|
The quality of posts and discussions on TL has degraded and has been muddied by trolls and bronzies. There's even quotes from QXC and other pro-gamers where they say they don't even post here anymore because "Its hard to defend a point when you have 10 bronze level players arguing with you" Every Thread turns into either a flame war or a balance thread. Even constructive threads get derailed after the first couple pages.
What I want to know, Is how many of you would like a new sub-forum or a way to have some threads locked to high level players only. Much like the wow forum Arena Junkies, you link your TL identity to your bnet acct. It would remove some of the anonymity, as well as allow for some REALLY good theorizing.
Honestly, I don't even think I would be able to post in these threads, but i sure as hell would read the crap out them!
I'm not making this as an "open letter" or call to action for the mods here, I just want to get an idea of how many other people here feel the same as I do.
The point limits are defiantly not set in stone, they are more or less just placeholders.
Poll: Would you support a "high-end discussion only" posting method?A 1200pt+ pro-gamer only Subforum (no public write) (1762) 60% Leave it the way it is. (508) 17% A 1200pt+ pro-gamer only Subforum (no public read/write) (461) 16% No changes, but link TL to bnet profile so you know the quality of replies (135) 5% A "must be xxxpoint or higher in order to reply" thread creation option (53) 2% 2919 total votes Your vote: Would you support a "high-end discussion only" posting method? (Vote): A 1200pt+ pro-gamer only Subforum (no public read/write)
(Vote): A 1200pt+ pro-gamer only Subforum (no public write)
(Vote): A "must be xxxpoint or higher in order to reply" thread creation option
(Vote): No changes, but link TL to bnet profile so you know the quality of replies
(Vote): Leave it the way it is.
The point limits are defiantly not set in stone, they are more or less just placeholders.
edit:
case and point
On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000.
and yes, I removed the disclaimer at the top since it was such an issue for some people and could not stay on point.
|
1200+ is far from pro-gamer. I'm 1300+ and never got past C/C- on ICCUP. I would love to see a sub-forum devoid of total scrubs, though.
|
|
|
Yea, the points would defiantly be up for discussion, i just there 1200 in there as a placeholder
|
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000.
User was warned for this post
|
I agree, while I'm not quite 1200 yet (only about 1000) I think it would be nice to have a place for those who know the game, and are honestly trying to improve and be creative with strategies. So much crap in the Strategy forums right now, its unfortunate.
|
ITS OVER 9000!
User was warned for this post
|
It's not that you're looking for 1200+ to be equaling 'progamer' it's just that when you get to 1000 point plus you at least weed out a lot of useless info. with a 1000 or 1200 range you are geting at least a generally decent knowledge base and most of what will be posted will be of quality and thought out.
If you have ever been to the Arena Junkies forums it uses this sort of idea and overall I really feel it works out very well.
|
I actually wouldn't mind a sub-forum where only the top players have rights to post, but the rest of us can read. I think that'd be pretty educational.
|
Who would take the time out of their day to verify all this crap, or write the code that does it automatically, or prove that the account they are claiming is theirs is actually theirs?
etc
edit: Seems to me that all we need is a "featured threads" subforum of some kind. Quality guide threads can be featured there, endorsed by TL staff.
|
Wouldn't mind it all, not 100% convinced it's needed either though. I'd be interested to see what it turned out like, though.
|
I voted for option 2, but would prefer the option re-written as "A pro-gamer only subforum, no public write".
|
On September 21 2010 04:07 Slow Motion wrote:
I actually wouldn't mind a sub-forum where only the top players have rights to post, but the rest of us can read. I think that'd be pretty educational.
I agree
|
I think you'll be surprised by how many immature "pro" players there are.
|
There is no valid way to measure one's skill. 1200 points (or any arbitrary value for that matter) doesn't mean anything. Heck, I'm over 1200 points and I know for sure I'm nowhere near as good as the top guys are. In fact I participated my first tourney this weekend and after getting my ass handed I realized that you get a very poor experience from laddering.
Anyways, back on topic, I like the idea as I could learn a lot from it, but I don't think there's a viable way to measure one's skill, nor would pros care making their discussion publics. I certainly can't picture IdrA posting a [G] on some build or strategy he has been tinkering.
|
i always giggle when a thread starts with "hai gais im 800-9000 point diamond player, therefore my opinion matters"
you come of as a huge elitist in my eyes, in the end its the staff of TL that decides stuff like that, and tbh i don't think they want it to be a regime like that
|
Sounds nice on paper. (Yeah no idiots right?)
Total organisational nightmare with lotsa drama and other bullshit. TL wont implement it.
|
apart from the fact this thread is going nowhere fast already...how do you define a high level player?
the 'pros' don't have to post and discuss here because they know each other on a real life level most of the time anyways.
and ranking is totally unrelated to 'high level', people get to diamond just by cheesing you know?
sure there's a lot of stupid posting lately, but locking people out is the worst reaction imaginable for a public forum.
|
Who would vote no to this? People who want to write to top players for some reason? Its a feature with a higher level of accuracy. Imagine what the strategy forums could be. All of us lower players could learn a lot at the cost of what? Obviously it is elitism but that doesn't make it wrong. Player with a better reputation (pts) has ideas which are more valid than a say a bronze player and there is no escaping that. You will still have the old threads and high level players will still post there just as much but we can have something we rarely have; an intelligent discussion where everyone is an informed contributor.
|
Since everyone keeps getting bonus pool, the limitations of some kind of pro subforum would have to scale accordingly. And as elitist as this idea sounds, I think it'd be really helpful. At least until SC2 is a bit older and whining > problem-solving dies down.
|
|
|
I'm not a member of TL for that long (new with sc2) but I think the mods on here are the best, just take a look at the closed threads and the people banned everyday. I also don't think your idea is great, infact I'm very much against it, if someone is trolling on here be sure they won't stay here for much longer, again reffering to the bans.
As for the discussion parts with only allowing diamond level players to post, in my opinion that won't work as many many people that are in diamond don't deserve to be there, I'm mostlly lurking on these forums and beeing denied access to a part of a forum just because I don't play sc2 enough to be 1200+ doesn't sound very good to me.
QXC you've probablly heard of him, is a great great player and I'm sure if he makes a post about something he feels needs posting, people that post negative responses just for the sake of posting, without actually discussing the matter at hand again like I said won't stay here much longer. SOmme people that have been warned or banned for 2+ days have been banned for one line posts, trolling, or even just quoting the guy above, when they provide no feedback on the discussion they need to go.
(TLDR): TL.net is great, please keep it as it is.
|
Considering some of the first few responses I wouldn't mind this at all....
|
On September 21 2010 04:09 valc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:07 Slow Motion wrote:
I actually wouldn't mind a sub-forum where only the top players have rights to post, but the rest of us can read. I think that'd be pretty educational. I agree
This could also fix the issue that was mentioned by Saracen, where a lot of pros don't actually like to post here any more because there is always an abundance of noobs telling them that they are stupid, whenever they post something.
|
The problem with this system is twofold; 1) There are plenty of high point players who still haven't a clue about actual game balance, 2) There are some players who don't play much and aren't ranked and still have more gameplay balance knowledge then most high rank ever will.
How about a Forum where the quality of yours posting earns you the right to post, instead of some arbitrary number? It would make a great deal more sense to base it off what someone has proven they can bring to the table of discourse instead of some number that may or may not of been earned.
|
You must have missed MorroW and IdrA getting into a flame war. Just having a ton of points and being good doesn't mean the forum wouldn't turn into a shit fest.
|
The only problem is you're offending all the bronzies who will then come into this thread and vote against this measure, even when its best for the website/community. If this vote indicates that people want this feature even with the lower players coming in here and poo pooing it, then it should be done without any doubt.
But it probably won't.
Sadly.
|
I don't feel i'm qualified to vote in this poll 
|
Its an interesting idea but I think it would not be successful and is unlikely to be implemented. If the 1200+ point players want a place to discuss strategy then they can make their own forum to do it.
+ Show Spoiler +btw "I'm high rank plat, my games are usually vs. 500pt Diamonds. so.... whats that C or lower in ICCUP?" probably means you're D rank iccup 
|
I like the idea, but I think that would deprave the actual strategy forum of veterans. If newbies like me have a legitimate question, who will answer when everyone is flocking to this new elite forum?
|
On September 21 2010 04:10 SmoKim wrote:
i always giggle when a thread starts with "hai gais im 800-9000 point diamond player, therefore my opinion matters"
you come of as a huge elitist in my eyes, in the end its the staff of TL that decides stuff like that, and tbh i don't think they want it to be a regime like that
Did you read the OP
|
On September 21 2010 04:09 artanis2 wrote:
I think you'll be surprised by how many immature "pro" players there are.
I think I won't.
Make this feature happen and we'll see how it works out.
|
As a brand new player to multiplayer rts, I would love to have that type of sub-forum. It's hard to tell which information in the strategy section is actually useful and which information is actually counterproductive.
|
I'd be up for having a sub forum that only "pros" can post in, just to have all their posts in one place and to be able to easily look at their strats/thoughts etc. But i think these people should not be just over 1200 rating. I think the TL staff should designate who they think should be able to post there. Hopefully people like IdrA, Huk, LzGaMeR, etc.
|
I have no problem with a 'qualified writers' forum. I want to say that there's so much to be learned if people would just shut up and listen to qualified players. I think it's redundant, though, because a place to go for 'qualified' or 'legit' information is what Liquipedia ought to be.
|
On September 21 2010 04:17 Karthane wrote:
I'd be up for having a sub forum that only "pros" can post in, just to have all their posts in one place and to be able to easily look at their strats/thoughts etc. But i think these people should not be just over 1200 rating. I think the TL staff should designate who they think should be able to post there. Hopefully people like IdrA, Huk, LzGaMeR, etc.
Don't let IdrA find out you compared him to HuK and Lz, his head my explode with BM.
|
First of all, I'm not sure that being high rated necessarily makes you good at discussing the game or knowledgeable about the game. Maybe its true for the top couple hundred players or so, but certainly not 1200+ point players. There are some really good game players who are immature/stupid/have dumb balance opinions but they are still able to play well. Maybe there are some lower rated ladder players who watch more than they play and who are intelligent people who just don't practice enough who can offer valuable input.
Also, comparing anything to arenajunkies is pretty much a joke, I was a member of that site from the day it was created and i saw very few intelligent threads and mostly exactly what you guys are complaining about, people you don't think are intelligent or highly ranked enough to be posting making stupid threads or whatever.
|
Largest benefit would be knowing the source is competent. The strategy section currently is a pretty iffy place sometimes. It is very frustrating to read a large write-up eagerly, then a couple pages of comments, and then watch the replay for 5-10 minutes only to find out that both players in said replay were atrocious.
The largest issue for setting the forum up would be how to allow privileges. Invite only would work for "pros only" but a 1300+ forum would need some automation likely requiring folks to link their TL accounts with their profiles. I don't know how much time or money would be required in setting that up.
I second issue which could likely could be worked around with some ingenuity is that the "good players" have an ever moving point value. Perhaps time will show that eventually we know "1500+ is a very good player" but currently we just know that point values have been slowly going up since launch. Solution likely would involve a "Rating > 1000 + kTime" in place of "Rating > 1300" to account for this steady growth of rating as the season goes on.
|
On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:
I'm high rank plat, my games are usually vs. 500pt Diamonds. so.... whats that C or lower in ICCUP?
LOL? try D-
|
On September 21 2010 04:11 Sl4ktarN wrote:
This is so elitistic.
I disagree.
The "lesser players" will still be able to read it, they just can't reply and fuck the thing up. I think it's an awesome idea. Right now the strategy forum is like bronze players OP with a diamond player response or diamond player with a bunch of bad bronze responses.
|
Instead of rating requirements, how about just a rank requirement?
top 200 via blizz weekly blog or just top x# on sc2ranks
|
Cough
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/
Just while were on the subject can we please have a forum where only people with over 3170 posts can participate? Im tired of threads made by people with only 48 posts talking about what the TL community should do...
|
i know this from arenajunkies. its a very good idea imho.
|
don't really like the idea, it's not because you don't play lots of 1v game that your opinion is garbage.
|
On September 21 2010 04:22 Gorguts wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote: I'm high rank plat, my games are usually vs. 500pt Diamonds. so.... whats that C or lower in ICCUP?
LOL? try D-
Hey thanks for helping me prove my point.
|
Team Liquid is a great community, and leave it that way. No need to try and split the community.
I feel the mods are doing their best, and are learning each day more effective methods of banning/warning us when we step out of line.
|
Well you kinda have a point there but it's just such a huge organizational effort that it's probably not worth it.
But yeah I'm at the edge of 1400pt and feel like I actually just now started to understand a lot stuff.
Having low Diamond players or lower in a thread won't help the discussion all too much :/
The thing I'd rather like to see are really, really strict banning rules against OP whiners. Especially in the GSL threads, it's an abomination >.<
|
An issue with the "idra/lzgamer/huk" level only forum -- Very small group of folks who have the least to gain and most to lose by discussing strategy online. I could be totally off here but that is what I'd think.
|
I am super interested in this happening because I would love to be able to read what better players are saying without having to manually filter thru the endless amount of crap posts.... I dont even get why bronze players post things like rushing carriers in PvT etc. etc. anytime you plan anything in a league below diamond I feel like you have a huge edge... 1000 points is attainable on the ladder with 1 build, prolly 1200 is now too do to inflation..
The thing about separating it with points is that our points are ever changing, maybe if the top like 1000 people on SC2 rankings (in each region could post) that would be legit. It would also make the ladder more completive via people fighting over the right to post... Awesome.
|
this is so sad. im hanging around in this forum since sc2 release. im new to rts (well some sc1 but not much) and as you can see my post count is not high. i mostly read. and i guess im not the only one that is just seeking for some tipps and tactics.
and to be really honest - when seeing how much "i am diamond" cool guys got trolled by the "carriers now spawn with 4 interceptors" patch notes i rarely visit tactics forum anymore.. so yeah go ahead and make your cool club. whatever....
|
I don't think there should be a posting requirement, but if there was a special icon or notification next to their name that they get when they're "pro status" like 1700+? that way people looking for high level insight can pay attention to which posts are from top players.
|
I'd think if you were trying to help the community you would want it open to everyone to read.
|
On September 21 2010 04:24 FaCE_1 wrote:
don't really like the idea, it's not because you don't play lots of 1v game that your opinion is garbage.
It doesn't take alot of games to get to 1200 and if you barely play, then how do you know all the subtle parts to the game? The only way to flesh out everything is experience - something that bronze players don't have
|
Do you have any idea how terrible Arena Junkies is? It's infested with trolls and idiots who think that they know something about a game just because they got some rating.
I dont see the problem with TL the way it is now... Sure there might be some silly posts but you can just ignore them, and the mods are good at deleting the worst.
Yes there are many pro players who everyone could learn alot from, but there are probably more 1200+ players that are total idiots, and will act like douchebags every chance they get. It will not increases the quality of the forum.
And the idea that access should only be given to a handfull of pros is just silly aswell. To have an active forum you'd need atleast 100+ people posting.
I cannot imagine that people cannot sort out which posts are good and which are bad.
Lets say HuK posted some really cool new strategy. I dont think that there would be 10 bronze players arguing with him. Infact, i've never seen bronze players argue with anyone, atleast not on TL.
Voted no, i think this is a terrible idea.
|
i ceraintly would support some sort of filtering. I simply keep the Strategy section tab closed right now. It just makes me sad.
|
Oh come on, now you're just being an Elitist Jerk (pun fully and completely intended). The mods are doing an excellent job of pruning idiot threads and the community self-polices with such efficiency, there's no reason for something like this. I read this as more of an "I'm great, so we should exclude people who aren't" thread rather than a serious suggestion.
|
Only problem is you could have a 1200 point bronze player.
|
Just for reference 500 is like D- and 1200 is maybe C.
If this were to ever happen, invite only would be the way to go. Elitist? Definitely but the discussion needs to happen somewhere.
|
Actually having a solution for this would be a great idea. But instead of having post count/points requirement why not have a karma system like slashdot along with a post rating option (like digg) ? That way good posters will have positive karma which will make their posts visible by default while regular posters will start from 0. This will also quickly bury troll posts and other stuff which reduces their voice.
This way people who have great posting history will have their voices heard more than those without.
|
This is stupid, this is only a phase and is more or less the moderators problem. TL has always been full of a lot of bad information, but we all know where the good information is and it is normally that which stays and get many hits. The good guildes, that Progamers write are still being looked at. however everybody els should still be able to write in how to improve and have their theories. And just have a good time. This forum is social also. What about giving probs, or suggesting builds.
What if some gold level player found some build which was not perfect but could become the next saviour build or bisu build for that matter, if it just got seen by somebody better.
If only very good players could post this would be hard to get to these posts. Also the current ranking systerm on ladder has no real effect or does not translate skill.
when time passes by people who are not Starcraft interested will go play halo or what ever and in a years time the forum will be cleaner again. It is just a temporary state in the long history of Teamliquid.
|
I would really prefer this not turn into Arena Junkies, the WoW pvp forums that requires a high rating to post on.
All it is, is lots of high level people arguing about how they are right and everyone else is wrong because of how good they are.
That said, it's not my choice. If this is done though, why 1200? in a month 1200 will be the new 500. You would have to constantly change the rating req.
|
If anything the forums need to be separated by points. Have some kind of 0-600 900-1200 1200+ and 1500+ division. Yea I know those points and ranks don't mean much but at least you know where everyone stands when they post an strategy or comment. There's no need for a "no public write" forum either thats just stupid and seems too exclusive. Just have sub forums divided using a point system and its up to everyone to post in their appropriate section. This is going to a major problem that I see a lot, which are strategies that are beyond the capability of the player. Different strategies work at different ranks. Starcraft 2 is not a one dimensional game where everyone should just mimic strategies executed by top players. You have to work your way up. I think a lot of people just assume everyone is capable of executing everything and give out advice accordingly. This is really far away from the truth. Having sub forums divided by points would solve this problem.
|
On September 21 2010 04:26 VonLego wrote:
An issue with the "idra/lzgamer/huk" level only forum -- Very small group of folks who have the least to gain and most to lose by discussing strategy online. I could be totally off here but that is what I'd think.
I agree with this. I really don't know how active a forum like this would ultimately be. Why would a group of people, who will eventually meet in a tournament somewhere, want to discuss and argue strategy. They have a close knit group of practice partners they do this with. And instead of just theorycrafting or discussing strategy generally they just perform the strategy and observe the results.
|
On September 21 2010 04:33 Homeland wrote:
This is stupid, this is only a phase and is more or less the moderators problem. TL has always been full of a lot of bad information, but we all know where the good information is and it is normally that which stays and get many hits. The good guildes, that Progamers write are still being looked at. however everybody els should still be able to write in how to improve and have their theories. And just have a good time. This forum is social also. What about giving probs, or suggesting builds.
What if some gold level player found some build which was not perfect but could become the next saviour build or bisu build for that matter, if it just got seen by somebody better.
If only very good players could post this would be hard to get to these posts. Also the current ranking systerm on ladder has no real effect or does not translate skill.
when time passes by people who are not Starcraft interested will go play halo or what ever and in a years time the forum will be cleaner again. It is just a temporary state in the long history of Teamliquid.
Progamers have actually specifically said they dont post on TL strategy forum because they hate getting in arguments with some platinum scrub who has no idea what he is talking about. This is a great idea and I would love to see it implemented.
|
On September 21 2010 04:12 Dekoth wrote:
The problem with this system is twofold; 1) There are plenty of high point players who still haven't a clue about actual game balance, 2) There are some players who don't play much and aren't ranked and still have more gameplay balance knowledge then most high rank ever will.
How about a Forum where the quality of yours posting earns you the right to post, instead of some arbitrary number? It would make a great deal more sense to base it off what someone has proven they can bring to the table of discourse instead of some number that may or may not of been earned.
1.) Understanding game balance is less important than understanding how to win games in a discussion of strategy, since we're players, not designers. Our goal is to win games, not balance them. That said, I think, as you might too, that there are plenty of high point ladder players who have limited, narrow knowledge even in the department of winning. However, I still think their understanding is demonstrably more relevant than that of those who have yet to prove themselves.
2.) Knowledge is gained either through experience or observation. No matter how much knowledge a non-playing player may have accumulated, it is still constrained by its second-hand nature. He may be a genius at synthesizing the information of others, but this constraint will innately bar him from the latest, practical trends at the highest levels. Examining the current and the best is especially important in SC2 right now in its state as a nascent game.
There is also the scholarly concern that primary sources tend to sport greater veracity than secondary ones.
--
Assessing a quality as nebulous as "posting quality" will always be more arbitrary than assessing ladder performance, which has well established metrics and runs on a system designed with explicit goals. The fact that ladder ratings, no matter their inadequacies, are governed by reason and principle, by definition makes them not arbitrary.
|
vegeta! but yea i hate reading nice strat threads and see someone just scream TERRAN OP! or COLLOSSI ARE IMBA!! then 50 other people scream at the first guy and the thread gets derailed
|
I can guess that this would make for a very boring subforum. Pros/High-level players are interested in the same topics as the rest of us, while I'm sure some of them would enjoy the comraderie of having a dedicated subforum, I bet most of them wouldn't be posting anything. Same as it is now. They are probably too busy playing the game.
Additionally, most of these people don't want to talk about their strategies with their peers. All that will do is give away the BO they've been working on for weeks. This is the same reason why players like this rarely post in the Strategy forums.
|
I'm sorry but TL already has a very elitist vibe to it as it is now. This has both good and bad sides. The good being that most posts on this site are above the crap you see on most game forums. The bad being the sometimes, in my eyes, ridicolous post count related rules.
If you ask me, and you did, there is no need to stimulate this elitist atmosphere.
|
Wait and see.... Points might as well go to 2000-3000 in the end and alot will have 1200+ plat.
I think i could easy reach that if i did play last 4-6 weeks and i m not good.
|
On September 21 2010 04:39 Amestir wrote:
I'm sorry but TL already has a very elitist vibe to it as it is now. This has both good and bad sides. The good being that most posts on this site are above the crap you see on most game forums. The bad being the sometimes, in my eyes, ridicolous post count related rules.
If you ask me, and you did, there is no need to stimulate this elitist atmosphere.
I totally agree. Splitting into a separate subforum would be a bad idea. But having a system to rate posts would be great and would probably take care of this problem.
|
Is this thread for real?
I though Diamond was only like 4-5% of the total playerbase, and now you want to limit that further to the top .5-1% to be allowed to discuss strategy? o_0
|
I dont really think its necessary, you can obviously tell when a person doesnt know jack-shit by making statements such as "omg zerg imba, cant do anything vs mutalisk harass"
i understand that people are tired of defending their opinions to players with lower skill or ladder rank than them but thats part of "life"
|
OK, I think I understand why someone would create such a thread. Now, let me introduce you to my idea.
Whenever the reader (not creator) looks in a thread, he/she will reason with themselves whether a post actually made any sense.
Helpful indicators:
- biased polls
- "that is so" kind of logic
- unnecessary paraphrasing and repetitions in general
|
1200 points is hardly progamer status, but it might be a start. Besides, it would be impossible to enforce. How would you determine which users have 1200+ points?
|
how could use something like blizzard elo to judge on Teamliquid?
i have been through so many teams tryout (obs or join) and i noticed that there is no different between 600 players and 1400 players... in fact, lots of time people with 400 point scored on the top 4 of the tourney over people who are 1200s...
DONT APPLY THAT BS ELO IN HERE!!!...just dont...
|
On September 21 2010 04:24 Mantikor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:22 Gorguts wrote:On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote: I'm high rank plat, my games are usually vs. 500pt Diamonds. so.... whats that C or lower in ICCUP?
LOL? try D- Hey thanks for helping me prove my point.
Well honestly you would be D/D-. Lol. Iccup is so much harder. Im 800 diamond and rising and i barely got to c- on iccup. And im sure that i am absolutly worst than when i played back then. So i guess im playing at a D/D+ lvl? and laddering is still easy as hell
Also i do not support this. Being a low ranking player doesent mean you dont know much about the game. Hell Ladder is more of a grind. If a player can be 400 diamond and still be alot better then a 1300 diamond cause he doesn't grind ladder
|
United States11390 Posts
On September 21 2010 04:45 Wr3k wrote:
1200 points is hardly progamer status, but it might be a start. Besides, it would be impossible to enforce. How would you determine which users have 1200+ points?
There is also the issue of points being inflated over time too.
|
I love the idea, but bonus pool and points inflation screws it up too badly. 1200 might be reasonable now, but in a few weeks a lot more people are 1200 despite the fact that they are worse players than the 1200s of now.
|
Make a special forum where people can 'theorycraft' their perfect game or 'talk' about balance and instaban anyone who utters imbala....* in the strategy forums?
Then one could just ignore undesired forums instead of getting a 19/20 ration of one liners and whine to every legitimate one.
----------------------
*that is fast enough so they don't even get to finish the damn word.
|
I agree with an elite forum where only people with great grasp of sc2 should post but I don't think it should have anything to do with their sc2 rank. There is lots of people who have increadble game sence but have low apm or freeze up under pressure so although they can contribute a lot to discussion they can not acheive high ranks. I think that team liquid should assign who can and cannot post in the elite forums.
|
I'm just a low diamond, but I think this is a great idea, would atleast get rid of the scrub posts in a good discussion.
there's another site that does this which is Arenajunkies for WoW, only 2.3k+ can post in their discussion forum
and this method works rly works well for AJ.
|
I think its a bit silly to divide it up with a sub-forum. It's not to say that those 1200+ points people don't have anything good to say, or people with less than that (if even a point or a larger but less than 1200 amount), but that some advice you get from 1200+ players will not always be applicable to those with less points/higher points because of the opponents you face. That's probably the reason why the forum is the way it is, where it's a lot easier to generalize and create less work. It seems a bit too elitist. Not really directing this at anyone, just my thoughts and what I think.
As for the quality of posts in the forums, yeah... it's not so great, but I creating a sub-forum wouldn't really fix the problem. Just because someone has more than 1200+ points as a diamond player doesn't mean they don't have... silly things to say?
