players who put in an effort. But I absolutely do not respect people who think they can sit back, watch a few "super-in-depth HD/Husky commentaries," and think they're veritable authorities at the game. I came. Why is elitism shunned upon? If you're on teamliquid, guess what, you're probably already in the top 20% of SC2 players. The simple fact that you're on this site trying to learn at all will put you leaps and bounds above others. I guess we're all eltists because we're not actually tanking our ratings to hang around in bronze lever games and give pointers to people. We're trying to learn and be better at the game and which to discuss the finer points of strategy with other GOOD players... Fuck our elitest views. I'm gonna' go hang out on b-net chat rooms for my strategy advice... oh wait. ''We're trying to learn and be better at the game and which to discuss the finer points of strategy with other GOOD players... '' Quoting you here, totally agree with this, I just dont understand how you ALSO agreed with the OP saying that ''900 pt diamond should not argue with top players since they will be right'' I dont see much discussion if I just take for cash everything QXC/drewbie/idra and company say. Also, if experience is the only factor when it comes to the games knowledge, what is the point of the SC2 Strategy section ? Why do people discuss things ? Shouldnt the most experienced player give its advice, and then everyone blindly go play more ? As others have stated, unless you're in a position to actually debate reasonably with the top players then you have no business trying to do so. .
So if MasterAsian says that there is an imbalance in ZvT, everyone should simply agree and not debate ? What is the point of the forums then ?
Why couldnt a Gold player come give his input on this subject and argue against MasterAsia..... might just turn out to bring a new argument to the table that hasnt been seen. (Even though thats probably not going to happen, still, thats the point of discussing.)
|
On August 25 2010 07:44 zatic wrote:
Just read this. Your BW SC2 comparison is pretty accurate from what I can tell.
About the SC2 strat forum. I really wish it would be better. For a while I enforced the bad OP rule pretty stricktly, but it just doesn't help. There is just so much spam.
Invite only: Has been discussed and found impractical and / or was received rather negatively. As you said it certainly runs against the principles TL was run by so far.
Have you considered a "Needs Improvement" forum. Threads that arnt desired quality but arnt really bad enough to outright close could be moved to this forum. The thread creaters could then work to bring the thread up to snuff. Possibly others could also post and offer ways that the OP can be improved.
I say this because there have been several times where I have had a thread closed and than after talking with the moderators (and getting their input about how to improve it) ive been able to put allot more effort into the OP. Many times this has resulted in very successful threads. I feel that this type of interaction helps me learn how to improve the quality of my own posts and maybe it could help others.
Are there bad posters, of course there are. But I feel the big problem TL faces right now is a bunch of new posters who could contribute allot to the community but need help in learning how to post better. Banning/silencing them isnt the best option nor is letting them continue to post low quality. We need some system that helps all these posters realize their full potential while drawing them closer (not farther) into the TL community.
|
On August 25 2010 07:51 Yurie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 07:48 Spartan wrote:
I laugh at the dissage on fastest map possible players. I can't believe such ignorance is still prevalent. Educate us, please.
HasHe has always been a FMP player leading all the way up until SC2 came out. He's never played non-money in SC1. DeAtHRoW was originally a FMP player also. Both of them hover around the 25-35 ranks in NA (according to SC2Ranks.com). aBstract is in the same boat as HasHe and is ranked 60ish in NA. There's probably other names in the top 100 alone that are FMP players, but I probably don't recognize them. I was a FMP player for years also. I stopped 1v1ing in SC2 about 2 weeks ago, but I'm still resting at 650ish in diamond. I'm #2 in random 2v2 diamond in my division and 90ish in NA; me and my girlfriend (she played FMP also) are 150ish in 2v2 diamond in NA. Yes, I'll agree that the majority of FMP players are gold/platinum league quality, but there's also a very significant number that are diamond quality.
|
My opinion of myself has dropped considerably since reading this thread.
|
yea some of the best fastest players have pretty decent macro/apm so it carriers over to SC2 well.
|
On August 25 2010 08:11 EleanorRIgby wrote:
yea some of the best fastest players have pretty decent macro/apm so it carriers over to SC2 well.
See what you did there 
|
As a 600 rating Diamond I agree =p I feel awful
|
Elitistjerks came up a lot -- remember that EJ main goal is to boil down a video game into math, where as TL has a much more involved. TL is a community of starcraft players, EJ is a digital lab.
|
On August 25 2010 08:11 EleanorRIgby wrote:
yea some of the best fastest players have pretty decent macro/apm so it carriers over to SC2 well.
It "carries over" because there isn't much macro to do, so as long as you have some sort of macro skills, you will be fine. Starcraft 2 is all about strategy and decision making rather than the macro game that was BW.
|
I totally agree with the OP. Im in diamond and I feel like i'm winning less games because I don't stick to set build orders and all-in every game, but I also feel like im learning in the right direction because of it.
|
Are there bad posters, of course there are. But I feel the big problem TL faces right now is a bunch of new posters who could contribute allot to the community but need help in learning how to post better. Banning/silencing them isnt the best option nor is letting them continue to post low quality. We need some system that helps all these posters realize their full potential while drawing them closer (not farther) into the TL community.
