EPT[VOTE] SC2 Player quality limits in order to post - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
| ||
NonY
8751 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:11 Archerofaiur wrote: I think both people are at fault, the original poster whose post didnt deserve respect and the repliers whose post further deteriorated the threads quality by being disrespectful. It is entirely possible to refute someones arguement without being disrespectful. If we had unlimited resources that might work. But when I'm going to visit the forums for 20 mins and I'm trying to maximize my productivity, it's better if I respond to the worthless post with "well fuck this guy he doesn't know what he's talking about" with 30 seconds of my time and then I spend my other 19 minutes 30 seconds putting effort into a worthwhile discussion. If I spent 20 mins making a few replays, noting specific times and writing a paragraph of explanation, all to tell someone why you can't stop a 6pool with a Force Field, then I've really wasted my resources. If I just say "sorry no you're flat-out wrong" then I'm being disrespectful but it's a perfectly reasonable response. And yeah it does come down to the skill level of the person I'm responding to. If HuK swears by something that I completely disagree with, I'll probably put in a ton of effort figuring out his perspective because I respect all the time and work and talent he's put in to becoming good at SC2. When I disagree with some scrub who has put in 1/100th of the effort I have, it's some reasonable disrespect. He hasn't put in his time and effort at becoming a top player so he better have something genius or it's not worth it (and there have been some posts with genius: increasing mining by 7%, fazing, etc). | ||
|
Sqq
Norway2023 Posts
Ensidia is a small bunch of cheating elitist who has done more harm to the community than good. Exploiting little mincebags who did anything to win, even if they knew it was cheating. You as an Ensidia member should never give critisism to a site like EJ who has helped the overall community more than you're guild will ever do. | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
a "no public write or read" is just silly though | ||
|
Koukalaka
United Kingdom80 Posts
If anyone has a method to beat Banshee/Marine/Raven timing pushes ... Please tell me.  On September 21 2010 06:24 Sqq wrote: lol at someone from Ensidia saying Elitist Jerks is visited by wannabes. Do you even stop and consider that alot of the number crunshing that you enjoyed so much often came from EJ ? Number crunching didn't get me world second Kil'jaeden kill, playing 72 hours in 5 days did. WoW isn't about numbers, it's about hours invested. More hours > more tries > more chance of success. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:23 Liquid`Tyler wrote: If we had unlimited resources that might work. But when I'm going to visit the forums for 20 mins and I'm trying to maximize my productivity, it's better if I respond to the worthless post with "well fuck this guy he doesn't know what he's talking about" with 30 seconds of my time and then I spend my other 19 minutes 30 seconds putting effort into a worthwhile discussion. If I spent 20 mins making a few replays, noting specific times and writing a paragraph of explanation, all to tell someone why you can't stop a 6pool with a Force Field, then I've really wasted my resources. If I just say "sorry no you're flat-out wrong" then I'm being disrespectful but it's a perfectly reasonable response. And yeah it does come down to the skill level of the person I'm responding to. If HuK swears by something that I completely disagree with, I'll probably put in a ton of effort figuring out his perspective because I respect all the time and work and talent he's put in to becoming good at SC2. When I disagree with some scrub who has put in 1/100th of the effort I have, it's some reasonable disrespect. He hasn't put in his time and effort at becoming a top player so he better have something genius or it's not worth it (and there have been some posts with genius: increasing mining by 7%, fazing, etc). Whats wrong with "no I dont agree with that and I dont think most other people do either" and move on? I think verbalizing that the guy should go get fucked is an excellent way to start a flame war, waste more of your time, and bring down the quality of the thread. | ||
|
Abdiel
52 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote: a "no public write or read" is just silly though Just gonna echo this point. Regardless of posting requirements, TL should always be the place where anyone can go to read what the top players are saying. | ||
|
aznhockeyboy16
United States558 Posts
| ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:26 Koukalaka wrote: A great example of people being an idiot is saying you can hold off a Banshee/Marine/Raven timing push by Phoenix and Zealots with Charge. As of current and playing at 1500-1600~ I cannot stop it. I always go gate > core > gate > robo in PvT (on short distance, on 4 players I go gate > core > expand > gate > gate > robo > council) because that Observer is a necessity. If I scout he's going marine/banshee/raven timing push, I'm already screwed because Phoenix/Chargelots/High Templar take too long from the time I've scouted to the time the push will hit my door. If anyone has a method to beat Banshee/Marine/Raven timing pushes ... Please tell me. Number crunching didn't get me world second Kil'jaeden kill, playing 72 hours in 5 days did. WoW isn't about numbers, it's about hours invested. More hours > more tries > more chance of success. I've played a couple ~1200ish diamond terrans as toss who did this and when I reviewed the replays, the only thing I could thing of that could have stopped it would be superior micro/superb force fields the only thing is, if you go too heavy on stalkers and they went heavy on marauders, IDK what to do. great force fields are the only thing I can think of (idk if you're specifically talking about high templar for the storms, but if you can feedback the raven before it gets PDD down it seems like that would help a ton, in addition to dealing decent dmg to the ravens/banshees - if you can get the high templar out in time) | ||