I also want to ask; How do you verify if a person posting on TL has a 1200+ claim? It's probably been asked before already though...
|
Russian Federation124 Posts
1000 diamond is around C- level
|
On September 21 2010 04:51 Talho wrote:
I'm just a low diamond, but I think this is a great idea, would atleast get rid of the scrub posts in a good discussion.
there's another site that does this which is Arenajunkies for WoW, only 2.3k+ can post in their discussion forum
The difference is Arenajunkies is full of people who trash on others because they think their gods, and in SC, like I said a minute ago, the ratings inflate. In 2-3 weeks the 'pro' level will be 2300, 2-3 weeks after that 2500, ect.
How are you going to put the req? Change it every few weeks? That would just be a pain in the ass for everyone =\
|
Its a great idea but only if the newbies can still read the forum (but not post).
TL is already bordering unreasonably elitist so making it any less noob-friendly would be a bad move in terms of maximizing membership, broadening community, and just getting hits.
It must be quite a challenge to balance between scaring away any and all new members and keeping the site from turning into a bronze league troll/flamefest.
This said making a forum called rainbow league discussion or something where only the top 5-10% of diamond players can post but everyone can read is a great idea. Implementation could be quite difficult however. Possibly could be done by setting up a way for players to submit a link to their bnet profiles and have a script figure out their ratings and toggle ability to post on this forum based on the current cut-off point whether its a constantly updated rating or a way to sort out their percentile.
This would meet the needs of high levels players to discuss strats without having to prove to some noob that going double evo chambers at 14 into 1 base muta is probably not a good build lol. At the same time the noobs have access to the discussions and can still greatly benefit from high level discussion without being alienated by the TL community.
|
make it an invite only forum. with read access. That is a nice idea, and has been discussed before too.
|
Its an excellent idea. I and many others would be ecstatic if there was a "really really good players only" forum. But points isn't the way to implement it. 5 weeks ago, 800 diamond was amazing, now its 1500, in a few months it'll be 3k.
|
Points totals seems to be such a moving target and not really something you can rely on. Just cos a guy knows one build very well doesn't mean he knows the game :p I'd much rather see some sort of reputation system if you want to create a restricted posting forum.
|
Perhaps when the pro league is created, then we can ask this question again.
As it stands now, bonus pool creates a steady increase in rating across the board. 1000 diamond today is not the same as 1000 diamond 3 weeks ago, and it's also not the same as 1000 diamond in another 3 weeks. So there is no way to define a hard cutoff rating currently.
|
lol 500 pts Diamond is below D from iccup. My friend got to 750 pts Diamond and he got stomped by D- in BW. And he's just flat out terrible in SC2, although in reality he was 750 pts last week and has since been demoted back to plat^^.
|
On September 21 2010 04:53 Seam wrote:
How are you going to put the req? Change it every few weeks? That would just be a pain in the ass for everyone =\
It's not just the requirement, it would be actually proving that you meet it. How the hell would you verify somebody is who they say they are? Even if you knew how to do THAT particular aspect, how would you do it so that it didn't take TL staff tons of man-hours?
I mean I already asked this, but I'm still extremely curious how anybody would solve the actual logistics of this.
Seems absurd.
|
A rather controversial move, but will save me forum browsing time on days when I am busy. Putting experienced players in the same room away from the general public may also give them room to raise serious discussion which can help push the game to the next level. I voted yes.
|
As a gold level SC2 and shitty level BW player, I'd love to see discussions of an upper tier of quality. Without the flak.
It would be nice if there was a way "unqualified" people could post, but only those who are "qualified" can see them, because sometimes the rest of us do have insightful questions or comments that pros could expand on.
|
Yeah I would agree that there is a lack of really good posts. I have thought it would be nice to have separation by what your points are at. I have no idea why the option of preventing people from even reading is there. I think even the lower level people could benefit.
Alternatively you could get people special markings next to their names to show skill lvl then you could know where your taking info from and forbid noobs for arguing with good players.
|
And how does one track this?
I know the information, and account information, of multiple players who play at 1400-1600~ and I can play any of these accounts [as long as they give me an authenticator code]. I can say I am the owner of account X at A rating, account Y at B rating and account Z at C rating. TL can't disprove this and thus must accept it.
It doesn't work. If you want to use the "example" of Arenajunkies' forum posting, I use other people's accounts to post on that forum too. Ratings don't stop idiots posting, because people who want ratings and make topics such as this are generally idiots.
|
On September 21 2010 04:03 MrBitter wrote:
1200+ is far from pro-gamer. I'm 1300+ and never got past C/C- on ICCUP. I would love to see a sub-forum devoid of total scrubs, though.
does it matter how far you go on C/C-
You can be a modern warfare 2 king of the world but what we are talking about here is Starcaft 2. If you can reach 1300 on starcraft 2 (relative to lets just use select as a refrence point of 1900) then yes you are a "pro" in the casual definition.
You are by no means tournament level pro or global level but a pro none the less.
|
ArenaJunkies is not a good site on which to base a website - and, really, other websites shouldn't be trying to make themselves similar to AJ. As a case in point, try searching for a strategy for Lock/Shaman/Druid ( LSD ). 9/10 posts in the high-rating section are either trolls or the nonsense about instant-globaling people. Or try to find information on DK/Lock/Druid ( Shadowcleave ) - an unpopular composition that is still played here & there has basically no threads, with quite a few of the posts on the topic coming from people who haven't ever played the team before. It's more difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff because it's difficult to know whether a person has any real experience or is just trollin' you hard. e.g. once I asked for Mage/Lock/Druid ( MLD ) assistance and got "Lol global people" - not to say that MLD is the pinnacle of complexity and skill at all, but it's a lot more involved than that unless you want to sit at the 1800 level all season.
Take, for example:
http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205545
http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205572
http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205446
Nor does having an "elitist" section actually eliminate bad threads as such:
http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=202376
http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=204173
Here's an example where there's a thread having some great replies and some absolutely garbage replies - Just like TL.net's Starcraft 2 strategy section!
http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=203138
Now, granted, every time a pro player posts you get at least some noise of people agreeing or disagreeing just based on it being who it is, but I think Sheth's thread here showed that just 'cuz you haven't won a major tournament doesn't mean you are incapable of contributing:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133023
A lot of people in that thread pointed out some nuances that either Sheth maybe didn't realize he did or things he could add to the build to make it better. I don't play Zerg, really, so I have absolutely no clue how good the build is - but Sheth's a good player and the post today is better than it was when he first posted it. Maybe all those players are equivalent of 1200 diamond players today, but based on the questions I seriously doubt it.
Plus 1200 isn't exactly the pinnacle of game knowledge. I've beaten players that are in the 1200 point range today that didn't use control groups, didn't rally new units to the fight, and had no capacity to transition even if their all-in kinda worked but didn't totally beat me down. The problem is that writing strategies requires a lot more than just being skilled at the game; I think there are probably people in the 1700 and higher ratings that would be the worst person ever to give you advice.
It's really challenging to communicate game sense, timings, and thought processes. It takes a very particular set of skills that most of the high level community ( quite frankly ) doesn't appear to posses. You can most assuredly be the greatest player in the world but have no real capacity to teach anyone to get even out of Gold - sometimes people just can't empathize with someone who doesn't have the skillset and knowledge they have. To be honest, it's perfect fine, but it doesn't help build a solid community.
|
Im a complete newbie and I really enjoy the idea.
|
I like this idea in theory, in the sense that you can have a high-level-only posting section that can be read by lower leagues.
The logistics of it may be difficult but if it can work then it would be helpful to the whole community. Being a Silver league player myself I know I could definitely benefit from high-level strategy discussion that doesn't get messed up by people from lower-leagues butting their own opinions in.
You could do it on a request basis where members PM mods their bnet account or a timestamped screenshot of their in-game profile, then the mods grant posting access to the forum. I don't know how much of a hassle for the mods that would be, but it is probably the simplest way to get it done.
|
On September 21 2010 04:53 Seam wrote:
How are you going to put the req? Change it every few weeks? That would just be a pain in the ass for everyone =\
I dont see much of a problem in that :x maybe there's a cap on the ratings, who knows ?
I personally dont see this as less noob-friendly. Cuz as a noob you cant even differ the good posts between the bad posts. That's a problem I atleast had when I was a bigger noob then now.
|
This idea will cause a lot of us to feel left out of discussions.
Then again, we can watch IdrA and LaLuSh make MorroW look stupid again.
|
I'm a 100 point bronze player. I literally have no idea what I'm talking about.
Thus, I voted Leave it as is.
|
They should be voted in by the community. Moderators and longterm VIPs should pick the initial pool of posters. Moderators and longerm VIPs should NOT get automatic access based on their position, only on merit.
|
How about we require a link to a players profile or require members to post their accurate ELO? This way bronzies and other noobs could still post, but you would know how much to value an opinion from such a low ranking player.
|
When Cataclysm is out in october, we should find peace again.
|
This would be great if it was possible to implement. I believe people have had thoughts about doing something like this many times before. But the problem is no one wants to do all the work for free when it's not a sure thing that it will work.
One big problem with the forums as they are right now is also that not only does low level players argue against higher level ones but they also sometimes ignore high level posts and spam threads so that good advice gets lost. I wouldn't be surprised if TL allready had something along these lines in mind though. TL staffers have alot of great ideas but it's not allways easy to get something physically done.
|
On September 21 2010 05:04 monx wrote:
When Cataclysm is out in october, we should find peace again.
lol, sad but true.
|
On September 21 2010 05:03 Easy772 wrote:
How about we require a link to a players profile or require members to post their accurate ELO? This way bronzies and other noobs could still post, but you would know how much to value an opinion from such a low ranking player.
Player's profile? As I said previously, I have access to about 4-7~ accounts which are all 1400-1600 P/T/Z players and I, myself, play 1500 Protoss and all I do is 4 gate every game.
Rating =/= Skill
Rating =/= Intellect
Rating =/= Knowledge
Elitism is a plague of many games, don't let it affect SC2 as well.
|
|
|
On September 21 2010 05:02 Fantistic wrote:
This idea will cause a lot of us to feel left out of discussions.
Then again, we can watch IdrA and LaLuSh make MorroW look stupid again.
Thread?
Also Progamers seem to argue alot amongst eachother on whats viable or not. Its not like they will be some perfect intellectual conversation on starcraft if this happens
|
On September 21 2010 05:03 bonifaceviii wrote:
I'm a 100 point bronze player. I literally have no idea what I'm talking about.
Thus, I voted Leave it as is.
So you DON'T want a forum that you can go and read and be confident that 90%+ of the information is accurate and vetted? You'd rather have a bunch of people who (like you said about yourself) have no idea what they are talking about discuss this stuff?
No one is talking about taking away the regular forum, just adding a sub-forum that would be exclusive to people who know what the fuck they are talking about.
Sportscenter doesn't invite guys who play flag football at church on Sunday to discuss football, why would TL invite bronze level players who admit to ignorance to help participate in high level discussions?
|
On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000.
The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D
|
I support a subfourm where pro-gamers can discuss/debate in peace from us gold-level scrubs. THe key word in that sentence being "pro-gamer" - not 1500 point diamond, not 9000 point diamond, but actual "I play SC2 as my current career" - because these guys can give a discussion that my play will never ever in a billion years reach, but would be exceptionally interesting to read without someone like me spewing shit I don't understand in a thread...
That being said, fuck you OP - just because I don't have 1000 games played doesn't mean that I can't contribute to a discussion. Of course, I'm also one of those people that know when to stay the fuck out of a discussion, or at least preface my response with "I'm a shitty gold player, but here are my thoughts..." THEY (pro-gamers) deserve a forum for sure...but really, your 1200 points diamond don't really mean sweet fuck all either...the way the ladder is setup, you could just be some useless scrub that cheesed his way to the top. Yawn.
|
On September 21 2010 05:00 Vz0 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:03 MrBitter wrote:
1200+ is far from pro-gamer. I'm 1300+ and never got past C/C- on ICCUP. I would love to see a sub-forum devoid of total scrubs, though. does it matter how far you go on C/C- You can be a modern warfare 2 king of the world but what we are talking about here is Starcaft 2. If you can reach 1300 on starcraft 2 (relative to lets just use select as a refrence point of 1900) then yes you are a "pro" in the casual definition. You are by no means tournament level pro or global level but a pro none the less.
No you're not. No one calls somone of that skill caliber a pro, that's utterly ridiculous. And people rarely, if ever, use what you're insinuating is the "casual definition" of pro, which is "a really good player." Pro is almost exclusively used if you are either trying to make a career out of it or are somehow making money at it, not "pretty good but definitely not tournament level."
|
On September 21 2010 05:06 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:02 Fantistic wrote:
This idea will cause a lot of us to feel left out of discussions.
Then again, we can watch IdrA and LaLuSh make MorroW look stupid again. Thread? Also Progamers seem to argue alot amongst eachother on whats viable or not. Its not like they will be some perfect intellectual conversation on starcraft if this happens
But just WATCHING this kind of conversation can be so educational. We don't know everything, neither do they, but by discussing it, they can come to much more meaningful conclusions than someone with 25 games under their belt who's trying to argue that an Ultra rush is a viable early game Zerg strat.
|
Someone with free time on their hands could code an 'star commenter' feature a la Kotaku (and then you would have a subforum where only 'star commenters' could post. This would make more sense than an arbitrary '1200 Diamond +' requirement (what if you go on a losing streak, or want to hide your main account like Day[9]?).
This wouldn't necessarily be a good idea, but it would be a better one.
|
I like the idea of a sub-forum where only certain "gamers" can post. A problem I see is that 1200 will eventually become mid-diamond with the way the system works, if it isn't already?
A pro gamer sub-forum where only the public can read would be awesome, but in reality pros don't post that much because they have more important things to do like practice and win tournaments.
"Most" pros don't complain about balance or at least make it very vocal. They see what tools they have (current SC2 balance and mechanics) and abuse/use them to their fullest potential.
So ultimately a sub-forum full of only high quality posts/responses would be sweet, but unrealistic.
|
On September 21 2010 05:05 Koukalaka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:03 Easy772 wrote:
How about we require a link to a players profile or require members to post their accurate ELO? This way bronzies and other noobs could still post, but you would know how much to value an opinion from such a low ranking player. Player's profile? As I said previously, I have access to about 4-7~ accounts which are all 1400-1600 P/T/Z players and I, myself, play 1500 Protoss and all I do is 4 gate every game. Rating =/= Skill Rating =/= Intellect Rating =/= Knowledge Elitism is a plague of many games, don't let it affect SC2 as well.
So how would we accurately obtain a players ELO then?
I want "lowbies" to be able to post, I would also like to know the rank of the people giving out advice as if they know everything about the game.
This is coming from a ~1000 Protoss (Im not trying to be an elitist as I know I am not great)
|
I always liked this idea, BUT as some have posted and stated AJ:s way of doing and showing that it's really hard. Most players are just being "cool" or flaming eachother about certain strats/comps/teams/players. And seeing how the trend so far is with the manner of the community it would simply turn into a big great flamefest or just not contribute as much as you like to hope.
If you want high level players/posters/proplayers to post I think the community rather should step back and not do as they've done before to players. Mostly when you see a progamer or a big namer, or someone who knows what they are talking about, the masses kinda overwhelm or a group just either troll them, making fun of what they are saying.
Just look at seth's thread he made, it was a really good, it was kinda detailed and probably one of the greater posts ( in my opinion) about how to handle TvZ at that time. (other great ones magic box and such). But still there were people calling him bronze level player or players just ignore and started trolling.
If I were a progamer, I would refrain from posting as well seeing how the community treats the better players sometimes.
|
|
|
On September 21 2010 05:05 Koukalaka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:03 Easy772 wrote:
How about we require a link to a players profile or require members to post their accurate ELO? This way bronzies and other noobs could still post, but you would know how much to value an opinion from such a low ranking player. Player's profile? As I said previously, I have access to about 4-7~ accounts which are all 1400-1600 P/T/Z players and I, myself, play 1500 Protoss and all I do is 4 gate every game. Rating =/= Skill Rating =/= Intellect Rating =/= Knowledge Elitism is a plague of many games, don't let it affect SC2 as well.
Good post, this reminds me of the time someone wanted to create sub-forums where only people who had above like 500 posts could write (note: I'm not 100% sure about the numbers). This is ridiculous, although I admit it would be a lot of fun if people with really high score (like 1600+) had their own sub-forum, read/not write for the rest.
|
The standard should be way over 1200 points. A pros or close to pros only thread here and there would be a good idea. But if these threads do get made it might change TL too much. It might become much more of a reading forum and not a forum forum. Forums are dialogues and discussions, even if some people have no idea what they are talking about. It is best to just ignore dumb posts instead of arguing with them.
This could isolate many people not only from the treads but the website as well. I feel it might become counterproductive to the development of the online community we have here. But I guess it's impossible to tell how it would really turn out unless it is actually done.
|
On September 21 2010 05:06 TechDeft wrote:
So you DON'T want a forum that you can go and read and be confident that 90%+ of the information is accurate and vetted? You'd rather have a bunch of people who (like you said about yourself) have no idea what they are talking about discuss this stuff?
That forum would be the only forum that the aforementioned good players would visit, and therefore render all other SC2 forums to be the digital ghettos of bad players. If you want to purge TL of people like me completely, this would be the best way of doing so.
|
On September 21 2010 05:12 Easy772 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:05 Koukalaka wrote:On September 21 2010 05:03 Easy772 wrote:
How about we require a link to a players profile or require members to post their accurate ELO? This way bronzies and other noobs could still post, but you would know how much to value an opinion from such a low ranking player. Player's profile? As I said previously, I have access to about 4-7~ accounts which are all 1400-1600 P/T/Z players and I, myself, play 1500 Protoss and all I do is 4 gate every game. Rating =/= Skill Rating =/= Intellect Rating =/= Knowledge Elitism is a plague of many games, don't let it affect SC2 as well. So how would we accurately obtain a players ELO then? I want "lowbies" to be able to post, I would also like to know the rank of the people giving out advice as if they know everything about the game. This is coming from a ~1000 Protoss (Im not trying to be an elitist as I know I am not great)
You can't. That's the entire point.
My point is even if something like this was implemented ... I could give my TL forum account, with access to post in special areas, to friends and they could troll/post idiotic comments and there's nothing TL can do outside of banning me. There really is nothing you can do.
|
On September 21 2010 05:14 Koukalaka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:12 Easy772 wrote:On September 21 2010 05:05 Koukalaka wrote:On September 21 2010 05:03 Easy772 wrote:
How about we require a link to a players profile or require members to post their accurate ELO? This way bronzies and other noobs could still post, but you would know how much to value an opinion from such a low ranking player. Player's profile? As I said previously, I have access to about 4-7~ accounts which are all 1400-1600 P/T/Z players and I, myself, play 1500 Protoss and all I do is 4 gate every game. Rating =/= Skill Rating =/= Intellect Rating =/= Knowledge Elitism is a plague of many games, don't let it affect SC2 as well. So how would we accurately obtain a players ELO then? I want "lowbies" to be able to post, I would also like to know the rank of the people giving out advice as if they know everything about the game. This is coming from a ~1000 Protoss (Im not trying to be an elitist as I know I am not great) You can't. That's the entire point. My point is even if something like this was implemented ... I could give my TL forum account, with access to post in special areas, to friends and they could troll/post idiotic comments and there's nothing TL can do outside of banning me. There really is nothing you can do.
LOL, nevermind then. I guess this is kind of pointless unless anyone has bright idea...
|
this is really needed to make the forums worth reading once you get better
|
+1 im 1.4k diamond and reading some of tls post depresses me now.
|
EDIT: Basically down below is a good/bad of why / why not implement this =)
EDIT 2: was on bottom of page 6, deleted and reposted here
On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote: Much like the wow forum Arena Junkies, you link your TL identity to your bnet acct. It would remove some of the anonymity, as well as allow for some REALLY good theorizing.
http://www.arenajunkies.com/forums.php
is the site he's talking about....
hmmm
cuz on Arena Junkies.. they had a "Ask a Gladiator" section where only the people who got 2600 rated (Gladiator title) where able to post there
but it was based on the WoW armory (wowarmory.com), not at all Your account.
so, with this in mind... it means any troll (not giving out ideas, just saying why it doesnt always work) could pick some 1300 diamond player that apparently doesn't know about TL (i've seen some people) and use their score to be able to post
---------------
HOWEVER! Back to my original thought when i said hmmm::
if this was to happen... imo the post would / should still include your TL name (ID, whatever), but just use the score of the "linked" account... aka, it doesnt show who's account you're using.
this WOULD keep the anonymous part of the intertnetz safe to people. Which is good.
Part Dos:
Use sc2ranks.com ... why? because it seems to be the most easily accessible and most frequently updated with ALSO having tons of data.
This idea is great in many ways:
1. It "stops" most of the "OMG WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?!?!" in threads of this section (mostly), aka, Keep discussion threads mostly about discussion, not flames
2. It gives the readers a good idea of what the "good" players are thinking about
3. Lastly, it would probably encourage people like Qxc and others who feel it pointless-to-post to come back and maybe put their view on things into the mix if ideas (i say Qxc cuz his name was mentioned in the OP)
4. Might motivate people to get to 1500, 1600, etc Diamond (1200 is eh, i played for 3 months of RTS and am almost that high) to feel "accomplished"
Contrary, it would cause some problems:
1. The platinum players who are technically diamond, or other players who have REALLY great insight can't post there yet
2. Would make the other TL users "left out in the dust" if all the diamond players stopped using the general forums or whatever - turning the "old" forums into B.net equiv. in terms of garbage output
3. Discourage players from posting on TL with the sense of "oh no one cares about the forums i can post in, why bother?!"
Final Thoughts:
Constructive discussions are boss no matter WHAT subject you're talking... but having an entire forum section to people only 1500 Diamond (or only B+ and higher on iCCup) seems a bit risky, especially since the TL community grew so much with SC2
|
On September 21 2010 05:15 ionlyplayPROtoss wrote:
+1 im 1.4k diamond and reading some of tls post depresses me now.
D+ on iccup
No. This is a stupid idea and i doubt if the idea will ever even be entertained by those in position to implement it.
|
i think its a good idea, but setting a certain amount of points as the limit might not be the best idea as there is a huge point inflation going on.
i voted for no public write, as other people should definitely be able to read the ongoing discussion in order to learn from them.
|
There's no "logical" way you could do this.
If you only let people with a "known" name post you're leaving out 90% of people who might actually be good but don't get coverage.
If you only let people with X+ rating post, you're opening the opportunity for accounts to be passed around.
If you forceably ban anyone who speaks about balance, you're initiating a quasi-autocratic communist forum and TLs reputation will be even more hurt than it is, as some say, with all these "WoW players".
|
On September 21 2010 05:14 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:06 TechDeft wrote:
So you DON'T want a forum that you can go and read and be confident that 90%+ of the information is accurate and vetted? You'd rather have a bunch of people who (like you said about yourself) have no idea what they are talking about discuss this stuff? That forum would be the only forum that the aforementioned good players would visit, and therefore render all other SC2 forums to be the digital ghettos of bad players. If you want to purge TL of people like me completely, this would be the best way of doing so.
How would it purge people? We would still be reading it. We would still be learning. We could still create valid discussions in the main area of the forums.
You either
A) Don't understand how a forum community works
B) Are retarded
C) All of the above
And what are you worried about? You can't contribute anything right now anyway, because as you stated, you don't KNOW anything.
So how would the forum change for you? It wouldn't. People can still come read strategy discussions, and in the regular forum, people can still do 8 posts a day about T imbaness or Void Ray rush problems.
|
On September 21 2010 05:07 vrok wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000. The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D
Actually, the irony of this is that i'm pointing out how within minutes of making any post, garbage replies flood in. No where in there did i mention anything about you being higher ranked than me, and really i dgaf. But thanks for playing.
|
On September 21 2010 05:20 Koukalaka wrote:
There's no "logical" way you could do this.
If you only let people with a "known" name post you're leaving out 90% of people who might actually be good but don't get coverage.
If you only let people with X+ rating post, you're opening the opportunity for accounts to be passed around.
If you forceably ban anyone who speaks about balance, you're initiating a quasi-autocratic communist forum and TLs reputation will be even more hurt than it is, as some say, with all these "WoW players".
Why not allowed hidden posts to the forum where the "pros" could see but not the general populace, allowing them to pick and chose worthwhile questions or discussions to unhide and respond to.
|
On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:14 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 21 2010 05:06 TechDeft wrote:
So you DON'T want a forum that you can go and read and be confident that 90%+ of the information is accurate and vetted? You'd rather have a bunch of people who (like you said about yourself) have no idea what they are talking about discuss this stuff? That forum would be the only forum that the aforementioned good players would visit, and therefore render all other SC2 forums to be the digital ghettos of bad players. If you want to purge TL of people like me completely, this would be the best way of doing so. How would it purge people? We would still be reading it. We would still be learning. We could still create valid discussions in the main area of the forums. You either A) Don't understand how a forum community works B) Are retarded C) All of the above And what are you worried about? You can't contribute anything right now anyway, because as you stated, you don't KNOW anything. So how would the forum change for you? It wouldn't. People can still come read strategy discussions, and in the regular forum, people can still do 8 posts a day about T imbaness or Void Ray rush problems.
rofl. just shat my pants.
|
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that.
|
8748 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:01 ShadowWolf wrote:ArenaJunkies is not a good site on which to base a website - and, really, other websites shouldn't be trying to make themselves similar to AJ. As a case in point, try searching for a strategy for Lock/Shaman/Druid ( LSD ). 9/10 posts in the high-rating section are either trolls or the nonsense about instant-globaling people. Or try to find information on DK/Lock/Druid ( Shadowcleave ) - an unpopular composition that is still played here & there has basically no threads, with quite a few of the posts on the topic coming from people who haven't ever played the team before. It's more difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff because it's difficult to know whether a person has any real experience or is just trollin' you hard. e.g. once I asked for Mage/Lock/Druid ( MLD ) assistance and got "Lol global people" - not to say that MLD is the pinnacle of complexity and skill at all, but it's a lot more involved than that unless you want to sit at the 1800 level all season. Take, for example: http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205545http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205572http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205446Nor does having an "elitist" section actually eliminate bad threads as such: http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=202376http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=204173Here's an example where there's a thread having some great replies and some absolutely garbage replies - Just like TL.net's Starcraft 2 strategy section! http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=203138Now, granted, every time a pro player posts you get at least some noise of people agreeing or disagreeing just based on it being who it is, but I think Sheth's thread here showed that just 'cuz you haven't won a major tournament doesn't mean you are incapable of contributing: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133023A lot of people in that thread pointed out some nuances that either Sheth maybe didn't realize he did or things he could add to the build to make it better. I don't play Zerg, really, so I have absolutely no clue how good the build is - but Sheth's a good player and the post today is better than it was when he first posted it. Maybe all those players are equivalent of 1200 diamond players today, but based on the questions I seriously doubt it. Plus 1200 isn't exactly the pinnacle of game knowledge. I've beaten players that are in the 1200 point range today that didn't use control groups, didn't rally new units to the fight, and had no capacity to transition even if their all-in kinda worked but didn't totally beat me down. The problem is that writing strategies requires a lot more than just being skilled at the game; I think there are probably people in the 1700 and higher ratings that would be the worst person ever to give you advice. It's really challenging to communicate game sense, timings, and thought processes. It takes a very particular set of skills that most of the high level community ( quite frankly ) doesn't appear to posses. You can most assuredly be the greatest player in the world but have no real capacity to teach anyone to get even out of Gold - sometimes people just can't empathize with someone who doesn't have the skillset and knowledge they have. To be honest, it's perfect fine, but it doesn't help build a solid community.
