|
If we are in the realm of WoW-analogies then I'd like to bring up Elitist Jerks forum for reference of how TL strategy forum should be run.
Few threads dedicated to the big topics "TvZ Mech" or "Protoss 2 gate" and not "Why did I lose this battle", "How do I counter Collossus".
A post in each thread must add content, if not you get a warning.
Arguments are not tolerated unless based on proof, if not they will result in warning.
Repeating something that has already been stated results in a warning (even if it is a 100 page thread, read before you post), otherwise it results in a warning.
EJ forums are incredibly disrespectful of new people and new ideas, which may not be something TL wasn't to work towards, but for the Strategy forum this might be the right move, while leaving the rest of the forums as they are.
|
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 ? The guides on there are so much better than those shitty guides posted on Ensidias homepage. The mage one stands out. On EJ they go into numbers, give examples and are very critical at what they post. On Ensidia, its like "well i use it because i know its the best" - yeah cheers for that like.
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.
Yes there are some incredibly mathematically gifted posters at EJ. Then they make some unbelievably ludicrous assumption in their work that invalidates everything. EJ was good once, now it's a very closed community that rambles on about minutiae over flawed theories.
Comparing EJ to TL is a pretty good idea because EJ is exactly what you don't want TL to turn into. I'm not totally opposed to the OPs idea but I think EJ should be a cautionary tale, not an example of success.
The chances of me playing enough SC 2 to ever post in such a forum is zilch but I would be perfectly fine with just reading. Using ladder ranking is definitely problematic, I don't see racial balance being close enough for ladder ranking to be viable any time in the near future. A professionals only forum would be interesting but since 99.9% of the posters wouldn't qualify I doubt that will get used.
|
A "must be xxxpoint or higher in order to reply" thread creation option
|
I don't understand why there would even be a "no read" option. That's just horrible. Nevertheless, I do support a "pros talking only" section. First of all, it won't detract from site at all. Moreover, higher level players would be more inclined to "debate" about things.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 21 2010 15:48 Grond wrote:Show nested quote +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 ? The guides on there are so much better than those shitty guides posted on Ensidias homepage. The mage one stands out. On EJ they go into numbers, give examples and are very critical at what they post. On Ensidia, its like "well i use it because i know its the best" - yeah cheers for that like.
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. Yes there are some incredibly mathematically gifted posters at EJ. Then they make some unbelievably ludicrous assumption in their work that invalidates everything. EJ was good once, now it's a very closed community that rambles on about minutiae over flawed theories. Comparing EJ to TL is a pretty good idea because EJ is exactly what you don't want TL to turn into.
I agree completely. The value of EJ was in the spreadsheets and not much more beyond that. Theorycraft works well in WoW because it's so simple on the PvE front. You cannot reduce SC to an equation.
On September 21 2010 15:55 Karliath wrote:
I don't understand why there would even be a "no read" option.
How do you know it doesn't already exist? 
|
i think its a misconeception that being 1200 points diamond equals "pro" so the pool itself is questionable at best
|
I wouldn't be able to ever write in such a forum, but thats fine. I would enjoy reading a "pro sub forum". However I don't think its a good idea because the "regular!" forum would be cluttered with:
"In the pro-forum, they say XX, do you agree, discuss".
And thats not a particular fun community to be a part of. That would be like arenajunkies in WoW. Sure, its fun to read some of the thread, but not a particular fun forum.
|
An interesting idea, but it comes with a couple of problems that spring to mind.
The first is, how would you avoid the non-elite forums degrading into worthlessness? If an average user comes and looks for strategy advice, which one do you think they would look at: the "Elite Strategy Forums" or the "Regular Strategy Forums"? Of course they will go straight for the elite ones, and the others will be left with nothing. Even if the "elite" posters did venture into the regular forums every once in a while, all you would get is then posting "well I can post in the elite section so you all have to listen to me because I'm better" which is basically what it is now.