|
ShadowWolf
United States197 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:11 Liquid`Tyler wrote: Yeah but your evidence doesn't conclusively support your argument. It certainly might point in that direction but it's just too weak by itself. The question we have to focus on is whether or not TL.net can produce more quality discussion by allowing the best players to have discussions with themselves. It's about improvement. There are so many other variables influencing whether or not strategy discussion is good and so much uncertainty about how good things can be potentially. And these things make productive comparisons between AJ/EJ/TL very difficult. Suppose we agree that, all things considered, TL.net has better discussion than those forums. That would be a start. But "all things considered" doesn't really matter. What we want to consider is just this one thing -- a restricted posting section. AJ and EJ could be even worse without their posting requirements. Or perhaps they could be better without their posting requirements and TL.net could have a different nature. I guess I'm not following. The OP specifically mentions AJ as a case-in-point that restriction of posting rights is an effective way of increasing post quality. The posts on AJ itself demonstrate that it doesn't dramatically affect posting quality since you can compare the posts in the non-restricted section to the posts in the restricted section. That's the only comparison I was attempting to make between the two sites. The specific point is that there's no inherent advantage to restricting posting rights, so we'd have to really look in to it further than that. The idea I was trying to point out and disprove was that you can draw a line at 1200 and say "You must be this tall to ride" is sufficient to improve the quality of posts on the strategy section. I'd basically guarantee you that the only difference between that forum and the SC2 Strategy forum of today is that there would be fewer of them. I guess maybe that's enough, sometimes. Thinking on it, I do see the other side: you ( where you = forum ownership ) understand you can't moderate the posts, so you decide to just drop the number low enough that the noise level is sufficiently low that you can wade through the posts. 'Course then you just doubled the forums you moderated, so I don't know. The basic gist is that there's no evidence ( at least in my opinion ) from AJ that the quality will improve, but the idea is probably that, if the quantity is low enough, you can find good posts. EJ is a different animal - any forum can be like EJ, but it requires a heck of a dedication from forum mods that I'd personally never ever suggest they take on. | ||
|
Laggy
United States385 Posts
If I were to provide an answer to this bad quality fiasco it would be handing out more temp bans, but this still might be terribly wrong. -Laggy | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:26 Koukalaka wrote: Number crunching didn't get me world second Kil'jaeden kill, playing 72 hours in 5 days did. WoW isn't about numbers, it's about hours invested. More hours > more tries > more chance of success. Number crunching and playing 72 hours in 5 days would have got it faster. | ||
|
Darpa
Canada4413 Posts
That said, I think that forum would be barren. | ||
|
Koukalaka
United Kingdom80 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:33 kzn wrote: Number crunching and playing 72 hours in 5 days would have got it faster. Number crunching doesn't help when only you and another guild are on the boss, and neither guild is sharing information because they want a world first. Seriously, people who obsess over numbers shouldn't be playing games. My knowledge of math is limited to BoDMAS and I considered myself average at WoW, and I consider myself good/great at SC2. | ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
These ideas in theory seem good but the posting quality on AJ was still pretty rubish. The only thing that can make a forum informative, and enjoyable is good moderating. Elitist Jerks, has the best WoW information forum on the planet and there are no requirements to post, just insanely good moderating. short answer: good moderation >>>>> posting requirements. | ||
|
KiF1rE
United States964 Posts
The problem i have with the current ops ideas of a point limit are a bit obscure. As we all know the issue with blizzards ranking system ,and trying to figure out points and leagues on who is actually good or not is flawed logic. As the posts that are on the first page like "over 9000" while are trash and fall into a meme category do bring up a semi valid point. The problem that points will continue to inflate and we cant really set a limit using anything about the bnet 2.0 ladder system, as if we set a limit at 1500 points, we will be having this discussion again when your casual noob has broken 1500 points due to bonus points and other inflation issues. or of course the eventual ladder reset. | ||
|
Chronald
United States619 Posts
| ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:36 Koukalaka wrote: Number crunching doesn't help when only you and another guild are on the boss, and neither guild is sharing information because they want a world first. Seriously, people who obsess over numbers shouldn't be playing games. My knowledge of math is limited to BoDMAS and I considered myself average at WoW, and I consider myself good/great at SC2. Sure, a good deal of the number crunching that goes on at EJ is based on shared information and similar stuff, but not all of it is. Rawr was simply a simulation of a massively simplified boss fight and still generated some interesting conclusions that held up in most fights, despite not having any boss fight specifics in it. You have to be good at WoW to get the most out of the results of number crunching, but its not useless, and never will be. | ||
|
Koukalaka
United Kingdom80 Posts
| ||
|
sammler
United Kingdom381 Posts
| ||
| ||