Can you compare AJ's strategy discussion to some other WoW Aarena forum's strategy discussion that does not have rating requirements and show that AJ isn't any better?
AJ doesn't have to be a perfect forum in order to prove that its methods are in its best interests.
And it's unreasonable to expect a strategy forum to provide excellent responses to any question you throw at it. If I think something is a bad idea and I know most people will agree with me, it's better if I don't waste any effort giving a long explanation why it's a bad idea. I can say "don't do that strat it sucks" and when everyone else reads that thread and agrees w/ me, they won't bump it just to say that they agree with me. They let it die. So it dies and that's all you see is one guy asking a question, one expert saying "no lol!" and nothing else. But you have to respect the consensus of top players and let them put effort into discussing more interesting things.
|
On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that.
Only skimmed a page or two, but yup I agree. The problem isn't skill, rating nor contribution, it's the community as a whole.
|
8748 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that.
I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect.
|
On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect.
Isnt that kinda the same thing?
|
i think this is a very very very good idea
seems like only new users disagree, shocking....
|
On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
How would it purge people? We would still be reading it. We would still be learning. We could still create valid discussions in the main area of the forums.
The "main" areas you speak of wouldn't be "main" anymore. Why bother creating a thread where the newbies and 'WoW players' cry about marauders when you have the option of creating one where only people of your gaming caliber do? It would make what you call the "main" part of the site a wasteland of trolls and whining.
On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
And what are you worried about? You can't contribute anything right now anyway, because as you stated, you don't KNOW anything.
That's right, and I don't. I post in General, mostly, and when I do post here it's to answer polls and make attempts at humour.
On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
So how would the forum change for you? It wouldn't. People can still come read strategy discussions, and in the regular forum, people can still do 8 posts a day about T imbaness or Void Ray rush problems.
I watch Day9 as much as I can, read build order guides, practice against the computer, I'm just not good at it. The message I'm getting by this suggestion is that because of that, it's not worth talking to me and that I'm just another troll messing up your website.
|
On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing?
no
people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all.
|
On September 21 2010 05:32 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
How would it purge people? We would still be reading it. We would still be learning. We could still create valid discussions in the main area of the forums. The "main" areas you speak of wouldn't be "main" anymore. Why bother creating a thread where the newbies and 'WoW players' cry about marauders when you have the option of creating one where only people of your gaming caliber do? It would make what you call the "main" part of the site a wasteland of trolls and whining. Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
And what are you worried about? You can't contribute anything right now anyway, because as you stated, you don't KNOW anything.
That's right, and I don't. I post in General, mostly, and when I do post here it's to answer polls and make attempts at humour. Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
So how would the forum change for you? It wouldn't. People can still come read strategy discussions, and in the regular forum, people can still do 8 posts a day about T imbaness or Void Ray rush problems. I watch Day9 as much as I can, read build order guides, practice against the computer, I'm just not good at it. The message I'm getting by this suggestion is that because of that, it's not worth talking to me and that I'm just another troll messing up your website.
having people who know what they are talking about deal with people who do not have a clue just results in stagnant/uninteresting discussions. the people who want to discuss things will just get frustrated and choose not to waste their time discussing issues.
If noobs dont contribute now, then not allowing them to post in some threads only filters out the garbage and keeps the good intact. i dont see the downside.
|
On September 21 2010 05:32 tacrats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing? no people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all.
I strongly dissagree with the idea that someones other credentials can some how allow them to be disrespectful towards others (if that indeed is your position). I think that is a very misguided approach that personifies this whole dilema (I know more than this guy therefore hes an idiot and my posting style should reflect this).
|
On September 21 2010 05:25 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:01 ShadowWolf wrote:ArenaJunkies is not a good site on which to base a website - and, really, other websites shouldn't be trying to make themselves similar to AJ. As a case in point, try searching for a strategy for Lock/Shaman/Druid ( LSD ). 9/10 posts in the high-rating section are either trolls or the nonsense about instant-globaling people. Or try to find information on DK/Lock/Druid ( Shadowcleave ) - an unpopular composition that is still played here & there has basically no threads, with quite a few of the posts on the topic coming from people who haven't ever played the team before. It's more difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff because it's difficult to know whether a person has any real experience or is just trollin' you hard. e.g. once I asked for Mage/Lock/Druid ( MLD ) assistance and got "Lol global people" - not to say that MLD is the pinnacle of complexity and skill at all, but it's a lot more involved than that unless you want to sit at the 1800 level all season. Take, for example: http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205545http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205572http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205446Nor does having an "elitist" section actually eliminate bad threads as such: http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=202376http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=204173Here's an example where there's a thread having some great replies and some absolutely garbage replies - Just like TL.net's Starcraft 2 strategy section! http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=203138Now, granted, every time a pro player posts you get at least some noise of people agreeing or disagreeing just based on it being who it is, but I think Sheth's thread here showed that just 'cuz you haven't won a major tournament doesn't mean you are incapable of contributing: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133023A lot of people in that thread pointed out some nuances that either Sheth maybe didn't realize he did or things he could add to the build to make it better. I don't play Zerg, really, so I have absolutely no clue how good the build is - but Sheth's a good player and the post today is better than it was when he first posted it. Maybe all those players are equivalent of 1200 diamond players today, but based on the questions I seriously doubt it. Plus 1200 isn't exactly the pinnacle of game knowledge. I've beaten players that are in the 1200 point range today that didn't use control groups, didn't rally new units to the fight, and had no capacity to transition even if their all-in kinda worked but didn't totally beat me down. The problem is that writing strategies requires a lot more than just being skilled at the game; I think there are probably people in the 1700 and higher ratings that would be the worst person ever to give you advice. It's really challenging to communicate game sense, timings, and thought processes. It takes a very particular set of skills that most of the high level community ( quite frankly ) doesn't appear to posses. You can most assuredly be the greatest player in the world but have no real capacity to teach anyone to get even out of Gold - sometimes people just can't empathize with someone who doesn't have the skillset and knowledge they have. To be honest, it's perfect fine, but it doesn't help build a solid community. Can you compare AJ's strategy discussion to some other WoW Aarena forum's strategy discussion that does not have rating requirements and show that AJ isn't any better? AJ doesn't have to be a perfect forum in order to prove that its methods are in its best interests. And it's unreasonable to expect a strategy forum to provide excellent responses to any question you throw at it. If I think something is a bad idea and I know most people will agree with me, it's better if I don't waste any effort giving a long explanation why it's a bad idea. I can say "don't do that strat it sucks" and when everyone else reads that thread and agrees w/ me, they won't bump it just to say that they agree with me. They let it die. So it dies and that's all you see is one guy asking a question, one expert saying "no lol!" and nothing else. But you have to respect the consensus of top players and let them put effort into discussing more interesting things.
AJ's forum is actually worse than just the battlenet forums for WoW. Basically any idiot could get posting rights and just troll that site.
This site is really really REALLY good. I dont know if people have even been on other forums, like MW2 forums, arenajunkies etc etc. They all suck massively compared to this one in terms of quality. I dont know why you'd want to change that.
There are a few bad posts, but the game is brand new and i'm sure over time the quality will become much better.
|
I want to know who the nutjobs are who vote for 1200+ read/write only.
O SHIT GUYS I GOTTA HIDE MY LEET STRATS FROM DEM BRONZE PLAYERS
|
On September 21 2010 05:34 tacrats wrote:having people who know what they are talking about deal with people who do not have a clue just results in stagnant/uninteresting discussions.
If noobs dont contribute now, then not allowing them to post in some threads only filters out the garbage and keeps the good intact. i dont see the downside.
That's fine, and you're entitled to that opinion. I'm giving mine, even though it obviously isn't worth as much here.
|
On September 21 2010 05:34 tacrats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:32 bonifaceviii wrote:On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
How would it purge people? We would still be reading it. We would still be learning. We could still create valid discussions in the main area of the forums. The "main" areas you speak of wouldn't be "main" anymore. Why bother creating a thread where the newbies and 'WoW players' cry about marauders when you have the option of creating one where only people of your gaming caliber do? It would make what you call the "main" part of the site a wasteland of trolls and whining. On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
And what are you worried about? You can't contribute anything right now anyway, because as you stated, you don't KNOW anything.
That's right, and I don't. I post in General, mostly, and when I do post here it's to answer polls and make attempts at humour. On September 21 2010 05:21 TechDeft wrote:
So how would the forum change for you? It wouldn't. People can still come read strategy discussions, and in the regular forum, people can still do 8 posts a day about T imbaness or Void Ray rush problems. I watch Day9 as much as I can, read build order guides, practice against the computer, I'm just not good at it. The message I'm getting by this suggestion is that because of that, it's not worth talking to me and that I'm just another troll messing up your website. having people who know what they are talking about deal with people who do not have a clue just results in stagnant/uninteresting discussions. If noobs dont contribute now, then not allowing them to post in some threads only filters out the garbage and keeps the good intact. i dont see the downside.
But who's to say that high level Diamond players are that much better posters?
I hate to use him as an example, but IdrA for instance.
|
Are we worried about posting quality or strategic cleanliness with this new subfourm though...
Idra might be a horrible poster but he knows the game.
|
On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect.
I agree. Pretty much people like to go "I THINK THIS IS WHY THIS IS THE WAY THIS IS AND I'M FUCKING RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG" and alot of "elitism".
And really, what about people who aren't pro-gamers that DOES have a high-quality piece of post? let's say iunno, Chill? djWHEAT? Day9?
I don't know their skill level (except Wheat, I know where he's at) they may NOT be like Flash-level skilled players, they may not be the high diamond proleague qualified players but they can give constructive and good quality posts of whatever they post and whatnot. So what's this talk about having a sub-forum about pro-gamers only to post?
Srsly, if theres a pro-gamer section, I can only imagine them making a topic going
"Srsly people, Terran's fucking OP.
-Idra"
rather then a srs discussion at times. I could be wrong but well, I could be right too.
|
I'd agree. Even though I'm probably just as much a part of the problem. Being mid-diamond really doesn't give me any more insight into the game than a silver or gold player when compared to the level of proficiency a pro has.
I voted to allow the general public to still be able to read (but not post) in the 1200+ only forum. I've learned so much just from reading these boards. If I didn't start coming here I would have never heard of Day[9] or Psy, and both those players have dramatically improved my game.
However, I'd still like to be able to post my own issues (currently it's fending off phoenix harass as Z and wondering whether T has a fair counter to muta/bling) and help out bronzies who legitimately want help with their macro.
|
A lot of ignorant people spout a lot of stupid, CHILDISH, immature stuff these days. (Emphasis on the word childish.) It's just horrible.
People say it's elitist, I say it's common sense.
This isn't a democracy. This is TeamLiquid, a forum with a once great big "qualityposts/total number of posts" - ratio.
I voted for a 1200+ subforum which everyone can read but only the best can post in. (Should this ever need to happen.)
Seems about right.
Although... I don't know if it would get used much. I think most progamers chat amongst themselves on MSN or whatever.
So yeah. I'm indifferent, TL-admins know what's best. ^^
|
On September 21 2010 05:21 Mantikor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:07 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000. The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D Actually, the irony of this is that i'm pointing out how within minutes of making any post, garbage replies flood in. No where in there did i mention anything about you being higher ranked than me, and really i dgaf. But thanks for playing.
Garbage threads get garbage replies. Your idea is ridiculous and unfeasible from a purely practical and technical point of view. You should really have put more thought into how it could possibly work before making a thread. Elitist Jerks >>> Arena Junkies. Good and harsh moderators make the difference, not arbitrary requirements for posting.
|
I think most of the people overrate the Strategy forum. Sure it has a lot of potential on paper but i only use it to get insipration instead of a real helping advice. If I think john doe has a good idea ill try it - if i think he just talks **** i just scroll down.
Thats why i dont think you need a "above x points" limitation.
|
On September 21 2010 05:42 vrok wrote:
Elitist Jerks >>> Arena Junkies. Good and harsh moderators make the difference, not arbitrary requirements for posting.
I think elitist jerks has a similar thing.
|
On September 21 2010 05:39 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
A lot of ignorant people spout a lot of stupid stuff these days. It's just horrible.
People say it's elitist, I say it's common sense.
This isn't a democracy. This is TeamLiquid, a forum with a once great big "qualityposts/total number of posts" - ratio.
I voted for a 1200+ subforum which everyone can read but only the best can post in.
Seems about right.
Although... I don't know if it would get used much. I think most progamers chat amongst themselves on MSN or whatever.
Lets say that we'd make a forum for 1800+ people only. Because 1800+ people probably think that 1400 players are scrubs.
Point is, there is always someone better, and someone will always think that someone else is a noob, no matter his rating.
This also happened to Arena Junkies, a sort of elitism within the elitism developed, where 2.4k players were idiots and only 2.8k players knew the game. Then then 2900+ crowd though that 2.8k players were idiots. You see the problem?
You cant just say "here's the line from good to bad". I bet i could find a gold player who knows more about the game than me, a diamond player. 100% certain.
|
In theory it is a great idea, but it wouldnt work.
You also will still get retarded discussions from people, as the "post-quality" and trolling can come from any point-total. I have at least talked with 3-4 people who were 1500+ and still think Terran is fine, or even underpowered! So i dunno. We'll still see retarded posts often, just scaled down.
|
As long as making a forum wouldn't make a new lower class of poster, I'd be fine with it. One thing I don't like about other forums is the sense of elitism older posters feel. Also, how would ladder resets work with the point thing?
|
On September 21 2010 05:42 vrok wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:21 Mantikor wrote:On September 21 2010 05:07 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000. The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D Actually, the irony of this is that i'm pointing out how within minutes of making any post, garbage replies flood in. No where in there did i mention anything about you being higher ranked than me, and really i dgaf. But thanks for playing. Garbage threads get garbage replies. Your idea is ridiculous and unfeasible from a purely practical and technical point of view. You should really have put more thought into how it could possibly work before making a thread. Elitist Jerks >>> Arena Junkies. Good and harsh moderators make the difference, not arbitrary requirements for posting.
Elitist Jerks is an awful website. Only wannabes visit that website: I was in Ensidia and I didn't visit the website once.
|
To be honest I'd have loved a sub forum where certain people where allowed to discuss. I can post all the lowbie shite I want on about 20 forums, so why not have 1 forum where I can actually read what way better players than me say ?
|
People really need to cool off on this issue. Trust me. Even if you set up a forum for progamers there would barely be any posts at all because if they have questions they would much rather talk to other high level players than posting on TLnet. In the case there they want to publish a new guide or strat they can always do it in the strategy section, and they would not need to defend their points against noobs in that thread.
I agree that it is impossible to filter out good players by rating but hey what can we do? We can only do the best we can and hope that works. At least people get 1500 would know when to shut up. I am only 800 and trust me I do know when to shut up. If you really feel like being elitist then only let people who play in tournaments post in that sub forum but I doubt it would really happen because it is too time consuming to sort out who play in tournaments and who doesn't.
|
On September 21 2010 05:44 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:39 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
A lot of ignorant people spout a lot of stupid stuff these days. It's just horrible.
People say it's elitist, I say it's common sense.
This isn't a democracy. This is TeamLiquid, a forum with a once great big "qualityposts/total number of posts" - ratio.
I voted for a 1200+ subforum which everyone can read but only the best can post in.
Seems about right.
Although... I don't know if it would get used much. I think most progamers chat amongst themselves on MSN or whatever. Lets say that we'd make a forum for 1800+ people only. Because 1800+ people probably think that 1400 players are scrubs. Point is, there is always someone better, and someone will always think that someone else is a noob, no matter his rating. This also happened to Arena Junkies, a sort of elitism within the elitism developed, where 2.4k players were idiots and only 2.8k players knew the game. Then then 2900+ crowd though that 2.8k players were idiots. You see the problem? You cant just say "here's the line from good to bad". I bet i could find a gold player who knows more about the game than me, a diamond player. 100% certain.
But wouldn't it help the game to develop?
And more importantly, I think the biggest issue here is the fact that many immature posters post stupid, shallow stuff and worthless advice in otherwise possible great threads. (See my edit of my post.)
Edit: And for clarification, by good players I mean players who are known to be good players and who have perhaps participated and won big tournaments. And who use their head and common sense when it comes to playing and figuring out SC2.
|
After reading most of this thread and looking at other peoples points, I change my mind. I support the idea of having a high caliber player only subfourm
|
I see this situation as analogous to the ladder. Diamond players are never matched with bronze players because it wouldn't be worth the diamond player's time to play the game. I've gotta say, I'm mid-platinum, and I would LOVE it if I played nothing but 1000+ diamonds all the time. It would be an interactive way for me to get better more quickly. But how is that fair to the diamond players? (Excepting real-life friends, of course) What would they be getting out of it?
So what are the high-level gamers getting out of posting in the forums here? What is their incentive? What do they get out of it? If they know that replies to their threads will be met with constructive criticism from knowledgeable gamers, well, that might be enough incentive to share their thoughts.
A new, expert-only forum would be extremely interesting for me to read. And I would likely still post in the public forums; I believe that there will still be value there. And I believe there will still be community there. But the expert-only forum would be different. It would be teachers' lounge, if you will. If a lowly plebian like myself wanted to comment on the pro's post, I could start a thread about it, linking to it, in the public forum.
This just seems like a good way to keep a large community while preserving the quality of the content.
|
On September 21 2010 05:25 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:01 ShadowWolf wrote:ArenaJunkies is not a good site on which to base a website - and, really, other websites shouldn't be trying to make themselves similar to AJ. As a case in point, try searching for a strategy for Lock/Shaman/Druid ( LSD ). 9/10 posts in the high-rating section are either trolls or the nonsense about instant-globaling people. Or try to find information on DK/Lock/Druid ( Shadowcleave ) - an unpopular composition that is still played here & there has basically no threads, with quite a few of the posts on the topic coming from people who haven't ever played the team before. It's more difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff because it's difficult to know whether a person has any real experience or is just trollin' you hard. e.g. once I asked for Mage/Lock/Druid ( MLD ) assistance and got "Lol global people" - not to say that MLD is the pinnacle of complexity and skill at all, but it's a lot more involved than that unless you want to sit at the 1800 level all season. Take, for example: http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205545http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205572http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=205446Nor does having an "elitist" section actually eliminate bad threads as such: http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=202376http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=204173Here's an example where there's a thread having some great replies and some absolutely garbage replies - Just like TL.net's Starcraft 2 strategy section! http://www.arenajunkies.com/showthread.php?t=203138Now, granted, every time a pro player posts you get at least some noise of people agreeing or disagreeing just based on it being who it is, but I think Sheth's thread here showed that just 'cuz you haven't won a major tournament doesn't mean you are incapable of contributing: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133023A lot of people in that thread pointed out some nuances that either Sheth maybe didn't realize he did or things he could add to the build to make it better. I don't play Zerg, really, so I have absolutely no clue how good the build is - but Sheth's a good player and the post today is better than it was when he first posted it. Maybe all those players are equivalent of 1200 diamond players today, but based on the questions I seriously doubt it. Plus 1200 isn't exactly the pinnacle of game knowledge. I've beaten players that are in the 1200 point range today that didn't use control groups, didn't rally new units to the fight, and had no capacity to transition even if their all-in kinda worked but didn't totally beat me down. The problem is that writing strategies requires a lot more than just being skilled at the game; I think there are probably people in the 1700 and higher ratings that would be the worst person ever to give you advice. It's really challenging to communicate game sense, timings, and thought processes. It takes a very particular set of skills that most of the high level community ( quite frankly ) doesn't appear to posses. You can most assuredly be the greatest player in the world but have no real capacity to teach anyone to get even out of Gold - sometimes people just can't empathize with someone who doesn't have the skillset and knowledge they have. To be honest, it's perfect fine, but it doesn't help build a solid community. Can you compare AJ's strategy discussion to some other WoW Aarena forum's strategy discussion that does not have rating requirements and show that AJ isn't any better? AJ doesn't have to be a perfect forum in order to prove that its methods are in its best interests. And it's unreasonable to expect a strategy forum to provide excellent responses to any question you throw at it. If I think something is a bad idea and I know most people will agree with me, it's better if I don't waste any effort giving a long explanation why it's a bad idea. I can say "don't do that strat it sucks" and when everyone else reads that thread and agrees w/ me, they won't bump it just to say that they agree with me. They let it die. So it dies and that's all you see is one guy asking a question, one expert saying "no lol!" and nothing else. But you have to respect the consensus of top players and let them put effort into discussing more interesting things.
Well, the idea of posting those links is that they are more a sample of the majority of the threads & posts on that forum. The mods there are active and do their best to try to prune some of the trolling; however, that wasn't my point. Unfortunately, I know of no other resources from which to glean Arena knowledge - the closest things I know of just don't get enough traffic to be good comparisons (e.g. http://forums.hydramist.net/ or http://www.shadowpriest.com/viewforum.php?f=58&sid=c1c79f1a9a14a33246e2768122ad0910 or http://wowmb.net/forums/f43/ )
My point is more that you can compare their section, which is posting-rights restricted to the TL.net SC2 Strategy section, which is not posting-rights restricted, and my opinion is that TL's is superior. The point of going to ArenaJunkies was more to illustrate that having a limitation in posting capacity doesn't automatically improve the quality of posts.
If you want to improve the quality of posts then it's going to take more than that.
|
I'd be fine with it, but it would be immensely difficult to implement. Where you introduce the cut off point is the main problem. Considering that with bonus pool inflation that the number of points people have is slowly going to rise regardless of whether they improve or not, you'd have to constantly up the cap. Also, some pro players don't ladder, some are immensely immature and some well known and respected members of the community may not ladder enough to meet whatever arbitrary metric is introduced.
Oh, yeah, there'd be about 5-6 posts a week.
Nice in theory, not so nice in practice. Also, not to sound like a douche, but I don't even think 1000 diamond is near a C rank on ICCUP.
|
good idea. im a gold player so i no i wouldnt be allowed, but i like reading the threads and its always annoying to come across some noob like me giving his two nooby cents.
|
As longs as I can read it I have no problem with this at all I get how anoying it must be for pro players arguing for something and then have people from an entire diffrent world (bronze/silver and what not) not getting that because the view of the subject differ that much.
|
Why 1200? The points keep changing because of the bonus pool and each division has different points.
Make it so only the players from blizz's top200 for each server able to post. This list is MUCH easier to verify and implement. Most of the top200 are TL.net members.
Balance threads really do not need non-top200 players posting.
|
theres not enough of them
|
and also: high rating does not mean =/= good knowledge, sure chances are higher that a person with high rating has better knowledge but ive played people with 1600-1700 rating that is just fucking terrible, im talking like D rank iccup terrible
|
it sounds elitistic but its a really good solution to these WoW/bronze players who just have no clue about the game and then try to argue their points with some essay posts which only hint at some form of imbalance with their lack of knowledge
|
You can't measure people's abilities with a single number. I'd probably support some sort of high level invite only discussion forum though that everyone could read.
Or perhaps - a system where they each get a chance to discuss a topic each week. Say "The use of banshees in TvP" then after a week of all these invite only people responding, the thread is made public for the rest of the forum to view and see what the opinions are of various things by top players?
Maybe I'm interpreting it as something meant for learning when it's really about top level players getting their own spot. Either way, I'd prefer it atleast be readable to us low level players. No point in seperating the board into different groups.
|
Besides, perhaps, a potential lack of activity in the forum if top players don't use it that much (or technical constraints), I don't see a reason not to do this. It wouldn't change any of the current discussion areas where people of all skill levels can present their point or ask questions. It would simply add a section for people who are better and more devoted to the game than the majority to post and create potentially higher level discussion.
The creation of this forum and its rules would require a level of deliberation that I assume TL staff would take/has been taking (since there has been talk of this before) to decide who gets to post, since I'm not sure rankings in SC2 are a good metric (at this point in time, at least). Some accomplished/well-known players should be allowed in first, then add some of the borderline pros and remove them if they are not fit or do not contribute in a meaningful.
I do not understand claims of elitism (or, more accurately, the problem with this type of "elitism") as the majority of people still has their area to discuss and pros would of course still be free to post there, while simply having a forum that provides them with the ability to have slightly more policed discussion with people in the upper echelon of players. Lower level players can still get their point out and people who devout more and often take the game more seriously (thus, in general, having more knowledge) can also have an area to discuss exclusively with people at the top level. This would be good for them, if they choose to use it, and good for people not on their skill level as it would allow them additional insight into how top players think about the current state of the game and current strategies trending the top of the ladder. And who knows, maybe one day you could post in that forum! If it becomes woefully underused or never meets its true purpose, it can be removed and marked up as a lesson.
Overall, I feel a sub-forum like this would be good for the community as a whole and the only people who lose are people who don't like reading what the current bunch of top players have to say.
|
I wouldn't mind as long as it is readable for those who cannot write in it.
But tbh, a requirement of "xxx" -amount of ladder points is ridiculous in some ways. There is alot of people with good points and posts that really don't even play SC2 seriously or either aren't that good in it. So there would be already one problem, cutting them off. IMO.