From what i have seen mods only ban either rude, arrogant or useless, sarcastic wanna-be-witty posts. I don't know maybe i'm asshole but i'm completely ok with that. You don't need 'system' to be a decent person on the forum. If you are, however, talking about what could be considered "stupid" questions, i think forum members are quite supportive and ask person to post replays etc. But thats just my observations. I'm quite newbie on TL. Also we got quite far from the topic of the OP 
|
On August 25 2010 07:26 oskuboi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 07:21 3clipse wrote:
I really hate these "600pt = D+" comparisons. Bw and sc2 are two very different games in very different stages of their development which are ranked on very different ladders. You cannot translate one into the other. I've beaten former B bw players and lost to former D- bw players. There's no standard measure of skill; apm is inadequate, winrate is inadequate, etc. It's also tough to compare a percentile ranking because the sc2 ladder incorporates the full population while iccup was and is a fairly elite, self-selecting group.
That said, your point is solid, Saracen. The game is in its infancy and very few players have developed the understanding necessary to criticize the game's best. The worth of all-in strategies is inflated and will win more games now than any other time because timings and capabilities are not yet well established. All opinions must be taken with a grain of salt at this time. Im prety sure that he doesnt means that if u were D+ in bw u are 600pt now. He ment that with same ammount of skill/knowing the game 600pt here would be D+ in sc1 imo
Yes, I know. It's still an invalid comparison.
|
obviously players are bad because the game is new. i'm in plat (damn thing won't promote me kind of plat), and i play against very bad diamond players often. i try not to be one to judge, but often i'll run into "that protoss". you know, "that protoss"? the one who has never played a straight up game in his life and relies on early void rays to win games? and if his void rays fail he either leaves the game outright or tries to transition out of it in a way that you would expect someone who has never played starcraft before in their life to do? yet, many of them are in diamond.
so i feel that while players may not be placed where they theoretically belong, i don't think that's the fault of the ladder system or anything. it's just because the game is young. once more people start learning more and more about the game, the ladder will become more representative.
in fact, i'd be willing to bet that in a year, gold and silver league will be housing players of the same skill as many low/mid level dia players today (no offense to dia players. you have to admit though, a lot of them are pretty bad)
|
I agree with the rankings.
As I was D+ or so, I fall pretty much into high-mid diamond.
|
Lol I agree with you Saracen, I was at best low D+ on Iccup and I'm mid high Diamond in SC2, they really need to do something about this ladder system.
|
On August 25 2010 08:24 RoyalCheese wrote:Show nested quote +Are there bad posters, of course there are. But I feel the big problem TL faces right now is a bunch of new posters who could contribute allot to the community but need help in learning how to post better. Banning/silencing them isnt the best option nor is letting them continue to post low quality. We need some system that helps all these posters realize their full potential while drawing them closer (not farther) into the TL community. From what i have seen mods only ban either rude, arrogant or useless, sarcastic wanna-be-witty posts. I don't know maybe i'm asshole but i'm completely ok with that. You don't need 'system' to be a decent person on the forum. If you are, however, talking about what could be considered "stupid" questions, i think forum members are quite supportive and ask person to post replays etc. But thats just my observations. I'm quite newbie on TL. Also we got quite far from the topic of the OP
Well same for the issue outlined in the OP. Their should be a standard where all players are allowed to contribute their thoughts but each poster should do so while recognizing their limitations and that they are one player among many. Its primarily an attitude problem of posters thinking that what they see is the gods truth. And that problem doesnt stem from where they stand on the ladder but rather how much they respect thier fellow community members. That latter is what needs improvement.
|
This post is very true and i agree with almost everything. Was A rank zerg A- rank terran and SC1 i find myself doing only customs because the ladder is very hokey feeling. Even high ranked players seem to do the most illogical builds that aren't necessarily all-in, but just dont make any sense, but they are still high rank because it works with the wattered down player base.
|
On August 25 2010 08:08 TurpinOS wrote:
So if MasterAsian says that there is an imbalance in ZvT, everyone should simply agree and not debate ? What is the point of the forums then ?
Why couldnt a Gold player come give his input on this subject and argue against MasterAsia..... might just turn out to bring a new argument to the table that hasnt been seen. (Even though thats probably not going to happen, still, thats the point of discussing.)
I specifically say if you don't have anything to add in terms of statistics, proof, replays of high level, whatever... then if a legit great player suggests you're wrong then you'd either better have a really, really good reply or accept that perhaps you're in the wrong.
Suggesting a new strat or view isn't the same as telling somebody they're wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