Second problem is, how on Earth would mods/etc. validate the posters who want to post in the elite forum? Force people to link their TL accounts to their BNet accounts? So what stops me from going onto SC2Ranks and picking a random 1200+ account and saying that is mine? It would be just blind luck as to whether they believed me or not. If the actual owner of that account then came along and wanted to post also, how would they decide whose account it actually was? Surely the only way to properly verify it at this point would be to go ingame and talk to them. So the mods would actually have to manually verify every one of the potential posters, of which they would get thousands and thousands, to decide. Then they would have to keep this up when the points level changes and new people move in and out of the required points ranges.
TL has a massive throughput for a gaming forum, and they would receive a LOT of legit and non-legit requests to posting access for the elite forum. I just don't see how it could feasibly be done without wasting hours of mod time every single day.
This would be a massive change to TL, it would basically change it from a public forum where people can discuss into a Think Tank which dispenses information.
|
Dont go to far with this... else its a good idea..
|
On September 21 2010 16:03 Jibba wrote:
You cannot reduce SC to an equation.
Obviously you can't model the whole game, but it feels like early build orders are a huge area of RTS games that is just waiting to be theory crafted out. Certainly you see a lot of discussion where someone posts a build and someone says "what if he makes X to counter?" and the thread derails into an argument over exactly how much of a threat that is. If we had a tool that could give us a definitive answer to exactly how many X you can have by time Y by finding the optimal build, rather than side tracking for 20 posts over how the person in the example replay was horrible and his build order sucked, that would improve matters.
|
|
|
Meh, I'd like this. I just got called a newbie by a self-proclaimed 'low level player', which to be honest is kind of annoying.
I'd much rather be called a newbie by high-level players.
|
The Ladder is a positive-sum game. This means that today's 1200 players will tomorrow be 1600 and even the 400 rating newbs will reach that static point in no time.
So the artficial barrier is flawed.
What I would suggest is making topics where pro-players can post (pro - as in TL decides who has the right to post, it can be tournament winners, or people acknowledged in their field (like Day9)) and everyone else can just read.
this is the only way to do it.
|
|
|
You cannot reduce SC to an equation.
Yes you could. The game itself is effectively a simulation governed by rules. Nevertheless, solutions would be stochastic and dependent on an enormous number of free parameters.
Battles would be much easier to simulate than the actual game, however. I could do it myself if I had a much better grasp of fluid dynamics and a few months of free time.
|
On September 21 2010 16:28 Hypatio wrote:Yes you could. The game itself is effectively a simulation governed by rules. Nevertheless, solutions would be stochastic and dependent on an enormous number of free parameters. Battles would be much easier to simulate than the actual game, however. I could do it myself if I had a much better grasp of fluid dynamics and a few months of free time.
I'd love to see the result of the community donating some money to fund a mathematical research project on SC2.
|
On September 21 2010 16:27 okrane wrote:
What I would suggest is making topics where pro-players can post (pro - as in TL decides who has the right to post, it can be tournament winners, or people acknowledged in their field (like Day9)) and everyone else can just read.
this is the only way to do it.
pro - as in TL decides
This is where it gets problematic to put it mildly.
|
The ladder cannot be a valid reference. Many world class players are temporarily inactive on the ladder, play custom games, experiment with multiple accounts, or have been on hiatus for some time but can still beat anybody. The thoughts of such people are invaluable.
What is the point in reading an argument which isn't self-supported enough to validate it, so you have to rely on the rank of the player to accept it?
I actually think the progamers and highest class players shouldn't have forum arguments - they tend to derail to bashing each other, it has happened so many times. At their skill level really the best proof is to play. It's rather the low/average players who learn things in discussions, because there are still many fundamentals they don't know, and they accept that.
|
And then the ladder resets and progamer x can't post cos he hasn't played enough ladder games to get the rating because he benefits more from custom games with practice partners can't post.
Didn't backread everything but yeah, this kinda makes it a silly idea to limit input based on ladder rankings, beyond any other issues one can conceive.
There is also the difference between knowledge and the ability to implement it of course.
|
if you're good enough to get invited to MLG/TL-invitational/GSL/etc... you can post... otherwise it's invite only from the people who are already allowed to post in the forum
just a thought 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