As myself, i think i know shitloads of things about this game than any of my Diamond level friends for example, and i'm not playing it hardcorely, even though i could manage to get into diamond.
|
On September 21 2010 05:46 Koukalaka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:42 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 05:21 Mantikor wrote:On September 21 2010 05:07 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000. The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D Actually, the irony of this is that i'm pointing out how within minutes of making any post, garbage replies flood in. No where in there did i mention anything about you being higher ranked than me, and really i dgaf. But thanks for playing. Garbage threads get garbage replies. Your idea is ridiculous and unfeasible from a purely practical and technical point of view. You should really have put more thought into how it could possibly work before making a thread. Elitist Jerks >>> Arena Junkies. Good and harsh moderators make the difference, not arbitrary requirements for posting. Elitist Jerks is an awful website. Only wannabes visit that website: I was in Ensidia and I didn't visit the website once.
It's awful, but you never visited it. Ok? Back in S1 and S2 it contained tons of useful information for my team anyway.
Still, that wasn't my point. The point is that heavy moderation is the way to go because whatever the arbitrary requirement is, it will not help.
|
I think the mods have already stated that they hate this idea.
I followed a really well run forum for awhile (non-gaming) that maintained the quality of their forums by really enforcing quality standards. Bad posts and poor spelling would get very negative comments/bans which would in turn keep the forum making quality posts.
This also attracted more quality posters. However, it was a huge strain on the moderation team to keep up. But, it was always a great read.
|
On September 21 2010 05:48 DwmC_Foefen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:44 Deadlyfish wrote:On September 21 2010 05:39 DwmC_Foefen wrote:
A lot of ignorant people spout a lot of stupid stuff these days. It's just horrible.
People say it's elitist, I say it's common sense.
This isn't a democracy. This is TeamLiquid, a forum with a once great big "qualityposts/total number of posts" - ratio.
I voted for a 1200+ subforum which everyone can read but only the best can post in.
Seems about right.
Although... I don't know if it would get used much. I think most progamers chat amongst themselves on MSN or whatever. Lets say that we'd make a forum for 1800+ people only. Because 1800+ people probably think that 1400 players are scrubs. Point is, there is always someone better, and someone will always think that someone else is a noob, no matter his rating. This also happened to Arena Junkies, a sort of elitism within the elitism developed, where 2.4k players were idiots and only 2.8k players knew the game. Then then 2900+ crowd though that 2.8k players were idiots. You see the problem? You cant just say "here's the line from good to bad". I bet i could find a gold player who knows more about the game than me, a diamond player. 100% certain. But wouldn't it help the game to develop? And more importantly, I think the biggest issue here is the fact that many immature posters post stupid, shallow stuff and worthless advice in otherwise possible great threads. (See my edit of my post.)
Well i dont think there's a problem, but even if there was, then the solution wouldnt be to just exclude a bunch of people from posting, but instead be stricter about deleting threads that just arent up to standards.
You cant just expect perfect replies always, there will ALWAYS be some silly replies. IMO it has nothing to do with rank at all.
|
Would a person's posting rights be revoked if they dropped below the minimum requirement?
Just asking.
|
I like the idea, and would be up for it without hesitation.
|
I agree that ladder ranking only might not be the best indication of being able to have a high level strategic discussion.
Maybe make it so that intitially only the top players can post but if the TL staff spots someone who makes high quality posts very often they can give that player access as well.
Some players just don't have the APM (anymore?) to get high ranking diamond but can still have a good strategic mind and bring decent contribution to discussions.
Or both, a proplayer forum and a forum for people who have proven to post good contributions. Would be fun to see which of the 2 creates most strategic gems over time 
Another possibility is a voting system, where people can +/- replies in any TL thread, giving people points for positive contributions, and those with high points are allowed in the toplevel discussions.
I would not be able to write in any of those forums but I would really like it if they existed. As long as I'm able to read it I don't find it elitism.
If you read something there and you really want to discuss it, you can always make new thread with a link to that thread.
|
top 200 from each server sounds fine. i doubt it'll happen though, given the amount of work required to verify everyone, and remove/add people everytime the top200 list changes.
|
So long as I am able to read this forum I think it would be great to hear from the truly top end players on strategy/general issues.
|
Definitely for something like this. 90% of the responses in a thread asking for advice are terrible. I know they are written with the best intentions, but it annoys me when I see someone say get a sentry to FF to counter a 6 pool in PvZ. Stuff like that.
|
8748 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:35 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:32 tacrats wrote:On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing? no people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all. I strongly dissagree with the idea that someones other credentials can some how allow them to be disrespectful towards others (if that indeed is your position). I think that is a very misguided approach that personifies this whole dilema (I know more than this guy therefore hes an idiot and my posting style should reflect this).
The first thing that happens is someone makes a post. That post can be made in a way that deserves respect or doesn't deserve respect. It doesn't matter whether or not the guy who is going to read the post and respond to it knows how to respect people. That has no influence on whether or not the post is deserving of respect or not.
So I'm saying that there's a problem with people making posts undeserving of respect. So someone who doesn't go around respecting every idiot that comes along, that is, someone who respects respect, will wisely disrespect the post undeserving of respect. So there's a post that doesn't deserve respect and now there's a reply that disrespects that post. The guy who made the reply could be perfectly capable of making respectful posts but the problem is that he's responding to someone who doesn't deserve respect. So, disrespect.
You suggest that the replier is the problem. These people who read posts and reply disrespectfully are the problem. And you hypothesize that it's because they don't know how to be respectful.
I suggest that the original post is the problem. These people who make shitty posts and provoke negative responses are the problem. And I don't hypothesize about why they do it because I don't give a shit.
Disrespect is a tool for fighting bad content. A forum full of disrespect is indicative of a forum full of people unhappy with the content. The disrespect isn't a bad thing itself, though it can certainly be unpleasant. Forcing everyone to respect each other can remove the unpleasantness but it's not going to fix the real problem. I could put this in medical language with symptom/cause/diagnosis/treating the symptoms vs treating the cause etc but I'm sure you can do that yourself! =]
|
I think it would greatly improve the quality of any starcraft 2 forum really to find some way to filter out all of the sub-diamond X point players.
But for the moment, I can do that on my own by simply ignoring the the players that don't know what they're talking about. I come here to read what people like Morrow, Idra, LaLush, TLOBrian, TLOJinro, Artosis, and all of the other more experienced/skillful players have to say. I can easily filter out trash other people spew. It's not hard to seperate the cream from the crop, or however that saying goes..
The change would be greatly helpful, but by no means necessary imo.
|
I dont think this would be a great move for teamliquid - part of the reason the site is so successful is that your average player can interact with the better players here.
A good alternative would be a "Rate this post" feature that would let you view, say, a 15 page thread with top rated replies, or all the replies depending how you'd like to browse. (completely ignoring ladder ranking)
|
I don't think points are the best way to go about it but a heavily moderated strategy forum section would be a good idea. Perhaps make the topic creator approve each message before it gets shown and new topics would have to be approved by the section moderator.
|
Or pros could just occasionally write articles on the state of the game and or different matchups, and then the public could discuss.
Or TL could have a forum where it's basically invite only, where everyone that's invited is a well known player.
|
I think its a good start, or at least some more details about players in-thread that indicate their main race & ladder rank would be really useful as well
|
Instead of a "You must be this tall to ride" forum, why not one subforum for Strat/balance discussion that is heavily, heavily modded. In that one anyone who posts something non-constructive or flat out wrong will get punished.
The end would be almost the same as this, but you wouldn't kick out people who may just be unlucky in getting promoted, but know the game. You would still get more quality posts this way.
|
On September 21 2010 06:00 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:35 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:32 tacrats wrote:On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing? no people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all. I strongly dissagree with the idea that someones other credentials can some how allow them to be disrespectful towards others (if that indeed is your position). I think that is a very misguided approach that personifies this whole dilema (I know more than this guy therefore hes an idiot and my posting style should reflect this). The first thing that happens is someone makes a post. That post can be made in a way that deserves respect or doesn't deserve respect. It doesn't matter whether or not the guy who is going to read the post and respond to it knows how to respect people. That has no influence on whether or not the post is deserving of respect or not. So I'm saying that there's a problem with people making posts undeserving of respect. So someone who doesn't go around respecting every idiot that comes along, that is, someone who respects respect, will wisely disrespect the post undeserving of respect. So there's a post that doesn't deserve respect and now there's a reply that disrespects that post. The guy who made the reply could be perfectly capable of making respectful posts but the problem is that he's responding to someone who doesn't deserve respect. So, disrespect. You suggest that the replier is the problem. These people who read posts and reply disrespectfully are the problem. And you hypothesize that it's because they don't know how to be respectful.
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.
In short you should never lets someone else drag your posting down with them. And I say that as someone whose made that mistake too many times before :p.
|
8748 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:50 ShadowWolf wrote:
My point is more that you can compare their section, which is posting-rights restricted to the TL.net SC2 Strategy section, which is not posting-rights restricted, and my opinion is that TL's is superior. The point of going to ArenaJunkies was more to illustrate that having a limitation in posting capacity doesn't automatically improve the quality of posts.
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.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 21 2010 05:46 Koukalaka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:42 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 05:21 Mantikor wrote:On September 21 2010 05:07 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000. The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D Actually, the irony of this is that i'm pointing out how within minutes of making any post, garbage replies flood in. No where in there did i mention anything about you being higher ranked than me, and really i dgaf. But thanks for playing. Garbage threads get garbage replies. Your idea is ridiculous and unfeasible from a purely practical and technical point of view. You should really have put more thought into how it could possibly work before making a thread. Elitist Jerks >>> Arena Junkies. Good and harsh moderators make the difference, not arbitrary requirements for posting. Elitist Jerks is an awful website. Only wannabes visit that website: I was in Ensidia and I didn't visit the website once.
That's funny because I was in Overrated and was possibly the first mage on the planet to use RIs for raiding, and I never posted on EJ either. Still, I had to fight through a ton of idiocy to post on the B.net forums and that's the problem we're facing now. I say this completely independently from being a banling, but we're not assuming that lower level players have no insights to contribute. The problem is that when I would post on B.net (I am a forum whore, after all), I had to deal with a huge amount of idiots telling me I was wrong, when they didn't know what they were talking about, and in that case volume wins out over quality.
Moderation helps with that, but the quantity we're talking about is pretty enormous. There is a lot of bad advice in the Strategy Forums at the moment, and while I think repeat offenders should be removed, we can't just wipe out 80% of the posters there.
|
So I cheese my way up to 1200 (which isnt hard btw) and can still post crap ;o
it has to be 1400-1500+ to have a difference compared to what we have now.
|
On September 21 2010 06:09 Seam wrote:
Instead of a "You must be this tall to ride" forum, why not one subforum for Strat/balance discussion that is heavily, heavily modded. In that one anyone who posts something non-constructive or flat out wrong will get punished.
The end would be almost the same as this, but you wouldn't kick out people who may just be unlucky in getting promoted, but know the game. You would still get more quality posts this way.
I agree with this.
|
Mods could just make "pro gamers" a different colored name. There aren't that many that fulfill such a tag, as in professional gamer. Below that, what's the point of distinguishing based simply on battle.net points? It's pretty unscientific to simply go "Diamond XXXX-points".
|
On September 21 2010 06:15 TekKpriest wrote:
So I cheese my way up to 1200 (which isnt hard btw) and can still post crap ;o
it has to be 1400-1500+ to have a difference compared to what we have now.
That limits the discussion to like, 250 players per realm. Sorry but no. 1200 is actually a pretty good metric at the moment. There's probably a couple thousand capable players overall.
|
On September 21 2010 06:13 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:46 Koukalaka wrote:On September 21 2010 05:42 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 05:21 Mantikor wrote:On September 21 2010 05:07 vrok wrote:On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:edit: case and point On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000. The irony of this would be that I'm actually higher ranked than you even though I have like 400 unused bonus points as I'm waiting for the patch to ladder. :D Actually, the irony of this is that i'm pointing out how within minutes of making any post, garbage replies flood in. No where in there did i mention anything about you being higher ranked than me, and really i dgaf. But thanks for playing. Garbage threads get garbage replies. Your idea is ridiculous and unfeasible from a purely practical and technical point of view. You should really have put more thought into how it could possibly work before making a thread. Elitist Jerks >>> Arena Junkies. Good and harsh moderators make the difference, not arbitrary requirements for posting. Elitist Jerks is an awful website. Only wannabes visit that website: I was in Ensidia and I didn't visit the website once. That's funny because I was in Overrated and was possibly the first mage on the planet to use RIs for raiding, and I never posted on EJ either. Still, I had to fight through a ton of idiocy to post on the B.net forums and that's the problem we're facing now. I say this completely independently from being a banling, but we're not assuming that lower level players have no insights to contribute. The problem is that when I would post on B.net (I am a forum whore, after all), I had to deal with a huge amount of idiots telling me I was wrong, when they didn't know what they were talking about, and in that case volume wins out over quality. Moderation helps with that, but the quantity we're talking about is pretty enormous. There is a lot of bad advice in the Strategy Forums at the moment, and while I think repeat offenders should be removed, we can't just wipe out 80% of the posters there.
I got banned from the WoW forums because I said that Shaman were imbalanced during Sunwell (I played Resto Shaman) and called anyone who disagreed with me a moron. Seems I got banned despite being right. Besides, most of what Elitist Jerks discuss has no possible place in PvE. Which is why I dislike it. I played Shaman how I thought they ought to be played, and I'd say I did fucking well in WoW for where I was in terms of "overall ranking". (Best PvE Shaman in the world <3)
But getting back to the issue here - you cannot fix it. Short of banning anyone who is an idiot, or makes various idiotic comments you cannot "initiate any sort of rule list" because it wont be read, people will pass around accounts and it will be awful.
|
I would say give it more time, and activley make a list of people that post valuable information and then just stalk their threads / posts. Maybe make a special star for those who contribute to the Strategy threads/posts in a very positive manner. Rating has nothing to do with what they post. Take the time 6 months or so and have a wave of "strategy stars" get handed out.
|
8748 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:11 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:00 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:35 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:32 tacrats wrote:On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing? no people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all. I strongly dissagree with the idea that someones other credentials can some how allow them to be disrespectful towards others (if that indeed is your position). I think that is a very misguided approach that personifies this whole dilema (I know more than this guy therefore hes an idiot and my posting style should reflect this). The first thing that happens is someone makes a post. That post can be made in a way that deserves respect or doesn't deserve respect. It doesn't matter whether or not the guy who is going to read the post and respond to it knows how to respect people. That has no influence on whether or not the post is deserving of respect or not. So I'm saying that there's a problem with people making posts undeserving of respect. So someone who doesn't go around respecting every idiot that comes along, that is, someone who respects respect, will wisely disrespect the post undeserving of respect. So there's a post that doesn't deserve respect and now there's a reply that disrespects that post. The guy who made the reply could be perfectly capable of making respectful posts but the problem is that he's responding to someone who doesn't deserve respect. So, disrespect. You suggest that the replier is the problem. These people who read posts and reply disrespectfully are the problem. And you hypothesize that it's because they don't know how to be respectful. 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).
|
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.
|
a "no public write" subforum with a minimum diamond rating would be kinda cool, seems like it would be a lot of work to implement as well though
a "no public write or read" is just silly though
|
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.
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.
|
On September 21 2010 06:23 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:11 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 06:00 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:35 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:32 tacrats wrote:On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing? no people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all. I strongly dissagree with the idea that someones other credentials can some how allow them to be disrespectful towards others (if that indeed is your position). I think that is a very misguided approach that personifies this whole dilema (I know more than this guy therefore hes an idiot and my posting style should reflect this). The first thing that happens is someone makes a post. That post can be made in a way that deserves respect or doesn't deserve respect. It doesn't matter whether or not the guy who is going to read the post and respond to it knows how to respect people. That has no influence on whether or not the post is deserving of respect or not. Im not saying you need to write a thesis explaining how the guy is wrong and how he can improve. All im saying is that antagonizing statements (even when the recipeint really doesnt know what hes talking about) do more harm than good. So I'm saying that there's a problem with people making posts undeserving of respect. So someone who doesn't go around respecting every idiot that comes along, that is, someone who respects respect, will wisely disrespect the post undeserving of respect. So there's a post that doesn't deserve respect and now there's a reply that disrespects that post. The guy who made the reply could be perfectly capable of making respectful posts but the problem is that he's responding to someone who doesn't deserve respect. So, disrespect. You suggest that the replier is the problem. These people who read posts and reply disrespectfully are the problem. And you hypothesize that it's because they don't know how to be respectful. 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).
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.
|
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.
|
having the option of limited responses seems reasonable, but setting an arbitrary bar like 1200 pts doesn't work due to the bonus pool.
|
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. 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 ? 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)
|
On September 21 2010 06:11 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:50 ShadowWolf wrote:
My point is more that you can compare their section, which is posting-rights restricted to the TL.net SC2 Strategy section, which is not posting-rights restricted, and my opinion is that TL's is superior. The point of going to ArenaJunkies was more to illustrate that having a limitation in posting capacity doesn't automatically improve the quality of posts. 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.
|
Honestly it does kind of suck having all these very low quality posts, and I wish I could propose a change but I can't think of any good way to do it. When you make things based on rank you are unfairly silencing players, players that might be looking to get better by asking questions on someones views or strategy. Correct me if I'm wrong but Team Liquid was a place to learn from each other to make StarCraft better and more challenging then it was. something a long those lines, it's just a really unfair system giving the finger to players who haven't reached a certain number, a lot of those players can't even reach a number because they have work or school or kids.
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
|
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.
|
I wouldnt mind an invite only pro-gamer forum as long as the public can read it. I dont care if I cant post, i just want to be able to read what they are saying.
That said, I think that forum would be barren.
|
On September 21 2010 06:33 kzn wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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.
|
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.
|
i wouldnt mind a quality forum where top level players can share and discuss along with other quality posters where there posts can be highlighted and showcased. The only issue i have with it is how and who do you determine is such.
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.
|
Some stickies are needed lol. Then people will have an idea of how tl strat posts should look
|
On September 21 2010 06:36 Koukalaka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:33 kzn wrote: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. 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.
|
As I said, you wont be able to get anywhere with posting requirements because it's not going to stop a very good player sharing his account with his/her partner and them making idiot posts. Nothing stops them. Would they care if they got banned? Perhaps, but would they get banned? Probably not.
|
I like the idea, for the strategy forum. I am a newbie so I moderate myself and only read there (rarely to be honest, because it is mostly fluff or crazy). Others obviously can't.
|
I'm still trying to figure out where WoW drama got into all this. Get that garbage off the SC2 forums.
I agree with the sentiment that a high-level only forum would be great, as long as the general public is able to read it, for educational purposes.
|
Posting in a thread with 11 pages is probably stupid, because no one will notice this post, but there is much better solution in my opinion that is implemented on other forums where people that "knows stuff" post valuable info.
For each post user can get points form other users - they can click "i like it" button or something when they think it is valuable.
When people accumulate points they can get new rank - for example star will appear near their post. When post from people that said something valuable before are marked in some manner you can simply skip all the flood in the thread if you don't have time, and read those marked with stars.
It is quiet easy to implement, don't mess with normal flow of posting that is here now and allows you to quickly evaluate posts value.
|
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. 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 ? 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 found that that build is really vulnerable to a lot of stalkers before the air rolls out. My recent experience was on blistering sands with the backdoor. I had a bunker upfront when I noticed he was coming in the back. I quickly made another one but he just rolled right over me with his mass stalkers + proxy pylon for more warp ins. Raven popped as he was halfway through my army.
|
i think its a great idea to have a forum where only "good" players may write. this way, the pros could have high lvl discussions about strategies and metagame without getting disturbed by all the noobs and trolls, while the lowish players could benefit a lot from reading in this forum. the real problem would be how to define "good". 1200 diamond sounds too low imho.
|
As long as everyone can read it I'd like that(I'm nowhere near 1200 points but would be nice reading advice given from people who aren't horrible).
Shame you can't just link your b.net profile and somehow extract league and points next to the username.
|
so somehow being ranked higher makes you smarter and more mature. hmmmm.
|
On September 21 2010 06:29 aznhockeyboy16 wrote:
having the option of limited responses seems reasonable, but setting an arbitrary bar like 1200 pts doesn't work due to the bonus pool.
Not only that, there are differences between realms too.
What about a "Progamer Karma" system for each post?
Would be a variation of common Karma systems you see everywhere, except you'd get more influence if you have more points; posts voted low would become hidden, and threads with good posts would become more visible.
Also, not everyone that understands the game is a diamond player. Removing the right of these people to start a thread in the "good" forum seems like a waste IMHO. If you want an example, take a look at the various "tricks" threads around tl.net. This fact means that threads by these people are either wasted, or would require an even bigger moderation team to keep track of, and move them into the "good" forum before they get derailed by bad posts.
A Karma system would be somewhat harder to program and fine-tune, but IMHO would provide much better results.
|
same story in car forums lol, i just think its just the way it is.
instead of 1200, i'm sure TL staff can pick and choose who they'd allow on elitist sub forum through reputation.
|
On September 21 2010 06:44 brocoli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:29 aznhockeyboy16 wrote:
having the option of limited responses seems reasonable, but setting an arbitrary bar like 1200 pts doesn't work due to the bonus pool. Not only that, there are differences between realms too. What about a "Progamer Karma" system for each post?Would be a variation of common Karma systems you see everywhere, except you'd get more influence if you have more points; posts voted low would become hidden, and threads with good posts would become more visible. Also, not everyone that understands the game is a diamond player. Removing the right of these people to start a thread in the "good" forum seems like a waste IMHO. If you want an example, take a look at the various "tricks" threads around tl.net. This fact means that threads by these people are either wasted, or would require an even bigger moderation team to keep track of, and move them into the "good" forum before they get derailed by bad posts. A Karma system would be somewhat harder to program and fine-tune, but IMHO would provide much better results.
HELL YA, wish you could edit in polls..
That would be agreat to have a + or - system for rep. having community self-moderate is a great option as well.
|
Everyone likes to read informative , thoughtful, and generally quality posts that can benefit them directly. The source of those posts directly tied to a non transparent rating will concentrate better posts at the cost of creating a "caste" in the poster/Sc2 player population. The underlying reason why posts degrade so quickly is the lack of manners and education from people that were brought up without respect for other peoples opinions(civility). Another core problem is the lack of objectivity by some posters. Instead of disagreeing by saying "this is what I think. Here are my list of facts #1,#2,#3 why I think I'm right" ;yet all we get is a not so hidden message in the reply post "your a bronze level noob ,your stupid, go jump in a lake". Here's an example I see frequently.
Marauder: "Its OP". Its to strong nerf nerf . Terran OP. Nerf. " reply "stop whining and learn to play.
What would probably be more helpful is to address why the marauder is strong. What is the true power of terran?
Marauder: Tier 1 super marine. It is super durable (120hps) and can be healed/resupplied to full combat readiness on the battlefront. It can be made very early in the game (tier 1). They do incredible damage to armored (20dmg) at tier 1 allowing them to destroy buildings and armored units cost effectively. They have concussive shells which grant the Terran the ability to decrease the mobility of his enemies and in conjunction with the Stim ability gives the Terran enhanced mobility to choose his battles. This allows them to more easily pick a favorable time to concentrate his army and attack decisively to win instead of just to harass. When in conjunction with all other Terran units, which also have superior attack range the Area of concentric range fire and ability to maximize firepower (dps)is superior than any other race in early and mid game(before tier 2.5). Add to this an intelligent commander the Terran can easily create favorable points of contact. Not only this but the ability to produce Marauders at such an early stage gives Terran the initiative and ability to comprehensively attack in speed, strength , and durability. Finally, with such a potent weapon in their arsenal, this grants the T user the ability to create a "grand tactic". They can easily create combinations of strategic decisions that were once considered risky become solid strats given the implied threat(reasons above) of scouting a tech lab attached to a barracks.
|
I think not even allowing other players to read the threads/forum would be counterproductive. Being able to read the discussions of high-level players would help to increase the skills and knowledge of those, like me, who currently lack both, which would then rub off on our posts, raising the average quality of posts all over the forum.
But I can definitely see how having us lowbies piping up with our misguided opinions could hamper high-level discussion, so I voted A 1200pt+ pro-gamer only Subforum (no public write).
|
I'm actually surprised there hasn't already been something like this implemented. It would be so beneficial imo. A much lower percentage of nonsense posts is always good. I voted for the subforum with no public write.
|
Would be nice to have an "x amount of points to post" forum but the public should be able to read it.
|
if we're gonna make an elitist forum, i suggest that only users who have 1200+ rank AND registered before 2008 be able to post.
you know, to keep new blood out of it.
|
I really like the idea of a subforum. I think going by rating is the wrong variable. If TL was to do this I hope they will wait out for the pro league. I am around a 1200 zerg player but about 60% of my games are against higher rated opponents. I have been favored with 1400 players and even with some 1100 players. Some 1500 players perfect 1 strategy. Some 1200 players cheese a lot. To me this says that because of inflation, hidden ELO, and divisions your rating and rank are not accurate measures of skill and only good for estimation.
Wait for pro league.
|
this is a good idea, but with a huge flaw
the point system is constantly inflating at the rate of about 100 points per week
as much as you want points to restrict people from posting, its an idea that won't help the forum index as much as you think.
im pretty sure anyway that most people experienced in the SLIGHTEST with the internet know what information to take to heart and what to overlook.
...but i still voted for 1200pt+ no public write lol
anyone who put no write or read is just a meanie, you should want people to be interested in gathering more information from the elite. these are the people that support esports and are the ones that are a great fan base.
|
What about people like me? I'm knowledgeable at the game but suck :p
Having lots of points doesn't mean your input will be better than the input of some bronze guy, you can observe and be good at theory, yet not exactly be the greatest when it comes to executing them.
|
High amount of ladder points does not equal intelligence. I've seen pro gamers on these forums make troll posts, so it wouldn't really raise the quality of posts one bit.
The only thing that would raise the quality of posts on this forum is more strict rules and better moderating.
|
The forums would improve if you could hide/censor posters you don't like. (If this already exists, hide me! But tell me how to do it first!)
|
Ties to ladder is pretty poor for several reasons, including: not all top players ladder a ton; often, top strategists for a game are not always the best players (and I don't just mean starcraft); and the fluctuating value of a ladder rank. I think a *heavily* moderated, no excuses sub-forum would be fine; with a write privilege taken away as a penalty.
|
1200 is a bit too low tbh, I've seen people on the ladder with 1300+ who'd played 800 games or another absurd number like that and are in the negative or barely breaking even. I'm assuming in a few months time 1300~ will be like the mid diamond rating...
|
On September 21 2010 06:41 Quarion wrote:
Posting in a thread with 11 pages is probably stupid, because no one will notice this post, but there is much better solution in my opinion that is implemented on other forums where people that "knows stuff" post valuable info.
For each post user can get points form other users - they can click "i like it" button or something when they think it is valuable.
When people accumulate points they can get new rank - for example star will appear near their post. When post from people that said something valuable before are marked in some manner you can simply skip all the flood in the thread if you don't have time, and read those marked with stars.
It is quiet easy to implement, don't mess with normal flow of posting that is here now and allows you to quickly evaluate posts value.
Well I posted the exact same thing a few pages back
here and that went unnoticed . I think this is a great idea which has been proven to work in other discussion boards . Looks like it may need a separate thread to bring it to light ...
Edit: Looks like more people are now suggesting the karma system. I strongly support that option instead of separate subforum. Its very powerful especially in situations where poster reputation matters.
|
This seems like a bad idea, because most of the meta game strategy that would be discussed wouldn't help lower level. Also, 500 point diamond is like barely d...
|
I like the idea, but make it higher than 1200...
|
its not a bad idea
but i think its funny that such a system will only create another system showing zerg as being under-represented
|
I think an invite-only thread would be more effiecient than a points based one.
|
Smashboards supported this feature for Super Smash Brothers Melee/Brawl.
The Back Room was used to cultivate discussion on many different topics about Melee, the most important being the tournament ruleset (no items, what are neutral stages, what stages are banned, etc) and advanced techniques (wavedashing, etc). As the game matured, the knowledge of the game spread out throughout the regular forum naturally so that solid strategic advice could be found throughout the forum.
When Brawl came out, however, Smashboards saw a spike in usage from people who had heard that it was the best Melee site but didn't know anything about how Smash worked. All of a sudden, the entire site sucked.
However, the Back Room was busy discussing all the characters, and began releasing threads with their impression of the metagame one at a time. All of a sudden, a tentative tier list was created and threads filled with strategic character-specific analysis were available for newbies to read and post about. It was a huge amount of good information that everyone had access to.
I think an application/invitation-only Back Room would be greatly beneficial to this site. At the end of the day, people are interested in cultivating the highest level of gameplay, and giving the pros a noise-free environment to do so can only help the community.
|
As a general idea, I definitely like it, BUT (as was the case with me in BW) there are several of us that have a deep understanding of the game but not the physical ability to follow through on that understanding. I'm definitely doing much better at sc2 in this regard (and hope to play enough ladder to break 1000 soon lol) but I know that my brain near the end of BW was at the upper levels of play, even if my mechanics weren't there physically. I'd say a better idea is to do an invite system, possibly with the higher level players (1500+ or maybe even higher) being able to nominate people of ANY skill level (playing-wise) who could join in the discussions.
EDIT: This nomination would have be approved by a poll or something - so its not like 1 person can just open it up to anyone. This forum would ideally be read-only to everyone who isn't qualified to post in it - as there really shouldn't be an elite STRATEGY forum... shouldn't everyone have the right to know what higher level players think about it? This isn't to limit the knowledge of the more casual player, its just to prevent trolling and promote a higher level of thinking in serious balance/strategy threads.
This also raises the question of HOW would you link the two (points & posting ability) together? Someone's points can fluctuate from day to day but their skill level will for the most part stay the same (ideally raising slightly over time) AND someone could eventually have 1500 points but hasn't played in 3-4 months and doesn't know the current state of the metagame (which currently seems to be changing by the week). Just a few potential problems with the idea - could just be solved by good coding lol.
|
This is a really great idea. I voted for no public write because it's just going to be detrimental. Lots of guys are going to say that 1200+ isn't good enough and I agree, so I think that it should be a pro player only forum. That way you only have really good players playing, and if they aren't really good it'll just be hilarious.
Bottom line is, there needs to be a place of enlightened, healthy discussion, that TL simply isn't capable of being as it stands. GL TL, I would love to see this.
|
Hmm I think the awesomeness of such a forum might actually be worth the inherent unfairness.
Although ladder points does not directly translate to game understanding; there is a clear correlation.
At the moment I have little motivation to ladder... this would certainly motivate me.
|
The forum should be invite only, points is a stupid idea since there is inflation of points because of the ladder
|
Since points aren't comparable across divisions and the bonus-pool causing some issues i would favor the top100 of the weekly blizzard ranking
|
uhhh
this doesnt make sense because points will only get higher and higher
soon 1200 will be shit
|
On September 21 2010 08:37 Klive5ive wrote:
Hmm I think the awesomeness of such a forum might actually be worth the inherent unfairness.
Although ladder points does not directly translate to game understanding; there is a clear correlation.
At the moment I have little motivation to ladder... this would certainly motivate me.
I agree with this. The problem would be, there would be even more people cheesing just to get to "tl forum" status. I have already come across a ton of profiles with 1100+ points, and their match history shows 1 cheese build per race.
This might be too much work, and also a bit unfair. But what if we allowed on the top tier players to start the forum, (like blizz top 200) then have them invite players who them deem to have quality posts in the regular forum, not necessarily right ones, just well thought out ones.
|
I agree the quality of posting is a problem. I don't really like any of the proposed solutions very much.
Is it possible to invert the thing? Rather than having a protected elite forum, can't the bronzies and relative newcomers be encouraged to discuss in a newcomer-friendly forum/s?
|
On September 21 2010 08:37 Wilko wrote:
Since points aren't comparable across divisions and the bonus-pool causing some issues i would favor the top100 of the weekly blizzard ranking
I mean this one:
http://eu.battle.net/sc2/de/blog/683001
|
On September 21 2010 06:41 Ympulse wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out where WoW drama got into all this. Get that garbage off the SC2 forums.
I agree with the sentiment that a high-level only forum would be great, as long as the general public is able to read it, for educational purposes.
then you're daft. WoW was brought up as an analogy of forums that have already introduced ideas identical to the one in the OP. Rank based posting didn't work to make those forums anymore enjoyable, intelligent, or educational. I don't see it working much better here.
Now a smaller rank based side forum with MORE moderation would do wonders, but without proper moderation no prerequiste subforum will do much aside from individual invitations based on extensive post history.
|
Am i the only one who realizes the sillyness with you taking away our right to write? lol. Just have 2 forums, one for everybody and one that is how you would have it. The best of both, no?
|
I would definitely want an exclusive forum. I would think that x amount of points to post would be kind of hard to keep track of, and if you have people post links to their battle.net accounts to verify it could be abused. Stealing a 1200+ Diamond friend's account who doesn't post on TL wouldn't be hard at all, and pretty soon the forums dedicated to knowledgeable people would be filled again with Bronze League-ers with Diamond friends. Not cool.
As a general idea, I definitely like it, BUT (as was the case with me in BW) there are several of us that have a deep understanding of the game but not the physical ability to follow through on that understanding. I'm definitely doing much better at sc2 in this regard (and hope to play enough ladder to break 1000 soon lol) but I know that my brain near the end of BW was at the upper levels of play, even if my mechanics weren't there physically. I'd say a better idea is to do an invite system, possibly with the higher level players (1500+ or maybe even higher) being able to nominate people of ANY skill level (playing-wise) who could join in the discussions.
I feel like if you really have a deep understanding of the game, then you should be able to follow it up physically. If you think you know a lot about StarCraft II, but end up in Gold or Platinum league, then you obviously don't know as much as you think. It's easy to just blame your mechanics when really your strategies are also at fault. I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but I went through a phase in Brood War where I thought I was the shit just because I lurked TL and browsed Liquipedia. It was a bad phase. If you don't have enough credentials (League and points, as shaky of credentials as they are), then I think you should just keep quiet when discussing more advanced strategies. Therefore, a points only system would be just fine and almost preferable if it could be somehow implemented in fairly and well.
It would be a very hard thing to do, but if it could be done I would be all for it.
|
Perhaps a certain group of top players, have the ability to make threads that only other top players can respond to. Problem is they need to be able to see it, and its a LOT of work for mods, so I dunno.
|
Great! I'll just link my TL account to a high ranked player and bam, I can post.
|
I think 1200 is a little tough. You need about 1220 to be in the top 1,000 in north america so that is really a very small group of players you're talking about. Lowering it down to 1,000 makes for about 5k eligible players who can post, still not very many. I would do maybe 6-800+ or diamond only and then a separate forum for the top 500 or 1000ladder players and all tournament players (not all players that play live tourneys do this for a living). mandatory linking to a profile would be fine, maybe even a welcome edition.
i doubt this will happen as it segregates the community too much. I think TL admins would be fine with a high profile players only forum but probably wouldn't split out 10% of the community away from the others and hold them up like they are too good to speak to anyone else.
That's not my opinion, but I think it's how a lot of TL admins think. Myself, I am used to posting on 2+2 a lot and I really like the way they split up the forums by stakes (it's a poker forum). The game is really very different in different skill levels. Strategies or balances that are true at one skill level do not hold at others.
|
Good posts can come from anyone, and bad posts can from anyone. Theres no need for a forum that requires a certain rating. Good players can be wrong and good players can be right. "Good" players may also not be good. It is up to you as members of the community to report posts that are bad and make sure those posters get warned/banned.
Since people are using AJ and EJ as examples, I'll continue those. ArenaJunkies has a rating requirement to post and the forum has basically become an incessant shit pool of posts that is now just cliques and random shitty posts and whining, little moderation for quality posting. Elitist Jerks on the other hand has no requirements to post, as long as you make a quality post,you wont get reported by the community. You can now get all the information you need for raiding and optimization on the site.
There is no definitive line that would just make a board good. It is up to members to report bad posts and moderators to ban the bad posters. Eventually you'll make progress and get a decent board as a result.
|
The amount of points you have on a ladder means nothing, same with what league you are in. Doesn't it say that somewhere in the posting rules anyway?
|
I'd definitely like it, for reading the posts and whatnot. Perhaps have a way to hide lower ranked players post like the spam hiding feature on youtube and the like? That way, if you wanted to wade in the murk, so to speak, you could.
|
I am not really anti-elitist, but I think it's a bad idea. I think you are overestimating 1200 diamond's a) skill b) understanding of the game c) ability to communicate them clearly and without bias. d)ability to bypass checks. What I'm saying saying is you will still get the usual sc2 forum crap. You might gain a bit, but at the cost of alienating people and undermining the other forums.
The latter is generally why I dont think special forums will ever happen, but I think I'd rather see something like Featured strategy writers/posters, or something to feature people with a record of quality strategy posts. I sort of do this mentally already, and skip certain people and look out for certain people in discussions. I dont know the implementation specifics, but something in that direction is probably more realistic.
edit: just to be clear - I am not opposed to it, but I dont see it happening because it won't be a big improvement given the downsides.
|
On September 21 2010 09:01 ironchef wrote:
I am not really anti-elitist, but I think it's a bad idea. I think you are overestimating 1200 diamond's a) skill b) understanding of the game c) ability to communicate them clearly and without bias. d)ability to bypass checks. What I'm saying saying is you will still get the usual sc2 forum crap. You might gain a bit, but at the cost of alienating people and undermining the other forums.
The latter is generally why I dont think special forums will ever happen, but I think I'd rather see something like Featured strategy writers/posters, or something to feature people with a record of quality strategy posts. I sort of do this mentally already, and skip certain people and look out for certain people in discussions. I dont know the implementation specifics, but something in that direction is probably more realistic.
Yep. I believe it was IdrA who said, "I'm not a game designer; I don't know how to balance the game, just that it needs fixing." or something to that effect.
|
On September 21 2010 08:51 Titan48 wrote:
Good posts can come from anyone, and bad posts can from anyone. Theres no need for a forum that requires a certain rating. Good players can be wrong and good players can be right. "Good" players may also not be good. It is up to you as members of the community to report posts that are bad and make sure those posters get warned/banned.
Since people are using AJ and EJ as examples, I'll continue those. ArenaJunkies has a rating requirement to post and the forum has basically become an incessant shit pool of posts that is now just cliques and random shitty posts and whining, little moderation for quality posting. Elitist Jerks on the other hand has no requirements to post, as long as you make a quality post,you wont get reported by the community. You can now get all the information you need for raiding and optimization on the site.
There is no definitive line that would just make a board good. It is up to members to report bad posts and moderators to ban the bad posters. Eventually you'll make progress and get a decent board as a result.
But we can have both moderation and requirements. I don't see why so many people fail to see this.
|
On September 21 2010 09:03 Medzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 08:51 Titan48 wrote:
Good posts can come from anyone, and bad posts can from anyone. Theres no need for a forum that requires a certain rating. Good players can be wrong and good players can be right. "Good" players may also not be good. It is up to you as members of the community to report posts that are bad and make sure those posters get warned/banned.
Since people are using AJ and EJ as examples, I'll continue those. ArenaJunkies has a rating requirement to post and the forum has basically become an incessant shit pool of posts that is now just cliques and random shitty posts and whining, little moderation for quality posting. Elitist Jerks on the other hand has no requirements to post, as long as you make a quality post,you wont get reported by the community. You can now get all the information you need for raiding and optimization on the site.
There is no definitive line that would just make a board good. It is up to members to report bad posts and moderators to ban the bad posters. Eventually you'll make progress and get a decent board as a result. But we can have both moderation and requirements. I don't see why so many people fail to see this.
The issue is, who will the moderation focus more on: the lower ranked players or the higher ranked? The thought would be that they would be given more leeway and special treatment.
|
On September 21 2010 04:26 VonLego wrote:
An issue with the "idra/lzgamer/huk" level only forum -- Very small group of folks who have the least to gain and most to lose by discussing strategy online. I could be totally off here but that is what I'd think.
This is a great point.
|
I don't know if someone wrote about it - IMO the real problem with the idea of separate sub forum is what would happen to the current SC2 strategy subforum. It could become so bad it would be better to just close it and leave the invite / 1200+ diamond only subforum.
Also, how many invites there would have to be to make it big enough, with good discussions happening daily? There is no point to it if there won't be much going on most of the time.
I think TL Attack, Liquipedia articles news, GSL News and Tournament Roundups news with all of their replays and VODs already serve the purpose that maybe could be achieved with separate subforum.
That's why I also agree with this:
On September 21 2010 06:15 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:09 Seam wrote:
Instead of a "You must be this tall to ride" forum, why not one subforum for Strat/balance discussion that is heavily, heavily modded. In that one anyone who posts something non-constructive or flat out wrong will get punished.
The end would be almost the same as this, but you wouldn't kick out people who may just be unlucky in getting promoted, but know the game. You would still get more quality posts this way. I agree with this.
Netwars.pl in general uses [kkd] tags* for threads where OP wants no morons and trolls to show up.
It makes up for moderation not as strict and sophisticated as that on TL.
*[kkd] is a shortcut of "kacik kulturalnej dyskusji" which (roughly?) means "cultural discussion corner".
I think [hdo] as in "high diamond only" would suit SC2 strategy. Those threads would still be accessible by all users or by all users who added their BN id to their TL profile. Making any statements in those threads while not being high in diamond could be grounds for a ban or warning.
|
I think we (everyone in the community) should be supporting mods in the strat forum
So leave it how it is and start being mature posters.
|
This months 1200 is next months 700s - you get like 500pts a month. The "cuttoff" would have to be ever moving.
|
what makes you think higher level gamers would even wanna post in this forum?
this seems like a lot of "can you guys post your strats for me so I dont have to practice" talk
|
On September 21 2010 09:09 coltrane wrote:
I think we (everyone in the community) should be supporting mods in the strat forum
So leave it how it is and start being mature posters.
If only the world was this simple
|
I always though TLQ being called elitist was just an exaggeration but holy crap. I think I'll take my nerding elsewhere if they enforce something like OP said.
|
The biggest problem I see is segregating the community. Low level players won't get advice from good ones. (who would visit the low level forum if they didn't have to?). That sounds like a way to slowly strangle TL. With fewer new members this site would slowly die. Even during BW this site was picking up members due to the huge amount of knowledge accumulated and healthy discussion. Oh and lets not forget the TL thread about bonus pool point inflation
My suggestion is to have threads, or even individual posts, endorsed by a highly skilled group of individuals that are hand picked to be the best TL has to offer. I'm thinking people who win big tournaments laying down stamps of approval. No fact checking required and if Idra, Morrow, or TLO endorse it it is a good strategy or brings up a valid point.
|
I don't mind the idea.
I'd probably not be able to post in it, but I don't need the strategy forum to inflate ego by spamming posts. I want it to have useful information and discussion for me to read, which is negatively impacted by inaccuracy.
Bad players cry elitism, it's the same in every forum.
Sure, good player does not equal good poster, but it's a lot easier to just mod for good posting when the poor content aspect of uninformed/inexperienced players is taken out of the equation.
|
That would be such motivation to hit 1200+.
Bonus Pool kills it though. So then just a pro/semi-pro forum, invite only.
|
The point system is horrible, there are people with amazing strategcical and theoretical reasoning who are at a lower rating due to not playing so much or just being one of those players with amazing game sense but lacking mechanics. At the same time the 1200 plus are filled with protosses who would not know what to do if they could not 4gate.
Although I would not mind seeing an "elitist" subforum where everyone can read but only the best players can write. It would definitely serve a purpose. But such a subforum needs to be invite only where TL moderators actually decide who gets invited there. That way only players who participate in tournaments and can objectively be seen to be good or players who distinguish themselves through excellent theoretical posts will get invited.
|
On September 21 2010 04:01 Mantikor wrote:Disclaimer; I'm moderate-low quality caliber of player. No way do I attempt to say I'm great at SC2. I'm high rank plat, my games are usually vs. 500pt Diamonds. so.... whats that C or lower in ICCUP? Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:05 vrok wrote:
1200 points? No way. At least over 9000.
Lol, this post is so retarded in so many ways but this takes the cake. C? Dude, you're probably D-/E. Diamond has nothing on C in iCCup.
|
Well it definitely should not be based on points, for one because there will be seasons and points will be wiped clean, and second because 1200 may mean a lot less in a month or so. Like i said before, the TL staff should give certain users of their choice the privilege of posting.
|
I just think it's hilarious that every post starts out with:
well, i'm levels and i'm 1200 diamond, so...
lol
|
This should be obvious: Do you want good people to post in the strategy section?
I'm all for great ideas from smart people, but when smart people have good strategy, they will play well. And I don't want any of the crap where people say "OH LISTEN TO ME EVEN THO I DON'T PLAY GOOD, I ANALYZE GAMES WELL". Everybody thinks they are this way.
Sure, noobs can get good strategic ideas, especially at such an early stage of the game.
But right now the SC2 forums are unusable, and we can't just depend on self-judgment and honor anymore.
|
No. TL already has enough of an elitist reputation as is, no need to make it worse with something inflammatory like this. Remember that 95% of the people who visit this site are not top diamond, they're normal people. So therefore, you're getting 95% of the site posting in the strat forum with really no clue about what they're posting, but that's just kind of the way life is.
Although, what WOULD be a cool idea is if TL started doing a biweekly/monthly/whatever newspost that was high-level players like HuK/TLO/IdrA/whoever talking about some really high-level strategies. That way, it would give them a way to educate us freely, without the problem of every other post being "LOL U SO BAD I MASS REAPERS AND WIN"
|
If you want high level commentary that's what interviews are for.
Strong mechanical abilities can take you very far in SC, even if you don't really have a solid understanding of the game. The ability to replicate successful strategies/techniques from other games does not guarantee any understanding of the game, it just means they can do a lot at once and know how to copy. Limiting discussion to high level players doesn't necessarily mean that discussion will be of higher quality, its just a shift in perspective that reflects the experience of higher level players. But, that doesn't mean that what they say is always going to be correct.
Furthermore, what about racial bias? If lower players opinions aren't valid, then surely the only way to have a valid opinion would be to be a high level player that only plays random, because racial bias means that the opinions would always be tilted unless you are fair to all races.
That's why it's pointless to try and create some kind of elite area for people to discuss the game, even if they are high level players you still have to make a judgement call on their reputation and bias to decide whether what they are saying is valid. Which is the same as if anyone can post, you still have to make the decision on whether their opinion is reliable, regardless of them being high/low level.
|
On September 21 2010 09:44 Gogleion wrote:
This should be obvious: Do you want good people to post in the strategy section?
I'm all for great ideas from smart people, but when smart people have good strategy, they will play well. And I don't want any of the crap where people say "OH LISTEN TO ME EVEN THO I DON'T PLAY GOOD, I ANALYZE GAMES WELL". Everybody thinks they are this way.
Sure, noobs can get good strategic ideas, especially at such an early stage of the game.
But right now the SC2 forums are unusable, and we can't just depend on self-judgment and honor anymore.
That's not entirely true. Raelcun, for example, has a deep understanding of the game, but doesn't play at a high level.
|
I think this is a good idea. Balance talk here is pretty awful, not that there wont be awful posts in this new "private" forum, but it will go a long way in filtering out the noise.
But you do run the risk of segregating the community.
|
There are plenty of people who know a lot that are not that good at the game.
|
On September 21 2010 09:59 Trezeguet23 wrote:
There are plenty of people who know a lot that are not that good at the game.
i really disagree with this sentiment
|
On September 21 2010 09:59 Dommk wrote:
I think this is a good idea. Balance talk here is pretty awful, not that there wont be awful posts in this new "private" forum, but it will go a long will in filtering out the noise. Because pro players NEVER talk about balance. *eyes roll to IdrA, who is sitting in a leather chair smoking a pipe, angrily petting a cat*
But you do run the risk of segregating the community.
It could be argued that you are practically guaranteeing it.
|
On September 21 2010 10:00 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 09:59 Trezeguet23 wrote:
There are plenty of people who know a lot that are not that good at the game. i really disagree with this sentiment
Raelcun doesn't know the game? JoshSuth doesn't know the game? You can't make generalizations like that.
|
I'm fine with a sub-forum where only certain players can write (not letting other players read it is stupid as hell and I can't even fathom how elitist you have to be to be one of the people who voted for that).
My question/issue with this is what the cut-off line would be?
1200 or so might be fine now but that will change as point inflation continues to increase. Who will decide what the cut-off should be? This is completely arbitrary and will likely spark plenty of controversy.
Sounds like a lot of work for the admins too. I wouldn't expect it to happen but would be happy if it did.
(Oh ya, there is also the fact that there are many 1200 players who don't know a damn thing about game balance/aren't good etc.)
|
On September 21 2010 09:57 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 09:44 Gogleion wrote:
This should be obvious: Do you want good people to post in the strategy section?
I'm all for great ideas from smart people, but when smart people have good strategy, they will play well. And I don't want any of the crap where people say "OH LISTEN TO ME EVEN THO I DON'T PLAY GOOD, I ANALYZE GAMES WELL". Everybody thinks they are this way.
Sure, noobs can get good strategic ideas, especially at such an early stage of the game.
But right now the SC2 forums are unusable, and we can't just depend on self-judgment and honor anymore. That's not entirely true. Raelcun, for example, has a deep understanding of the game, but doesn't play at a high level.
And there are also people like Bill gates who drop out of college and end up Billionaires. I think the few people who aren't high ranked but have a deep understanding are few and far between. There really is no best way in handling the situation, you either keep the channel open letting in ALLOT of noise or you limit and run the risk of shutting out a few people who may have a great understanding but don't play exceptionally well but in the process shut out a significant amount of noise.
|
Why promote even more blatant elitism on TL? Mods just need to crack down a little more. We don't need to make this crap worse.
|
you wouldn't need a separate forum for 'elite' players if people weren't so dumb when discussing balance. however i am wary about having an exclusive forum because it rail-roads the discussion of balance, making the guys who play enough games to be 1200+ diamond 'right' and everyone else 'wrong'.
i am skeptical that having an exclusive forum will get rid of the problems anyway. i expect it'll full of nerds who will now have an inflated ego and bigger sense of entitlement to have their arguments gratified.
|
On September 21 2010 09:57 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 09:44 Gogleion wrote:
This should be obvious: Do you want good people to post in the strategy section?
I'm all for great ideas from smart people, but when smart people have good strategy, they will play well. And I don't want any of the crap where people say "OH LISTEN TO ME EVEN THO I DON'T PLAY GOOD, I ANALYZE GAMES WELL". Everybody thinks they are this way.
Sure, noobs can get good strategic ideas, especially at such an early stage of the game.
But right now the SC2 forums are unusable, and we can't just depend on self-judgment and honor anymore. That's not entirely true. Raelcun, for example, has a deep understanding of the game, but doesn't play at a high level.
Please, let me direct you to this
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=137693
This is never going to happen. How in the world would tl verify that your account is 1200? Battle.net Teamliquidbook integration 2.0?
|
On September 21 2010 08:23 DGMavn wrote:
Smashboards supported this feature for Super Smash Brothers Melee/Brawl.
The Back Room was used to cultivate discussion on many different topics about Melee, the most important being the tournament ruleset (no items, what are neutral stages, what stages are banned, etc) and advanced techniques (wavedashing, etc). As the game matured, the knowledge of the game spread out throughout the regular forum naturally so that solid strategic advice could be found throughout the forum.
When Brawl came out, however, Smashboards saw a spike in usage from people who had heard that it was the best Melee site but didn't know anything about how Smash worked. All of a sudden, the entire site sucked.
However, the Back Room was busy discussing all the characters, and began releasing threads with their impression of the metagame one at a time. All of a sudden, a tentative tier list was created and threads filled with strategic character-specific analysis were available for newbies to read and post about. It was a huge amount of good information that everyone had access to.
I think an application/invitation-only Back Room would be greatly beneficial to this site. At the end of the day, people are interested in cultivating the highest level of gameplay, and giving the pros a noise-free environment to do so can only help the community.
No one responded to this. I left smashboards and the melee community shortly after Brawl came out, and the situation they dealt with was similar to this, but much worse since the new people were extremely disrespectful toward the community behind the previous games. However I do think the back room character discussions they hosted were a step in the right direction.
It would be nice to see TL host invite only discussions on strategy topics in a forum closed to all but the best players and contributors. After a week of discussion a mod could move the thread to the SC2 strategy section and open it up for the rest of the users to post in. This way top players have a way to discuss strategy on the forum without interference, and the rest of the community can join the discussion after it has developed from the input of the best players/posters on the site.
|
This goes against so much of what TL is all about.....
|
On September 21 2010 10:08 Sprouter wrote:
you wouldn't need a separate forum for 'elite' players if people weren't so dumb when discussing balance. however i am wary about having an exclusive forum because it rail-roads the discussion of balance, making the guys who play enough games to be 1200+ diamond 'right' and everyone else 'wrong'.
i am skeptical that having an exclusive forum will get rid of the problems anyway. i expect it'll full of nerds who will now have an inflated ego and bigger sense of entitlement to have their arguments gratified.
Look at the forums now. More often than not it opens with "I'm #### Diamond, and I think x" Most often, you already have what you're looking for and it doesn't help.
Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does.
|
On September 21 2010 10:02 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:00 mOnion wrote:On September 21 2010 09:59 Trezeguet23 wrote:
There are plenty of people who know a lot that are not that good at the game. i really disagree with this sentiment Raelcun doesn't know the game? JoshSuth doesn't know the game? You can't make generalizations like that.
I like their casting but I dont know if i would take strategic advice from either of them
|
On September 21 2010 10:08 Butigroove wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 09:57 MythicalMage wrote:On September 21 2010 09:44 Gogleion wrote:
This should be obvious: Do you want good people to post in the strategy section?
I'm all for great ideas from smart people, but when smart people have good strategy, they will play well. And I don't want any of the crap where people say "OH LISTEN TO ME EVEN THO I DON'T PLAY GOOD, I ANALYZE GAMES WELL". Everybody thinks they are this way.
Sure, noobs can get good strategic ideas, especially at such an early stage of the game.
But right now the SC2 forums are unusable, and we can't just depend on self-judgment and honor anymore. That's not entirely true. Raelcun, for example, has a deep understanding of the game, but doesn't play at a high level. Please, let me direct you to this http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=137693This is never going to happen. How in the world would tl verify that your account is 1200? Battle.net Teamliquidbook integration 2.0?
I don't see the point in the link, if it was an argument. If it was an agreement, then I, of course, agree.
But yeah, it's super impractical. Even the ranking sites like SC2Ranks aren't that accurate.
|
On September 21 2010 10:12 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:02 MythicalMage wrote:On September 21 2010 10:00 mOnion wrote:On September 21 2010 09:59 Trezeguet23 wrote:
There are plenty of people who know a lot that are not that good at the game. i really disagree with this sentiment Raelcun doesn't know the game? JoshSuth doesn't know the game? You can't make generalizations like that. I like their casting but I dont know if i would take strategic advice from either of them
This isn't about strategic advice, it's about understanding of the game. That's what most of the controversy is about: people don't want some noob with no understanding butting into their elitist conversation. I'm arguing that rank doesn't necessarily correlate to understanding.
|
On September 21 2010 10:10 MythicalMage wrote:
[
Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does.
QFT.
You don't have to be good at the game to know about the game.
How many football coaches actually played the game on a professional level?
baskteball?
baseball?
any sport?
the fact is, a love (therefore knowledge) of the game does not correspond to a knack for it.
|
On September 21 2010 10:09 PeT[uK] wrote:
This goes against so much of what TL is all about.....
I know, huh.
Pretty retarded crowd SC2 brought in, and not just the people OP was complaining about.
And 1200 is nowhere near C, lol. I'm like D and got 1000 diamond easy.
|
The concept of a sub-forum for top players is to discuss and explore topics of high-level play otherwise irrelevant to the average player. Top-level players would be provided with an invaluable tool to directly communicate and debate with each other (and with a large number of their peers), on the topics that they feel are relevant to their level of play.
Even if you had a heavily-modded open forum that had perfect etiquette and thoughtful posts abound, all bronze player posts would likely only have an element of "political correctness" that is unsupported by high-level experience. High-level players' posts would have a quality of "practical correctness" backed by deep experience.
Let me put it this way, there is almost no way for a well-moderated forum of individuals with extreme dedication to lose out against an also well-moderated forum of people who are only casually dedicated to the game. I mean, just look at the average poster of TL (who is already more dedicated to the game than the average player) compared to other SC sites with casual posters who have much less of a passion for the game.
As for the practical considerations for this sub-forum:
Don't make the cutoff list by ladder points; instead, make the cutoff a top percentile or percent (depending on what the skill level distribution looks like) of the global rankings. Something like the global top 200 would be a good start. This is to avoid having to frequently adjust the cutoff as a result of point inflation/deflation.
Afterwards, add onto the list any well-recognized, subjectively determined VIPs who should have a place in the sub-forum's discussions. With the same reasoning, remove from the list any known abusers/hackers or any players who do not have the same merit (i.e. players who rely completely on the same cheese strategy every game to attain the cutoff).
Player's who have been admitted into the sub-forum, but then fall below the cutoffs later on, should be allowed to stay on for a period of time before having their posting permissions removed. The players would either have to re-attain the cutoff or demonstrate in some other way that they still have the relevant knowledge to participate in the forum with other current top players.
As with any other forum on TL, quality moderation would be in place, although I expect that the need for moderation would be less in this type of sub-forum.
|
On September 21 2010 10:14 leve15 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:10 MythicalMage wrote:
Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does. QFT. You don't have to be good at the game to know about the game. How many football coaches actually played the game? baskteball? baseball? any sport? the fact is, a love (therefore knowledge) of the game does not correspond to a knack for it.
That's what I've been saying. XDDD. That argument was more aimed at balance threads, but often that's what threads degenerate into.
|
yeah no kidding, I was like D+ at best on ICcup and I'm flirting with 1200 points. I don't even play that much.
some people are truly retarded.
|
On September 21 2010 10:10 MythicalMage wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:08 Sprouter wrote:
you wouldn't need a separate forum for 'elite' players if people weren't so dumb when discussing balance. however i am wary about having an exclusive forum because it rail-roads the discussion of balance, making the guys who play enough games to be 1200+ diamond 'right' and everyone else 'wrong'.
i am skeptical that having an exclusive forum will get rid of the problems anyway. i expect it'll full of nerds who will now have an inflated ego and bigger sense of entitlement to have their arguments gratified. Look at the forums now. More often than not it opens with "I'm #### Diamond, and I think x" Most often, you already have what you're looking for and it doesn't help. Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does.
No one has said anything about being a good designer. Being good at the game gives you a pretty good understanding of the game, enough so that you can contribute in a meaningful way to a discussion.
|
On September 21 2010 10:14 leve15 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:10 MythicalMage wrote:
[
Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does. QFT. You don't have to be good at the game to know about the game. How many football coaches actually played the game on a professional level? baskteball? baseball? any sport? the fact is, a love (therefore knowledge) of the game does not correspond to a knack for it.
A good portion of football (soccer) managers worldwide are ex-players. in a lot of ways its beneficial, but it does come with hyped expectations straight out the gate, hence so many people fail at it.
|
QFT.
You don't have to be good at the game to know about the game.
How many football coaches actually played the game on a professional level?
baskteball?
baseball?
any sport?
the fact is, a love (therefore knowledge) of the game does not correspond to a knack for it.
"Hi guys, I have never personally invested in the stock market and made any money, but you should take investing advice from me."
hmm... its possible I guess... but I rather just listen to someone who has done actual investing.
|
8748 Posts
On September 21 2010 06:27 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 06:23 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 06:11 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 06:00 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:35 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:32 tacrats wrote:On September 21 2010 05:30 Archerofaiur wrote:On September 21 2010 05:28 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 21 2010 05:23 Archerofaiur wrote:
I think this thread pretty clearly points out that the real problem is that many in this community dont know how to respect each other. And no a seperate forum will not fix that. I think the problem is that most people don't act in a way that deserves respect. Isnt that kinda the same thing? no people give respect to those that deserve it is not the same as people not respecting anyone at all. I strongly dissagree with the idea that someones other credentials can some how allow them to be disrespectful towards others (if that indeed is your position). I think that is a very misguided approach that personifies this whole dilema (I know more than this guy therefore hes an idiot and my posting style should reflect this). The first thing that happens is someone makes a post. That post can be made in a way that deserves respect or doesn't deserve respect. It doesn't matter whether or not the guy who is going to read the post and respond to it knows how to respect people. That has no influence on whether or not the post is deserving of respect or not. Im not saying you need to write a thesis explaining how the guy is wrong and how he can improve. All im saying is that antagonizing statements (even when the recipeint really doesnt know what hes talking about) do more harm than good. So I'm saying that there's a problem with people making posts undeserving of respect. So someone who doesn't go around respecting every idiot that comes along, that is, someone who respects respect, will wisely disrespect the post undeserving of respect. So there's a post that doesn't deserve respect and now there's a reply that disrespects that post. The guy who made the reply could be perfectly capable of making respectful posts but the problem is that he's responding to someone who doesn't deserve respect. So, disrespect. You suggest that the replier is the problem. These people who read posts and reply disrespectfully are the problem. And you hypothesize that it's because they don't know how to be respectful. 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). 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.
They're both disrespectful but one is vulgar and the other isn't. I don't think anyone really gives a shit about vulgarity around here. So really those two options send the same message: your idea is so bad that I'm not even going to bother explaining why it's bad.
|
I've posted on forums for other games where a 'high level only' subforum was created. Guess what:
qxc and friends aren't going to post on exclusive forums either. That's because they're always DEAD. Nobody posts in these, because if high level players want to talk to each other THEY JUST DO IT. They can contact each other whenever they want! Why would they post in a tiny forum that nobody is to bothering write for when they could just open a chat window?
The reason the rest of us have forums is because we don't know who shares the interests that would drive them to... this forum. Whereas high level gamers don't have this issue.
The OP's idea is just dumb...
|
On September 21 2010 10:18 Gingerninja wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:14 leve15 wrote:On September 21 2010 10:10 MythicalMage wrote:
[
Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does. QFT. You don't have to be good at the game to know about the game. How many football coaches actually played the game on a professional level? baskteball? baseball? any sport? the fact is, a love (therefore knowledge) of the game does not correspond to a knack for it. A good portion of football (soccer) managers worldwide are ex-players. in a lot of ways its beneficial, but it does come with hyped expectations straight out the gate, hence so many people fail at it.
I meant american football, for clarity.
However, my point stands.
Wayne Gretzky isn't coaching anywhere.
Michael Jordan?
Troy Aikman?
TL has always been elitist, which is why it took me seven (7!) years to finally make an account, but this suggestion is honestly beyond anything I could even imagine suggesting.
It's called Liquipedia, morans!
|
On September 21 2010 09:12 mOnion wrote:
what makes you think higher level gamers would even wanna post in this forum?
this seems like a lot of "can you guys post your strats for me so I dont have to practice" talk
Great point.
If it was made the subforum would be devoid of real "pros." Having access to all of their BOs and replays is too much as it is. Creating a forum where everyone would come and hawk out their strats is asking far too much.
|
Another great point.
Here's to this thread ending very shortly.
|
On September 21 2010 10:10 MythicalMage wrote:
Being good at the game doesn't mean you're a game designer, so stop pretending it does.
You're wrong.
You're right in that it doesn't make you capable of making a commercially successful game, but it sure as fuck makes you capable (or more capable, at least) of making a competitively balanced game, if you really want to.
If you're a game designer and you want to know how to make, say, PvP less defined by warpgate play while not massively impacting PvT and PvZ, how the fuck are you going to make that decision? You ask someone who's right at the top of the competitive scene in PvX, because they're the only ones who have a strong and instinctive understanding of how each matchup plays out and why.
You don't get good at this game without understanding how it works in competition.
|
On September 21 2010 05:08 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:06 Tabbris wrote:On September 21 2010 05:02 Fantistic wrote:
This idea will cause a lot of us to feel left out of discussions.
Then again, we can watch IdrA and LaLuSh make MorroW look stupid again. Thread? Also Progamers seem to argue alot amongst eachother on whats viable or not. Its not like they will be some perfect intellectual conversation on starcraft if this happens But just WATCHING this kind of conversation can be so educational. We don't know everything, neither do they, but by discussing it, they can come to much more meaningful conclusions than someone with 25 games under their belt who's trying to argue that an Ultra rush is a viable early game Zerg strat.
*going back to the dawing board* 
|
500pt Diamonds. so.... whats that C or lower in ICCUP?
Thats like D/D-.
|
I could've sworn that when this was first posted, the OP made a different credentials claim than the one up now.
In any case, I just want to stress to anyone who may be reading and not be aware... that iCCup is truly, veritably, demonstrably hard as hell. People used to make entire blogs about ranking up once, and most of those were from people finally attaining D+ or C-. Many of them sported 200+ apm, hours of study on builds and replays, and hours more of watching pro-games. The skill stratification is so deep that every rank is defended by a substantial mechanics and game sense barrier.
So please don't make silly guesses as to your hypothetical iCCup rank. Not only are such guesses irrelevant to SC2 discussion, they're usually unjustified. At least experience the climb to D+ and taste how insanely difficult iCCup is first.
|
First, I thought 1.2k was a bit much, but once u really think about it, that sounds a bit fair (btw, 1.2k is barely d in iccup). Anyways yeah, it might split the community a little, but it's worth it. I rather have a smaller community dedicated to sc2 than another bnet forum (gosh I hate that place now...). The only worry I have is how are u going to prove who u are? People might just snatch random URLs...but I love this idea..I wouldn't even be able to write either.......for now.
Another problem has came up though after writing my las sentence...points are kinda being inflated over time....
|
How about just banning all stupid shitty posts so that TL can be readable most of the time in every single forum section? Oh that's more complicated?!
|
As a noobier player, i think the idea makes sense, but there are several problems such the constant inflation of the ladder that kills things. Not to mention the nightmare of setting up, coding, and maintaining such a system would cause...
In my opinion, i would rather ban a bunch of people than deal with that kind of organizational mess and drama. Although, i am naturally unorganized i suppose.
|
I would really like to see something like this happen. Not sure if points is the best way to determine player skill though (maybe anyone who has ever made it to the Ro8 in any tournament or something?).
I know I'm not good enough to post anything strategy related, and have thus never posted in the strategy forum. But I do absolutely enjoy reading about well defined, practical strategies, and have very high appreciation and respect for being able to dig through these strategies.
I think one problem that TL has in this respect is the exclusion of certain people. I would guess they would want the site accessible to all sorts of players, and a feature like this may discourage some of the community from coming to TL. Well maybe not... maybe more people will come to TL because of the consistent quality of their strategy forum haha. I'm sure the staff will act in the best interest of TL in the end
|
I guess you could make a script to the points required to post in the forums rose at an equal rate as the bonus points to include the inflation. The only time this forum would be a mess would be right after a ladder reset, but it would quickly balance out shortly after once the better people pull ahead.
Also I think points are a good way to do it. True it's not the best indicator of skill, but we do want a good amount of people posting on there. If you're even above 1000 points you will have a basic understanding of the game, or at least understand you don't know everything, and that's enough to add to a discussion.
|
I would be ecstatic about this change, even though it would preclude me being able to post. As long as anyone could read, that would be fantastic.
Honestly, I'm so confused when people say how "elitist" or "high power" TL is. I'm new to SC2 and was very excited to find out about an exclusive group of elitist players who had high power discussions. You can't imagine my disappointment when I actually came to the site. People really talk up TL and how awesome, pro, and elitist it is far too much. I have no doubt but that it was this way in the past, but SC2 seems to have brought a slew of new people to this board that makes it hardly any better than any other SC2 forum, it just has more pretense and arrogance.
|
1200 ia pro gamer now? i guess im a pro gamer.
|
I love the idea of an "1X00+ only" subforum that is public read. With school so busy and not enough practice I still find myself learning and improving as much as I can simply from streams and things like the D9D, as well as the few solid "gems" of threads here on TL, even though they are pretty damn rare. A subforum with SOME sort of limitation on it would encourage top-level players (not just the ones at the proposed limit of course, but tip-top such as referenced in the OP that don't want to argue with the inevitable, and stubborn, bronzies) to at least attempt informative and useful discussion, and hopefully work out well.
Great idea. Seems elitist at first, but I don't think most good/high-diamond (a group I am not a part of, mind you) posters have problems with lower level players looking specifically for help and have an open mind willing to learn. These aren't the players this is about, and said players shouldn't take offense. It's more about the stubborn bullheaded low level players that consistently make issues out of the same thing and refuse to acknowledge any help or suggestions from players that seriously know what they're doing.
|
Almost all of these suggestions sound like a moderator's nightmare, and they are the ones everyone should be selling ideas to imo, since they are the ones that will have to a) implement it, b) enforce it c) stand behind it and d) live with the consequences, which these days are not insignificant in the least.
|
A points limit would be tough, because with the rapid inflation, a "good" amount of points is ever changing. God damn Bonus Pool makes comparing points at different time periods impossible!
At first the people with 1000+ were amazing, when the GSL started someone had 1600 points and it was ridiculous, and now two weeks later two players (HuK and Fenix) have 2k points, and 34 players have at least 1800!!
However, I do support a read-only forum of actual pros though.
|
i wouldn't mind the idea, but 1200 isn't exactly that high... my girlfriend has been 1200+ and im sure she could get there again once she gets used to playing terran.. just switched from P.
|
Completely agree. It could be pros only, it could be high diamonds - both are fine with me as long as it is just a sub-forum.
P.S. It's not about banning people. Why should people who give their opinions in a well-mannered way be banned? It's just that EVERY thread gets 10+ pages for minutes. No one in their right mind will read through all this.
Face it, TL is actually the Blizzard forums for SC2.
|
This is idea is wakeful, unless they make it so elitist that it basically stops being a forum and just becomes the a club. Then it might work I guess, but it would miss the point altoghether.
It stratifies the community. TL.net is amazing because we have such a strong community, and because we have a distinct culture. How many people who don't play WoW anymore still browse Arenajunkies? Like, two. Yet TL.net has masses of frequent visitors who no longer play starcraft, or even game in general, yet still come back for the sites distinctive culture. Being diamond 1500 doesn't make you special on TL.net. Only two groups of people exist on tl.net, pros and joes (and contributors, oh yeah). Being "Diamond 1500" doesn't give you any more right to comment then being "diamond 1000" or "diamond 500".
More strict moderation would be how you solve this problem. Going back to what I said before, a single consolidated place for actual pros with deep understanding of the game to post would be fine as to sort a standard for the level of discussion we want on TL.net (Idra rage notwithstanding), but it wouldn't really be a solution to what the OP is looking for, as it would be too niche (basically just limited to the pros that frequent TL.net and other renown players/contributors.) A "Diamond 1200" forum would be utter crap.
|
On September 21 2010 11:35 starcraft911 wrote:
i wouldn't mind the idea, but 1200 isn't exactly that high... my girlfriend has been 1200+ and im sure she could get there again once she gets used to playing terran.. just switched from P.
Hmm.. When was the last time you went clubbing?
|
|
|
On September 21 2010 10:14 whitelynx wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:09 PeT[uK] wrote:
This goes against so much of what TL is all about..... I know, huh. Pretty retarded crowd SC2 brought in, and not just the people OP was complaining about. And 1200 is nowhere near C, lol. I'm like D and got 1000 diamond easy.
no i'm saying that prohibiting newer players from conversations is against the community aspect of TL. This is suppose to be a welcoming environment, what kind of message does this send to them?
This is probably not the best place to do this kind of shit. Do it on another site
|
no, make it 1400+ and then next week make it 1600+
1200 was yesterday's 1400, this awful ladder system is so inflated in points right now any donk can get to 1200
|
In my mind this is a place for baddies like myself to come and learn. I want to see debate between people who know what they're talking about. The last thing i want to see is people like me arguing with people like me, and lowering the standards. I find it interesting that TL would allow anyone to sign up and post here, that's really generous. The last thing you want to do though is drive away people who are worth having. It's not like i'm paying a cent to be here - i have no rights, i am a guest.
So i think instead of framing it as "make a new forum for good players" you should instead "make a forum for baddies". The main forum should be for good players to talk about this game and anyone who wants to post there should earn the right. That should be the default imo. Then if i'm allowed to read the main quality form and possibly learn a thing or two, then great.
If you're kind enough to make a forum for people with crap ratings, then that's great too. There won't be any benefit to it unless some decent players are willing to argue with a dozen bronze people. But if they want to do that, then that's marvellous. If baddies are willing to admit they suck and try and learn from decent players willing to share the knowledge, then that's awesome.
Take your site back.
edit: and i use the term baddies with all due respect.
|
Its not a terrible idea at all, however due to the way that the ladder currently works, you would need to continuously update the required ratings.
1200 was "pro" 2 months ago, 1800 will be a decent rating tomorrow, and a month from now likely over 2400. I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this. As the lower players improve, the low/mid tier diamond players will eventually suck rating from them, and the cycle continues.
|
On September 21 2010 13:11 PeT[uK] wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 10:14 whitelynx wrote:On September 21 2010 10:09 PeT[uK] wrote:
This goes against so much of what TL is all about..... I know, huh. Pretty retarded crowd SC2 brought in, and not just the people OP was complaining about. And 1200 is nowhere near C, lol. I'm like D and got 1000 diamond easy. no i'm saying that prohibiting newer players from conversations is against the community aspect of TL. This is suppose to be a welcoming environment, what kind of message does this send to them? This is probably not the best place to do this kind of shit. Do it on another site
what kind of message? a message that should already exist in their minds but clearly it doesnt. if you dont know what you're talking about then don't pretend to. we are adults not pre schoolers. its not like we need to protect the fragile psyche of noobs (who, apparently, dont realize they're noobs yet)
i know when i begin playing a new competitive game, i keep my mouth quiet until i feel like im a very experienced/skilled player.
|
Or even better, link it to the TLPD? I dont really know how the TLPD works but I guess only games from quarter-finals> and invite tours get placed there?
X amount of games required in the TLPD to be allowed to post, or something...
|
I think it's a good idea, 1200 not exactly pro or not exactly even close to pro, but you need to have some knowledge of balance, and you're not going to make any retarded statements that I read far too often.
|
i've been on a forum designed for people with good ratings before. It was ok but didn't exactly have any improved forum etiquette, strategy discussion or post quality.
|
Yeah problems of elitism would arose. But I mean there is a point where I think this would be acceptable. I mean because logic dictates that this is a smart idea, but its kind of wishy washy if its wrong or a disservice to the public or not.
And I think we would have to wait a season or something to see where the real point caps are for each skill level if not more.
|
On September 21 2010 08:27 KnightOfNi wrote:
As a general idea, I definitely like it, BUT (as was the case with me in BW) there are several of us that have a deep understanding of the game but not the physical ability to follow through on that understanding. I'm definitely doing much better at sc2 in this regard (and hope to play enough ladder to break 1000 soon lol) but I know that my brain near the end of BW was at the upper levels of play, even if my mechanics weren't there physically. I'd say a better idea is to do an invite system, possibly with the higher level players (1500+ or maybe even higher) being able to nominate people of ANY skill level (playing-wise) who could join in the discussions.
EDIT: This nomination would have be approved by a poll or something - so its not like 1 person can just open it up to anyone. This forum would ideally be read-only to everyone who isn't qualified to post in it - as there really shouldn't be an elite STRATEGY forum... shouldn't everyone have the right to know what higher level players think about it? This isn't to limit the knowledge of the more casual player, its just to prevent trolling and promote a higher level of thinking in serious balance/strategy threads.
This also raises the question of HOW would you link the two (points & posting ability) together? Someone's points can fluctuate from day to day but their skill level will for the most part stay the same (ideally raising slightly over time) AND someone could eventually have 1500 points but hasn't played in 3-4 months and doesn't know the current state of the metagame (which currently seems to be changing by the week). Just a few potential problems with the idea - could just be solved by good coding lol.
Sorry, but there's no such thing as a sub-1000 point player who knows more about the game than a 1500 point player. I hate to break it to you, but this kind of thinking has no truth in it at all; it's just what bad players tell themselves to make themselves feel better. If a real top player didn't play for 3-4 months, he would be able to get back in shape and compete with the rest of the top players in anywhere from a day to a week. There's no such thing as being a Starcraft genius in thinking about the game. You can't say "oh, I may be a 500 point gold player but I'm 1500+ diamond when it comes to strategy!" It just doesn't work that way because experience, skill, and knowledge go hand in hand. You really can't have one without the other. So yeah, you can keep on kidding yourself by saying "oh, if I were to work just a bit harder, I'd be top 100 easily." Or you can actually have a healthy mindset and acknowledge that your knowledge is lacking and that you actually need to work more at the game.
Because I hate to break it to you, but this is Starcraft 2. It's not mechanics that are holding anyone back. It's knowledge.
This wasn't directed towards you in particular, but to people in general who make claims like these. So sorry if I offended you...
|
i feel like someone should link the "truth about diamond league" thread if someone hasn't already
this is exactly what that thread was saying we should not do..
assume people above a certain # of points in diamond know what they are talking about...
|
United States11390 Posts
On September 21 2010 08:27 KnightOfNi wrote:
As a general idea, I definitely like it, BUT (as was the case with me in BW) there are several of us that have a deep understanding of the game but not the physical ability to follow through on that understanding. I'm definitely doing much better at sc2 in this regard (and hope to play enough ladder to break 1000 soon lol) but I know that my brain near the end of BW was at the upper levels of play, even if my mechanics weren't there physically. I'd say a better idea is to do an invite system, possibly with the higher level players (1500+ or maybe even higher) being able to nominate people of ANY skill level (playing-wise) who could join in the discussions.
EDIT: This nomination would have be approved by a poll or something - so its not like 1 person can just open it up to anyone. This forum would ideally be read-only to everyone who isn't qualified to post in it - as there really shouldn't be an elite STRATEGY forum... shouldn't everyone have the right to know what higher level players think about it? This isn't to limit the knowledge of the more casual player, its just to prevent trolling and promote a higher level of thinking in serious balance/strategy threads.
This also raises the question of HOW would you link the two (points & posting ability) together? Someone's points can fluctuate from day to day but their skill level will for the most part stay the same (ideally raising slightly over time) AND someone could eventually have 1500 points but hasn't played in 3-4 months and doesn't know the current state of the metagame (which currently seems to be changing by the week). Just a few potential problems with the idea - could just be solved by good coding lol.
In another post, you said that you were barely d+ in BW.
That doesn't even come close to a "deep understanding" of the game. Your brain isn't even anywhere near upper levels of play and don't blame it on excuses like hurrr my mechanics suck but i could be olympic if they were better!!!! There are so many things that don't even become apparent without actually playing the game. Just watching pros play may give you the impression that you know what is going on but you really don't.
Stop with the sc2gg level of extrapolation please.
|
personlay i dont think this would make any difference unless u just made it "known" players. beacuse like idra has stated ppl rating are infalted via balance issues, so to him a rdm 1400pt terran is still a dumbass noob who doesnt know wat they are playing
|
Oh the irony of seeing 95% of posts made on accounts created after April 21st, AKA teamliquid beta key giveaway day.
|
IMO should be invite only sub-forum that non-invitees can only read. Then have TL admins only invite top players
|
On September 21 2010 13:53 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 08:27 KnightOfNi wrote:
As a general idea, I definitely like it, BUT (as was the case with me in BW) there are several of us that have a deep understanding of the game but not the physical ability to follow through on that understanding. I'm definitely doing much better at sc2 in this regard (and hope to play enough ladder to break 1000 soon lol) but I know that my brain near the end of BW was at the upper levels of play, even if my mechanics weren't there physically. I'd say a better idea is to do an invite system, possibly with the higher level players (1500+ or maybe even higher) being able to nominate people of ANY skill level (playing-wise) who could join in the discussions.
EDIT: This nomination would have be approved by a poll or something - so its not like 1 person can just open it up to anyone. This forum would ideally be read-only to everyone who isn't qualified to post in it - as there really shouldn't be an elite STRATEGY forum... shouldn't everyone have the right to know what higher level players think about it? This isn't to limit the knowledge of the more casual player, its just to prevent trolling and promote a higher level of thinking in serious balance/strategy threads.
This also raises the question of HOW would you link the two (points & posting ability) together? Someone's points can fluctuate from day to day but their skill level will for the most part stay the same (ideally raising slightly over time) AND someone could eventually have 1500 points but hasn't played in 3-4 months and doesn't know the current state of the metagame (which currently seems to be changing by the week). Just a few potential problems with the idea - could just be solved by good coding lol. Sorry, but there's no such thing as a sub-1000 point player who knows more about the game than a 1500 point player. I hate to break it to you, but this kind of thinking has no truth in it at all; it's just what bad players tell themselves to make themselves feel better. If a real top player didn't play for 3-4 months, he would be able to get back in shape and compete with the rest of the top players in anywhere from a day to a week. There's no such thing as being a Starcraft genius in thinking about the game. You can't say "oh, I may be a 500 point gold player but I'm 1500+ diamond when it comes to strategy!" It just doesn't work that way because experience, skill, and knowledge go hand in hand. You really can't have one without the other. So yeah, you can keep on kidding yourself by saying "oh, if I were to work just a bit harder, I'd be top 100 easily." Or you can actually have a healthy mindset and acknowledge that your knowledge is lacking and that you actually need to work more at the game. Because I hate to break it to you, but this is Starcraft 2. It's not mechanics that are holding anyone back. It's knowledge. This wasn't directed towards you in particular, but to people in general who make claims like these. So sorry if I offended you...
You don't seem to understand that not everyone has the time to play to high rating.
For example, I'm somewhere around 1k points or something right now but by no means have I hit a cap... I just don't play enough to get my rating high
|
On the Battle.net forums I would think this idea is stupid. Here on the Team Liquid forums, the idea holds alot of weight. It really is only up to the people who run the site though if any changes like this were to happen, so I'll let them figure it out.
In the mean time, I think the mods are doing a hell of a job taking care of trolls and banning the trash that comes to the forums. They're doing a much better job than the Blizzard mods are on their forums anyways.
|
1200 is way too low. If you did this, its only a matter of time until most people can post in it anyway. The ratings are only getting higher and will continue to do so over time. Player based and not rating based imo.
Big tourney placements, winners, and commentary personnel.
|
On September 21 2010 14:05 -orb- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 13:53 Saracen wrote:On September 21 2010 08:27 KnightOfNi wrote:
As a general idea, I definitely like it, BUT (as was the case with me in BW) there are several of us that have a deep understanding of the game but not the physical ability to follow through on that understanding. I'm definitely doing much better at sc2 in this regard (and hope to play enough ladder to break 1000 soon lol) but I know that my brain near the end of BW was at the upper levels of play, even if my mechanics weren't there physically. I'd say a better idea is to do an invite system, possibly with the higher level players (1500+ or maybe even higher) being able to nominate people of ANY skill level (playing-wise) who could join in the discussions.
EDIT: This nomination would have be approved by a poll or something - so its not like 1 person can just open it up to anyone. This forum would ideally be read-only to everyone who isn't qualified to post in it - as there really shouldn't be an elite STRATEGY forum... shouldn't everyone have the right to know what higher level players think about it? This isn't to limit the knowledge of the more casual player, its just to prevent trolling and promote a higher level of thinking in serious balance/strategy threads.
This also raises the question of HOW would you link the two (points & posting ability) together? Someone's points can fluctuate from day to day but their skill level will for the most part stay the same (ideally raising slightly over time) AND someone could eventually have 1500 points but hasn't played in 3-4 months and doesn't know the current state of the metagame (which currently seems to be changing by the week). Just a few potential problems with the idea - could just be solved by good coding lol. Sorry, but there's no such thing as a sub-1000 point player who knows more about the game than a 1500 point player. I hate to break it to you, but this kind of thinking has no truth in it at all; it's just what bad players tell themselves to make themselves feel better. If a real top player didn't play for 3-4 months, he would be able to get back in shape and compete with the rest of the top players in anywhere from a day to a week. There's no such thing as being a Starcraft genius in thinking about the game. You can't say "oh, I may be a 500 point gold player but I'm 1500+ diamond when it comes to strategy!" It just doesn't work that way because experience, skill, and knowledge go hand in hand. You really can't have one without the other. So yeah, you can keep on kidding yourself by saying "oh, if I were to work just a bit harder, I'd be top 100 easily." Or you can actually have a healthy mindset and acknowledge that your knowledge is lacking and that you actually need to work more at the game. Because I hate to break it to you, but this is Starcraft 2. It's not mechanics that are holding anyone back. It's knowledge. This wasn't directed towards you in particular, but to people in general who make claims like these. So sorry if I offended you... You don't seem to understand that not everyone has the time to play to high rating. For example, I'm somewhere around 1k points or something right now but by no means have I hit a cap... I just don't play enough to get my rating high
Then keep playing until you're capped when you find the time and you'll see where you really stand.
I think the main reason a lot of people refuse to ladder as much (besides time constraints, of course) is that they're afraid of realizing that they're actually worse than they thought they were. Again, this isn't directed towards you in particular, but to the general public.
|
1. How do you want to prove it? Checking and validating these things is too much bureaucratic effort for the TL staff IMO.
2. The points are always increasing, so a fixed limit is junk anyways. What about plaers who drop below / stop playing?
3. Do you really think that only high rank players have the brains to think about it? Maybe they just have the reflexes but a brain like a moron?
Terrible idea ...
|
I think it's a good idea only in the fact that I'll have a great laugh when the quality of posts doesn't actually increase. Instead of attempting to seize respect, try actually formulating well constructed posts and limiting responses in threads that are drama fest/lack real merit. I don't see how segregating the a good portion of the user base will actually improve the quality of discussion on teamliquid.
At this moment there are only 3190 people above 1200 diamond anyways, 1201 from North American servers 727 from Europe, and that's before considering for dual accounts. How many of those players do you think would actively contribute to this proposed sub forum.
If some lowly 1150 rated Diamond player wanted to inquire as to the opinions of the people he probably considers his competitive peers. How is he/she supposed to go about doing that, exactly? Would there be a separate sub forum in which the plebeian lifeforms that constitute the majority of TL's userbase could prostrate ourselves in subjugation before our new higher ranked overlords, as we plead for their advice. When I take a knee I shall inquire, "Oh great 1400+ rated diamond protoss please sire reveal your wisdom to me." to which my beloved superior will reply, "Well four gating has worked pretty good for me, but sometimes I mix it up and make void rays."
|
Wouldn't it be safer to just give the right to post to certain players that have proved themselves (Give this privilege to admins/mods) than have an arbitrary point value? That way, we are still able to get high quality posts, without some random number. I mean, just listen to Day9 talk about 4gating to a high win/loss.
|
On September 21 2010 14:09 Rabiator wrote:
1. How do you want to prove it? Checking and validating these things is too much bureaucratic effort for the TL staff IMO.
2. The points are always increasing, so a fixed limit is junk anyways. What about plaers who drop below / stop playing?
3. Do you really think that only high rank players have the brains to think about it? Maybe they just have the reflexes but a brain like a moron?
Terrible idea ...
1. Not at all
2. You know, there are measures of peoples' skill that don't inflate... And players who stop playing will probably stop posting as well, so I don't see the problem
3. Are you serious...
|
TL.net has come a long way compared to other sites without compromising forum post quality due to the extra mile most of the admins and mods put in, don't fix whats not broken.
Saying that, if I had to choose between a minimum rating to post section vs an invite-only to post section of the forum (both would add too much unnecessary management overhead IMO), I would personally prefer invite-only. Though it does help to weed out some unnecessary/troll posts, it would not solve the problem of flame wars which still do happen between top players.
I feel like the reason why people think an "elite section" would solve the forum etiquette problem is due to the fact that the ratio of non top-tier players far outweigh that of top-tier players and hence people see more trolls/flame wars between lower-tier and naturally assume as such.
|
Some of the responses here are totally totally idiotic.
On the average, a 1500+ player will have more knowledge of the game than a 1000- player. Period. This means that on the average, a 1500+ subforum would have more useful posts than a forum open to anybody.
I don't see how you could possibly make the argument that a forum open to anybody would have better posts than a forum open only to the top tier of players. Does that make sense at all to you? Doesn't make sense to me.
And as for the elitist thing. Duh. You're coming to a website to learn more about Starcraft (if you're bad) or share your knowledge of Starcraft (if you're good). That inherently forms an elitist mentality where there are the goods who are separated from the bads - this type of elitism is not a bad thing and is present anywhere there are people who are superior to others.
I don't know whether I support such a forum, but come on guys. Really?
|
On September 21 2010 14:09 Rabiator wrote:
1. How do you want to prove it? Checking and validating these things is too much bureaucratic effort for the TL staff IMO.
2. The points are always increasing, so a fixed limit is junk anyways. What about plaers who drop below / stop playing?
3. Do you really think that only high rank players have the brains to think about it? Maybe they just have the reflexes but a brain like a moron?
Terrible idea ...
i dont know why noobs think they can just think/theory craft about starcraft balance/strategy
this would work if there wasnt time involved in this game
you dont know how squeezed you are in a matchup until you face the time constraints required to counter a certain build/army
like playing vs double gate zealot pressure into expand/double robo collossus timing attack
everyone noob and their mothers are gonna say something like "just get roaches and quick tech to brewdl0rds!"
|
Not sure if this is mentioned already but i think a rating system would be better where people can rate each other's posts and only the people with +100 rating can post on the subforums.
This way bronze leaugers who have a deep understanding and repectful has a chance to post.
Sure top player who are hated will not get to post but it will keep the trolls out.
Also having a 1200 pt requirement is unfair for us zergs at least for this patch.
|
I suggest 1,000+ for zerg, and 1,800+ for protoss and terran to encourage an equal level of discussion.
|
All the TL staff would have to do is limit it per user. Or better yet, have the high level players send the TL staff member a PM saying "allow me to post in this section." From there they can allow / deny. Simple as that
|
United Kingdom2950 Posts
I don't think it should really be based on points, but rather just a simple invite-only, no public write forum. Players and forum users who the TL admin staff believe are adequate posters and have a deep understanding of the game can then be invited to participate.
|
These people who claim that they are or their are players who are in low leagues or points but possess equal or greater knowledge then higher ranked players kind of reminds me of poker.
In the case of people who watch poker they all think that they can play at the highest level and scoff at pro players when they make mistakes, and they - while viewing all the cards, having all the information - will claim that they would make the correct play if they were in that spot.
|
On September 21 2010 14:20 Zeroes wrote:
Not sure if this is mentioned already but i think a rating system would be better where people can rate each other's posts and only the people with +100 rating can post on the subforums.
This way bronze leaugers who have a deep understanding and repectful has a chance to post.
Sure top player who are hated will not get to post but it will keep the trolls out.
Also having a 1200 pt requirement is unfair for us zergs at least for this patch.
There's no such thing as a bronze leaguer who has a deep understanding of the game. There's not having played enough to get to high rating, but if you have a deep understanding of the game you can get to diamond with only 10 apm. You don't need mechanics to get above platinum... a deep understanding of the game is plenty
|
I think the idea of having an 'elitest' forum where only the top players can post but is avaliable to everyone to read is an amazing idea - and to be honust, from my experiance in reading the strategy forums, this is almost a 'must have' idea for TL.
Although I disagree with 1200+
At the moment im flucturating from 1200-1300 (Havnt ladderd properly in about 2 weeks) and I would not be interested in reading ideas from people around my skill level.
I dont think people understand how ''easy'' it is to get to 1200-1300 at the moment, theres people up there who know one solid build and have average macro/micro and/or cheese there way to victory which is very easy to do since battle.net league games are a BO1.
Having a forum where TOP TOP players can post would be extremely interesting to read as these players have huge understanding of the game whereas 1200-1300 rated players do not
* Im not trying to flame all 1200-1300 people as I am one myself, but I just want to point out that the difference of skill level of players in 1200-1300 rating is hugely different as people have reached that level in different ways, some aquire alot more knowledge of the game on there journey up *
|
I say increase the point minimum from 1200+ to 1700+. Also, won't you have to constantly update the point value as everyone plays more?
|
On September 21 2010 14:12 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 14:09 Rabiator wrote:
1. How do you want to prove it? Checking and validating these things is too much bureaucratic effort for the TL staff IMO.
2. The points are always increasing, so a fixed limit is junk anyways. What about plaers who drop below / stop playing?
3. Do you really think that only high rank players have the brains to think about it? Maybe they just have the reflexes but a brain like a moron?
Terrible idea ... 1. Not at all 2. You know, there are measures of peoples' skill that don't inflate... And players who stop playing will probably stop posting as well, so I don't see the problem 3. Are you serious...
Part of the problem is players don't understand that knowing a colossus is good against hydras is not high level strategy. Knowing exactly what units can do, knowing all of the timings (including 60-100 food timings) is going to become a huge deal and unless you can actually execute at a high level and HAVE TO KNOW those timings, they're almost impossible to learn.
The other day I heard someone tell me "you can defend a 2 gate with a 14 hatch 14 pool". It sounded insane to me, I know how tough it is to defend a 2 gate with a 14 pool, and that's a pretty big delay. But then you see it and you realize that your pool will pop and you can have 4 larva ready and quickly build 2 queens which is a huge deal for defense vs having just 1 queen and 6 lings. And then my mind was literally BLOWN, it's EASIER to defend a 2 gate with a 14 hatch than with a 14 pool.
Again, players at my level (1000 diamond) are not in a position to even really figure out things at this level, very early timings because we don't have to, just getting better at the simplest things will push me to higher levels than any of that stuff. It's easy to look at a game from a high level player and see all the things he could have done that you "would have done", but what you don't see are the 1000 little mistakes that he didn't make that you would have. And the thing is, it's because he doesn't make those other mistakes that he's even in a position that his mistakes matter.
As someone less than 1200 diamond, and not yet at that level, I will openly say that players at my level are terrible, they don't know why they're scouting half the time, they don't know how to recognize very basic things and they poorly execute some build they probably copied of a decent player that they execute 1000x worse.
Important Point, also TL:DR
Even if some 500 gold player has an 1800 diamond level understanding of strategy, the gain from that is nowhere near the loss form the million other 500 gold players that will want to comment as well, it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make, and many others who would be interested in reading higher level players thoughts should be willing to make. It is literally the difference between giving good players incentives to share their thoughts and not, and the former is clearly better.
|
This thread is great proof of the downsides to a ladder ranking system, it leads to elitism and arrogance. This game has not even been out 6 months and already we have players who want to segregate themselves from others because they view themselves as "better players".
The argument is going back and forth about whether good players have "enough knowledge" about the game. For the strategy forum, this may be the issue, but good post content goes far beyond the strategy forum. What about the guy who discovered the +7% mineral trick? Do we know that he is a 1500 point diamond player? If the best players know the most about the game, why didn't Idra or HuK make a post about this? What about the great posts about the number of optimal workers, the guy whose been making that awesome machinima, or the guy who created YABOT; were they 1200 point diamond players? What about HD and Husky, who brought us one of the best tournaments of the beta, how much do you want to bet they are not both 1200 point diamond players?
I get the issue, TL has been plagued by terrible posts and know-it-alls in the strategy forum spewing nonsense and acting like it is RTS gospel; in some cases even being so bold as to attempt to counter the knowledge of well know pro players. However the issue is not that they are simply not "as good of players". TL has been plagued by crap posts because TL has an abundance of crap posters. Good content is generated by good posters, not necessarily by good players. Good posters know when they can offer insightful strategy knowledge and when they should defer to players with more insight on the subject. Good posters know when they have something interesting and useful to share and when creating a thread would be a waste of electrons. Good posters know how to remain GM in the face of total noobery. Good posters know how to be good, contributing members of the community. Playing lots of Starcraft cannot and will not teach this, and segregating yourself from the rest of the community based on how many points you have in bnet would accomplish nothing other than to break a community in two.
Mind you I think the mods on TL do an excellent job of wielding the ban hammer and I mean no disrespect to them. But if anyone on TL deserves a special forum, it should the the posters who continually exhibit GM and whose posts are always full of good content. That would be something helpful to the community.
|
Let it be. Even noobs might have something important to add to conversations or point out something that needs discussion. People should just make better posts.
And mods could just release the kraken on the strategy forum.
|
On September 21 2010 14:34 -orb- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 14:20 Zeroes wrote:
Not sure if this is mentioned already but i think a rating system would be better where people can rate each other's posts and only the people with +100 rating can post on the subforums.
This way bronze leaugers who have a deep understanding and repectful has a chance to post.
Sure top player who are hated will not get to post but it will keep the trolls out.
Also having a 1200 pt requirement is unfair for us zergs at least for this patch. There's no such thing as a bronze leaguer who has a deep understanding of the game. There's not having played enough to get to high rating, but if you have a deep understanding of the game you can get to diamond with only 10 apm. You don't need mechanics to get above platinum... a deep understanding of the game is plenty
I just used bronze leaguer as an example and there are many low level who have good questions to ask.
I do think this system would be better than what the OP proposed.
Because:
1. Good players aren't always a good poster
2. It will filter out the BM and trolls
3. It will keep the quialty posters high
|
On September 21 2010 14:41 HwangjaeTerran wrote:
Let it be. Even noobs might have something important to add to conversations or point out something that needs discussion. People should just make better posts.
And mods could just release the kraken on the strategy forum.
As far as I know, it hasn't been suggested to eliminate any of the current forums/topics. It would simply allow the better players a place to post without having 10 random noskill players trying to say they are wrong. There's nothing stopping topics in a pro section from being also made in another section of the forum for discussion between everyone else.
Anyways, I'm for making a pro section for discussion to allow more of the upper-tier players to discuss issues without having randoms try to say they're wrong without proof, and it would allow imbalances to be spotted easier among the pro-level.
|
On September 21 2010 14:42 Zeroes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 14:34 -orb- wrote:On September 21 2010 14:20 Zeroes wrote:
Not sure if this is mentioned already but i think a rating system would be better where people can rate each other's posts and only the people with +100 rating can post on the subforums.
This way bronze leaugers who have a deep understanding and repectful has a chance to post.
Sure top player who are hated will not get to post but it will keep the trolls out.
Also having a 1200 pt requirement is unfair for us zergs at least for this patch. There's no such thing as a bronze leaguer who has a deep understanding of the game. There's not having played enough to get to high rating, but if you have a deep understanding of the game you can get to diamond with only 10 apm. You don't need mechanics to get above platinum... a deep understanding of the game is plenty I just used bronze leaguer as an example and there are many low level who have good questions to ask. I do think this system would be better than what the OP proposed.
Yes but the point/problem is there are far more low level players that are bitching and moaning about balance with almost no understanding of the game than low level players that genuinely want to learn to play and have good questions.
TL quality has dropped alot due to the masses of low level players starting whine thread after whine thread and bombarding any good post with flames. Honestly it's pretty hard to read or participate in the forums nowadays and I'm sure I'm not the only one who's started to visit less and less.
|
Being one of the bronze scrubs referred to by this, I would enjoy a sub forum where I could easily find intelligent threads to read rather than wading through all the threads that currently float around. If people come here to get better then it will only help them to have a restricted space that will protect them from learning bad ideas from other bad players.
I do however think points are meaningless and that a before suggested rating/karma system perhaps that automatically let you in if you provided a number of good posts to the forum that indicated you were worthy of having your ideas in the restricted space. It would make sense that you'd need a number of rated posts rather than a single or couple of well rated posts. For example many people would up vote a really good custom map like YABOT, but this doesn't necessarily indicate a user is able to discuss strategy. Many of these systems already exist and would be fairly simple to moderate compared to entirely subjective moderator choices or having to implement a custom battle net linkage system.
I think if the sub forum were open to the public, then people should have absolutely no issue with it. After all, if anything, this forum would benefit them. If good players feel they cannot contribute, then they will leave, and that will make TL a worse place overall. Having a super exclusive club would also give players incentive to get better and provide insightful posts in order to try and gain access.
I'm not certain something like this is required, however I think it would be a nice idea regardless if it could be implemented easily enough to make it worth doing.
|
I still think if top players really want to discuss without interruption, they can do so in an irc chat or whatever their preferred client is. If they care enough to help the community, they could post their chat logs. Discussion without interruption is extremely easy, if they want to talk amongst themselves yet have that chat available, they can.
Or if exceptionally skilled players want to help, they can make videos, or write articles. Sectioning off a section of the forum won't achieve much. People would likely condescend even more. They would urge each other to stick to their proper forums. The special members would be told to go back to their tower while those who missed the cutoff would be insulted for their low status. We aren't Sneetches. We don't need stars on our bellies.
Edit: That was post 123 for me. How appropriate that I referenced Dr. Seuss.
|
because a 50 post OP is the most trustworthy opinion
|
Meh. I find bronze leaguers are the most polite posters on TL. They know they're worse, so they don't have the ego to go around touting their ideas as truth/flaming other posters.
But if a system like this were to be implemented then I think it would be better to get pros on TL to verify a player as good enough to post rather than referring to ELOs. Skill varies too much in diamond for any reliability. You can get to 1200+ simply with mass games/cheese.
|
On September 21 2010 14:47 oxxo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 14:42 Zeroes wrote:On September 21 2010 14:34 -orb- wrote:On September 21 2010 14:20 Zeroes wrote:
Not sure if this is mentioned already but i think a rating system would be better where people can rate each other's posts and only the people with +100 rating can post on the subforums.
This way bronze leaugers who have a deep understanding and repectful has a chance to post.
Sure top player who are hated will not get to post but it will keep the trolls out.
Also having a 1200 pt requirement is unfair for us zergs at least for this patch. There's no such thing as a bronze leaguer who has a deep understanding of the game. There's not having played enough to get to high rating, but if you have a deep understanding of the game you can get to diamond with only 10 apm. You don't need mechanics to get above platinum... a deep understanding of the game is plenty I just used bronze leaguer as an example and there are many low level who have good questions to ask. I do think this system would be better than what the OP proposed. Yes but the point/problem is there are far more low level players that are bitching and moaning about balance with almost no understanding of the game than low level players that genuinely want to learn to play and have good questions. TL quality has dropped alot due to the masses of low level players starting whine thread after whine thread and bombarding any good post with flames. Honestly it's pretty hard to read or participate in the forums nowadays and I'm sure I'm not the only one who's started to visit less and less.
The people who bitch and moan about balance will not get good karma/ratings and won't be allowed to post in the sub fourms.
TL quality has dropped because of the masses it not all the low level people's fault. I know many daimond level players who rage about balance.
|
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open.
|
On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open.
I know i hate this discrimination. Why can only veterans be moderators? All users are created equally and we should have all the same rights. I agree that this is no way to maintain a community. You know i even heard they have moderator only forums?!!?? They are conspiring against us i tell ye!
|
You're takling like the only problem is the skill level of the posters. Being 1500 Diamond doesn't stop you from being a douchebag. I'm sure there's a lot of people who are not hardcore gamers but who watch the GSL and have a lot to share with the community.
Take for example the OGN and MBC commentators (excluding the ex-pros) : If they were english speakers, would you stop them from posting about BW because most of them couldn't hit B- on ICCUP ?
I am RADICALLY opposed to this idea.
|
On September 21 2010 15:10 illumination wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open. I know i hate this discrimination. Why can only veterans be moderators? All users are created equally and we should have all the same rights. I agree that this is no way to maintain a community. You know i even heard they have moderator only forums?!!?? They are conspiring against us i tell ye!
there is a reason veterans are moderators, its because they are the most trustworty.
|
absolutely, positively no
|
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem.
|
On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem.
What's "your experience?"
This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies
|
the #1 diamond in my division (1600pts) doesnt have a game over 8min(win or loss/over the 20 or so i looked at)
|
On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open.
discrimination indeed
we should let all the banned posters post their garbage again and strip away moderators of their abilities
all this discrimination makes me sick, why cant we all have carrier icons too? i hate this site
|
On September 21 2010 04:07 Slow Motion wrote:
I actually wouldn't mind a sub-forum where only the top players have rights to post, but the rest of us can read. I think that'd be pretty educational.
This basically sums up my feelings. I cruise the SC2: Strategy forums a lot, and quite frankly, I feel like I made a wrong move recommending it to my friends as a learning tool. There are a bunch of bronze leaugers (I'm only 54 Silver), but I want to learn how to play, and how to improve... not read an unlimited amount of posts stating that Terran and Protoss (or whoever they just lost against) are overpowered.
Basically, I'm going on the statement that this is a good idea, and will allow low-level players to learn, while the discussion is done by the people who know what they are talking about, rather than 80 Bronze players piping up about what they had for breakfast and how it doesn't relate to choosing between upgrading +1 Melee, or +1 Carapace against a FE Protoss.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
i do see what the OP is trying to accompolish but i dont see it working on TL. the fact that you're basing skill and knowledge on blizzard's inherently flawed ladder point system should be enough to deter any form of implementation.
|
Yes 1200+ only please.
I wouldn't mind if the entire TL became like this too.
|
On September 21 2010 15:17 QkDown wrote:
the #1 diamond in my division (1600pts) doesnt have a game over 8min(win or loss/over the 20 or so i looked at)
Its accounts like this that worry me and are the largest drawback to this idea(for me).
|
Being a lurker on the TL forums for a while now I would love to have a section where high level players discuss strategy and builds without interference from theorycrafters. Someone tells you to just go ultralisk against mass sentry/zealot push, someone who actually knows the timing has the knowledge that you cant really have ultras by the time the first push comes(but I'm only low diamond so what do I know)
It was probably the arrival of sc2 that made me start lurking the forums around the start of 2010, and with the release of starcraft 2 the site will grow even more. And with more players coming in there will be players who think they are awesome after getting 10 wins in a row in gold division, thinking they're awesome and unbeatable. They'll start arguing with top players like Nony, Incontrol etc, And having played niche custom strategy games in warcraft 3 and being quite good at it, I really know it's frustrating to argue with all these horrible players that played other horrible players, it's not really the fact that they post and come with their opinion, it's the fact that they will come with an opinion like it's a fact.
Player A says: Saving up all your money and gas, (building only scvs) rushing BC tech and going 5 starport bc rush is a really good tactic that obliterates the enemy whenever i use it.
Player B says: No you can't really do that, cause you'll die whenever the enemy attacks
Player A says: I only lost a couple times using this tactic, if you're that afraid get a couple marines
Arguing with this kind of logic is kinda exhausting, You know it does not work, but player A will still insist it works perfectly, and it is your fault. You'll want to keep the community open but when noobs like me start arguing with people who's REALLY good and knows the timings in and out it's really frustrating for the better player(s)
Take a game you're really good at, any game, you played it for years. a friend starts getting into it. He starts playing, he's improving but he's nowhere near your level and you know that and won't be for atleast months. Then after a couple weeks he's starting to tell you what to do and saying things that are completely untrue, he's saying the only reason you are better than him at the moment is just that you press your buttons faster. His theory and strategies are equal if not better! So yeah... People who's just saying they lack the mechanics and micro to get to higher levels, but say they have equal gameknowledge, yes that MAY be true, but the player who's higher ranked have faced better players,more strategies and has ofc more experience. So the higher ranked player should in theory be better in theorycraft shouldn't he?
Anyways that's my 3 cents. Maybe an own forum with only invited players that can post isn't the answer, but it sounds better in theory to me(If we can still read it ofc), than having to jump over all the crap posts or possibly learning the wrong things.
|
On September 21 2010 15:17 billyX333 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open. discrimination indeed we should let all the banned posters post their garbage again and strip away moderators of their abilities all this discrimination makes me sick, why cant we all have carrier icons too? i hate this site
Apples and oranges. Mods, bans / temp bans are based on how respectful and useful you are to the community, not on your Bnet or ICCUP rank.
|
On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem. What's "your experience?" This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies
You're joking right?
I've probably said this a million times these past 2 days. Arena Junkies is absolute SHIT. Have you ever even been on Arenajunkies? The only reason that anyone goes on Arenajunkies is either to troll or for drama. There is 0 serious discussion.
In S1-S2 arenajunkies was a nice place, after that it just got out of control. See the thing is, being good at a video game doesnt mean anything. You can be mentally handicaped and still be good at Sc2/WoW.
BadWithNames was actually spot on. You cant just make an "elite" forum and just hope that it will keep the bad posts away, because trust me it wont.
|
On September 21 2010 15:31 ChApFoU wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:17 billyX333 wrote:On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open. discrimination indeed we should let all the banned posters post their garbage again and strip away moderators of their abilities all this discrimination makes me sick, why cant we all have carrier icons too? i hate this site Apples and oranges. Mods, bans / temp bans are based on how respectful and useful you are to the community, not on your Bnet or ICCUP rank.
no its not apples to oranges when you bring in the word discrimination and say this is a "shameful" discussion because its 'discrimination'!
oh please
its kind of like a applying for a job which requires a phd or a speaking job which requires a certain amount of recognition
but thats discrimination too though right?!
|
On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:
What's "your experience?"
This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies
Sorry -orb- but I think covered my thoughts pretty well. I'm not the type to sit here and have a long discussion over something, I say my peace and move on. I'll simply say again that the problem in my eyes isn't that "the quality stuff has no where to be posted" it's that "there's to many shit threads flooding the forums." Then again my eyes don't mean much so whatever.
P.S. Thank you for your stream. Good luck in the future. May you channel your rage to success.
|
On September 21 2010 15:10 illumination wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open. I know i hate this discrimination. Why can only veterans be moderators? All users are created equally and we should have all the same rights. I agree that this is no way to maintain a community. You know i even heard they have moderator only forums?!!?? They are conspiring against us i tell ye!
"all *should be* equal" is the biggest problem of democracy, because some people do not understand a problem but are allowed to "vote" for / against it. An easy example is D&D and another is shooter games; the first has been accused of supporting satanism and the second is accused of causing school shootings. Both accusing parties have never played the games in question to understand what they are really doing with a player and yet these people can get highly emotional about them. So IN THEORY you are right that we all are "equals", in REALITY we are not. Many of us are idiots with no brainpower to speak of.
That is the reason why the thought of having a "circle of experts" is appealing, but the reality is that you cant really determine who an expert is and who isnt. High points or success in tournaments do not mean a thing and the success of cheese in the GSL shows that you can get very far with by using a shortcut to win games. You need TIME and constant exposure to someone to find out if he is an idiot or knows his stuff and a forum can do neither of these things. So the idea is neat, but impractical.
|
People are arguing that high score does not equal skill. Actually it does mean you are skilled. If you lose a lot of games your score will remain low.
What it does not make you is a pro. But that is not what the forum is for, it is meant to weed out people with 300 score in bronze. Not many of those players are going to reach the threshold to post in the high skill forum.
I think such a forum would be nice to have. At least try it out to see if it works.
|
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
|
Tons of potential for abuse if you let people invite. Using ladder rankings has numerous problems which have been pointed out. A strict professionals only criteria is the only one that would work in my opinion. I'm not sure how the TL staff would feel about a forum that some of them aren't supposed to post in though. I think the idea has a lot of merit but deciding on a qualification is tricky. Anything less than 100% compliance will cause problems down the road.
|
On September 21 2010 15:33 billyX333 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:31 ChApFoU wrote:On September 21 2010 15:17 billyX333 wrote:On September 21 2010 15:05 Ancient.eu wrote:
Are you kidding me ? You want to implement discrimination between users ?
I can't believe TL is tolerating this thread. This is no way to help and maintain a community.
It's shameful that this discussion is still open. discrimination indeed we should let all the banned posters post their garbage again and strip away moderators of their abilities all this discrimination makes me sick, why cant we all have carrier icons too? i hate this site Apples and oranges. Mods, bans / temp bans are based on how respectful and useful you are to the community, not on your Bnet or ICCUP rank. no its not apples to oranges when you bring in the word discrimination and say this is a "shameful" discussion because its 'discrimination'! oh please its kind of like a applying for a job which requires a phd or a speaking job which requires a certain amount of recognition but thats discrimination too though right?!
You're completely missing my point. I am not against all forms of difference. Discrimination is necessary in certain aeras. I am against unfounded and illegitimate discrimination ; and to me, creating a sub forum where only 1200+ diamond players could post is illegitimate discrimination because the value of your contribution is not based on your bnet rank.
There's a ton of ppl who just love the game and follow it with attention but don't have the time to play 3 hours a day. Hell, I bet there would even be a decent amount of TL moderators who couldn't access to this sub-forum.
|
knowing about the game does not equate to being able to spend 12 hours a day playing the game and thus know what to do to win matches.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
You can't just balance the game around the top players, you need to take a broad look over everyone. Like for instance Brood War if it was still being updated, Jaedong does this ridiculous strat which only Flash can hold it off, but any zerg in the world could feasebly do it, that should be nerfed. Just because one person/a few top players can hold it off, doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed to help the wider sense of the audience who play the game for fun.
|
|
|
oh btw, 1200 points, if it hasn't been pointed out is way way way to low, I am 1200 myself, and frankly, I suck donkey balls
|
On September 21 2010 19:54 Qikz wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
You can't just balance the game around the top players, you need to take a broad look over everyone. Like for instance Brood War if it was still being updated, Jaedong does this ridiculous strat which only Flash can hold it off, but any zerg in the world could feasebly do it, that should be nerfed. Just because one person/a few top players can hold it off, doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed to help the wider sense of the audience who play the game for fun.
Why not? I would argue that many top players share the same experiences with us most of the time. It's a constant battle to fight weaknesses with strategy. Whilst certain things like unit placement, on-the-go improvisation, and game sense cannot be replicated, things like build order and tactics can be used by a wide variety of people.
|
Honestly... Who cares about the ladder anyway?
- Some people love to play random on the ladder
- Some people use the ladder to try out new things
- Some people play to just have fun
Just because a player 4-Gates all the time and has a 1300+ Rating doesn't mean he has a deep understanding of the game.
If you have a problem with a bad player responding, than don't care about his opinion.
|
I support this as well 100%.
I've written some very well formulated blog posts, yet there's lots of common players not understanding them and trolling them (even random admins, which got a blog ban).
On September 21 2010 20:18 Iatrik wrote:
Honestly... Who cares about the ladder anyway?
- Some people love to play random on the ladder
- Some people use the ladder to try out new things
- Some people play to just have fun
Just because a player 4-Gates all the time and has a 1300+ Rating doesn't mean that also has a deep understanding of the game.
If you have a problem with a bad player responding, than don't care about his opinion.
Impossible to get to 1300+ rating with 4 gate alone.
|
On September 21 2010 19:54 Qikz wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
You can't just balance the game around the top players, you need to take a broad look over everyone. Like for instance Brood War if it was still being updated, Jaedong does this ridiculous strat which only Flash can hold it off, but any zerg in the world could feasebly do it, that should be nerfed. Just because one person/a few top players can hold it off, doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed to help the wider sense of the audience who play the game for fun.
If only a single player out of the many, many top players could only hold off this "ridiculous strat" then obviously it would be overpowered. For a competitive game you have to balance around the top, but just because you balance around the top does not mean you have to restrict it to the top 2. But for a competitive game you really have to balance around the top players, you can't just assume people will be bad forever.
|
I think the Arena Junkies model was terrible. All the 'restricted' forums were full of people posting there because they could (and to show off), and the quality of posts was bad because everyone that had the rating thought that entitled them to profess whatever opinion they had, and anyone not high enough ranked was literally not allowed an opinion.
A much better model is the Elitist Jerks model, where the forums are so heavily moderated that most of the people lurk for fear of getting banned, and only people with genuine insights or a history of posting constructively make new threads.
I think linking the accounts to the forums isn't a bad idea, as it would allow you to inspect people that you think have posted something interesting or controversial and make up your own mind, but any kind of "Grind your 1v1 rating to xyz in order to post here" would prevent anyone trying out new ideas on the ladder for fear of being silenced on TL.
|
Its not a big deal to let upper class ranks to have a forum of there own. If its such a problem then make a forum for plat below and see whos discussions have more merit.
|
Russian Federation114 Posts
So you think that trolls are low ranked players only? This is a very poor statement, there are trolls at any rank, limiting the ability to post will only greatly reduce the number of posts on the forum without really improving their quality.
Ps: is this a fake vote poll ? It says I already voted and cannot vote any more (I did not vote), with 1k5 votes in one day... kinda strange
|
Im not complelty sure of the 1200 cap, however i do think that TL definitly needs a sub-forum for pro players.
Props for pro players still posting here but it is pretty much rediclous when some of them posts and randoms come and bash them.
I actualy was posting in a thread with Morrow a couple of days ago, then some random guy shows up and replies : " I dont care that you are a pro player, you obviously dont know what you are talking about" or something in that line, wich is pretty lulzy.
There is little to none incentive for pro players to post in here aside from the fan club threads. So its really a win-win situation, pro players will have a place to debate stuff with other pro players and the public wins because they can actualy get to see what pro players talk about, and dunno maybe learn something?
Considering that there are actualy pro-players out here a sub-forum for them should have been made a long time ago.
|
Hyrule19031 Posts
1200 is arbitrary. The easiest thing to do (from the forumgoer perspective) would have open invites to the forum. Staff invites a few pro level players, and they can in turn invite whoever they want. From a technical point of view it'd be easier to have people request access (like TL Mafia forum) and have staff grant/deny the privilege. From a Staff point of view, I've been told "this is terribly elitist and will never happen"*
So I doubt we'll see this feature, as much as I like the idea.
*not an exact quote
|
Well so far 75% of the voters want some sort of system like this so that should give a good sign to the staff. The current strategy forum is flooded with useless posts, one or two posts from a good/pro player would be way more educational then anything in there right now.
I also disagree with the rating requirement though, an invite system would be a better solution.
|
I feel bad because there are just so many unintelligent but well meaning people in the sc community.
|
On September 21 2010 19:49 hoovehand wrote:
knowing about the game does not equate to being able to spend 12 hours a day playing the game and thus know what to do to win matches.
4 gating 12 hours a day to a 1500+ rating does not equate to knowing about the game either. There's only two ways to do this well, much stricter moderation or invitation only. Frankly invite only has far less potential for abuse than tieing it to point ranks.
|
59 Posts
gogo for a forum full of 4 gaters and T lamers, if u make such a thing invite only plz
|
On September 21 2010 16:39 Grond wrote:Show nested quote +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 decidesThis is where it gets problematic to put it mildly.
Not quite. It can be done in multiple ways:
Application Based
Player writes an application on the TL forums, posts relevant replays and stats, explains his knowledge. He can then even be tested in game to prove his worth.
Tournament Based
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
Vouch Based
An already posting player can vouch for others.
Much better than 1300 rank ladder crap.
|
On September 21 2010 10:27 danl9rm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 05:08 TechDeft wrote:On September 21 2010 05:06 Tabbris wrote:On September 21 2010 05:02 Fantistic wrote:
This idea will cause a lot of us to feel left out of discussions.
Then again, we can watch IdrA and LaLuSh make MorroW look stupid again. Thread? Also Progamers seem to argue alot amongst eachother on whats viable or not. Its not like they will be some perfect intellectual conversation on starcraft if this happens But just WATCHING this kind of conversation can be so educational. We don't know everything, neither do they, but by discussing it, they can come to much more meaningful conclusions than someone with 25 games under their belt who's trying to argue that an Ultra rush is a viable early game Zerg strat. *going back to the dawing board*
Hehe
|
there is no reason for not letting non pros read those articles...i would stop using tl if this was the case. i think it would lead to a forum that tl never wants it to be.
|
On September 21 2010 19:54 Qikz wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
You can't just balance the game around the top players, you need to take a broad look over everyone. Like for instance Brood War if it was still being updated, Jaedong does this ridiculous strat which only Flash can hold it off, but any zerg in the world could feasebly do it, that should be nerfed. Just because one person/a few top players can hold it off, doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed to help the wider sense of the audience who play the game for fun.
This doesn't make any sense. Jaedong can only do this ridiculous strat because of his insane skill level, and flash can defend this ridiculous strat because of his insane skill level. Conclusion: No nerf needed, game is balanced at their skill level. If the strat was easy to do and terrans were getting smashed in all skill levels.. then yes it would be nerfed.
|
On September 21 2010 21:36 shynee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 19:54 Qikz wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
You can't just balance the game around the top players, you need to take a broad look over everyone. Like for instance Brood War if it was still being updated, Jaedong does this ridiculous strat which only Flash can hold it off, but any zerg in the world could feasebly do it, that should be nerfed. Just because one person/a few top players can hold it off, doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed to help the wider sense of the audience who play the game for fun. This doesn't make any sense. Jaedong can only do this ridiculous strat because of his insane skill level, and flash can defend this ridiculous strat because of his insane skill level. Conclusion: No nerf needed, game is balanced at their skill level. If the trick was easy to do and terrans were getting smashed.. then yes it would be nerfed.
Sounds to me like he's saying that Jaedong just invents it, and 'everyone' can execute it but only Flash has the skills to hold it off.
|
I doubt any of the top players would even use it, personally. They'd be in a forum full of people who think they're on the same level as them. At least the way we have it now, when people see a big name contradict them, they know they should probably be quiet.
|
The forum regulars have mentioned this has come up before and been quashed. Will that be the case this time with the wide support it's getting?
A lot of you regulars were complaining about the "WoW Players"...if those are the only people who seem to be getting offended, would it be the end of the world if they were scared off pre-Cata? This is closer to Elitist Jerks than WoW.com, and right now all the wow.com'ers are the ones creating "meaningful" threads.
I'm new here, but I'm here to learn. I'd love to be able to see a high level discussion take place.
They don't have to agree, they don't have to be civil. I don't care. I just want to absorb their deep understanding of the game.
|
I both agree and disagree with the winning option in the poll.
I get amazing value in listening to high level discussions. I am not at their level, I dont expect my opinion to be taken under the same weight. If there is a high level discussion forum, I would LOVE for it to be read only to lower level players. As in, all the 1200+ diamonds get to post and have their discussion, but everyone can still read it. Just those who don't meet requirements, can't respond and contribute to the discussion. (Also can't derail the discussion)
|
On September 21 2010 21:38 Ryalnos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 21:36 shynee wrote:On September 21 2010 19:54 Qikz wrote:
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.
You can't just balance the game around the top players, you need to take a broad look over everyone. Like for instance Brood War if it was still being updated, Jaedong does this ridiculous strat which only Flash can hold it off, but any zerg in the world could feasebly do it, that should be nerfed. Just because one person/a few top players can hold it off, doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed to help the wider sense of the audience who play the game for fun. This doesn't make any sense. Jaedong can only do this ridiculous strat because of his insane skill level, and flash can defend this ridiculous strat because of his insane skill level. Conclusion: No nerf needed, game is balanced at their skill level. If the trick was easy to do and terrans were getting smashed.. then yes it would be nerfed. Sounds to me like he's saying that Jaedong just invents it, and 'everyone' can execute it but only Flash has the skills to hold it off.
Yea but thats not true because the strat is not easy to execute, otherwise toss and terran would be losing all the time. Top level zergs can execute it and top level terran/toss can stop it. So yes.. you do balance a game predominantly around the best players. I'm sure marauders are owning toss and zerg in Bronze early game rushes but you wont see blizzard nerfing them because good players know how to deal with it. Pros are having problems with zealot 2 gate pressure in ZvP, that is why that is getting nerfed. So are the tanks. Bronze players are still having problems with baneling busts but that also will not be nerfed because there is a legit strategy to deal with it.
Because pro players slowly perfect their game, things reach an equilibrium and every strategy has a viable counter, or way to deal with. Now lets say a pro player does a strat that 80% of pros cannot stop, this disrupts the equilibrium of the game and needs to be addressed.
|
I don't agree with this at all. I don't Have the time to get to 1200 diamond, much less the time to maintain it. Any spare time I have is spent watching vods or reading through tl. I don't think it is fair that we who have diamond knowledge get grouped with the noobies only because we're time constrained.
|
This is a community site, leave it the way it is, what you're suggesting won't be implemented anyway.
|
On September 21 2010 21:51 Reubachi wrote:
I don't agree with this at all. I don't Have the time to get to 1200 diamond, much less the time to maintain it. Any spare time I have is spent watching vods or reading through tl. I don't think it is fair that we who have diamond knowledge get grouped with the noobies only because we're time constrained.
But then we also have the point that most low-level players THINK that they have the knowledge of a high Diamond player.
|
On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem. What's "your experience?" This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies
It did not work for Arena Junkis, Hell it doesn't work at all.
I played at 1300-1500 Protoss and I got bored of it so I switched to Zerg, on another account, and I'm having trouble breaking 900~ points due to the idiocy of the ladder and 1 base plays. But to my point: if you want to stop idiots posting, you ban them. You aren't going to get rid of idiots by enforcing silly restrictments. As I said earlier in the thread- I have multiple friends who play this game and, specifically my partner, uses my AJ account, my Cataclysm Alpha/Beta account, my FF14 Beta account, my [Banned] Elitist Jerks account and no doubt when I'm invited to Diablo IIIs closed Alpha I'll let him play on that. He's my partner, of course I'm going to shit him access to everything. My partner plays at a silver level because he dislikes RTS games.
Do you see the problem? Impose a restriction. Iditos can still post because of account sharing.
|
On September 21 2010 21:51 Reubachi wrote:
I don't agree with this at all. I don't Have the time to get to 1200 diamond, much less the time to maintain it. Any spare time I have is spent watching vods or reading through tl. I don't think it is fair that we who have diamond knowledge get grouped with the noobies only because we're time constrained.
I agree with this part. I think that to post you should need more than BNet ladder credentials.
I really believe that TL should chose an initial pool with 2-3+ players of each race that the TL staff agrees are above and beyond as far as theory and game knowledge goes.
Then there could be regular polls(hosted in the subforum only, for players who want to see it), asking what new discussionators we would like to try and invite to add to the mix.
That way we don't get random bads with 12 hours a day to grind their points.
|
On September 21 2010 21:56 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem. What's "your experience?" This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies It did not work for Arena Junkis, Hell it doesn't work at all. I played at 1300-1500 Protoss and I got bored of it so I switched to Zerg, on another account, and I'm having trouble breaking 900~ points due to the idiocy of the ladder and 1 base plays. But to my point: if you want to stop idiots posting, you ban them. You aren't going to get rid of idiots by enforcing silly restrictments. As I said earlier in the thread- I have multiple friends who play this game and, specifically my partner, uses my AJ account, my Cataclysm Alpha/Beta account, my FF14 Beta account, my [Banned] Elitist Jerks account and no doubt when I'm invited to Diablo IIIs closed Alpha I'll let him play on that. He's my partner, of course I'm going to shit him access to everything. My partner plays at a silver level because he dislikes RTS games. Do you see the problem? Impose a restriction. Iditos can still post because of account sharing. Yea, the problem is people like you account sharing. Still irrelevant if you use my idea of community chosen people.
Beyond that, why would folks like you want to share your account name and poison the discussion forum?
|
I would have thought a more viable and easy alternative would be banning people for low quality posts which do not align with reality. If someone is trying to claim something far outside the norm I was under the impression that they had to provide proof.
Instead of top players getting frustrated at having to argue with bronze level players constantly (some of whom are probably 1200+ Diamond players anyway), just ban these people for making outrageous claims without the requisite proof.
I understood this was a requirement of these forums in any case.
|
On September 21 2010 21:56 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 21:51 Reubachi wrote:
I don't agree with this at all. I don't Have the time to get to 1200 diamond, much less the time to maintain it. Any spare time I have is spent watching vods or reading through tl. I don't think it is fair that we who have diamond knowledge get grouped with the noobies only because we're time constrained. I agree with this part. I think that to post you should need more than BNet ladder credentials. I really believe that TL should chose an initial pool with 2-3+ players of each race that the TL staff agrees are above and beyond as far as theory and game knowledge goes. Then there could be regular polls(hosted in the subforum only, for players who want to see it), asking what new discussionators we would like to try and invite to add to the mix. That way we don't get random bads with 12 hours a day to grind their points.
If you play 2 hours a day you can reach 1200 points. I have. And if you dont play much, then you wont even have the experience to post in a "high level strat forum". You should be posting in the regular strat forum. Watching VODs and replays and playing against players who are below 1000+ diamond isn't the same as playing against other 1500+ diamond level players. Not to sound cold but I wouldn't want to read your strategy.
|
On September 21 2010 21:57 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 21:56 Cranberries wrote:On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem. What's "your experience?" This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies It did not work for Arena Junkis, Hell it doesn't work at all. I played at 1300-1500 Protoss and I got bored of it so I switched to Zerg, on another account, and I'm having trouble breaking 900~ points due to the idiocy of the ladder and 1 base plays. But to my point: if you want to stop idiots posting, you ban them. You aren't going to get rid of idiots by enforcing silly restrictments. As I said earlier in the thread- I have multiple friends who play this game and, specifically my partner, uses my AJ account, my Cataclysm Alpha/Beta account, my FF14 Beta account, my [Banned] Elitist Jerks account and no doubt when I'm invited to Diablo IIIs closed Alpha I'll let him play on that. He's my partner, of course I'm going to shit him access to everything. My partner plays at a silver level because he dislikes RTS games. Do you see the problem? Impose a restriction. Iditos can still post because of account sharing. Yea, the problem is people like you account sharing. Still irrelevant if you use my idea of community chosen people. Beyond that, why would folks like you want to share your account name and poison the discussion forum?
I care more what my partner thinks of me rather than an internet society I'll never meet and probably wouldn't want to meet? Also, your idea is totally stupid.
|
IMO, the problem is there is a ton of players with X amount of points in diamond that makes them think they are top tier and understand the game or even good when in reality they are pretty awful. You might aswell leave it be. Odds are all the top players will have each others msn and discuss stuff there
|
Well yeah I know most golds think they're diamond, however there's no way to weed them out without screwing a lot of people. The best thing to do wod be what someone else said and to just create a new sub forum, and let people vote on who gets in based on renown.
Edit: and I CAN'T even play two hours a day to getto 1200  . (also please mind my spelling mistakes, I'm in class)
|
On September 21 2010 22:00 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 21:57 TechDeft wrote:On September 21 2010 21:56 Cranberries wrote:On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem. What's "your experience?" This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies It did not work for Arena Junkis, Hell it doesn't work at all. I played at 1300-1500 Protoss and I got bored of it so I switched to Zerg, on another account, and I'm having trouble breaking 900~ points due to the idiocy of the ladder and 1 base plays. But to my point: if you want to stop idiots posting, you ban them. You aren't going to get rid of idiots by enforcing silly restrictments. As I said earlier in the thread- I have multiple friends who play this game and, specifically my partner, uses my AJ account, my Cataclysm Alpha/Beta account, my FF14 Beta account, my [Banned] Elitist Jerks account and no doubt when I'm invited to Diablo IIIs closed Alpha I'll let him play on that. He's my partner, of course I'm going to shit him access to everything. My partner plays at a silver level because he dislikes RTS games. Do you see the problem? Impose a restriction. Iditos can still post because of account sharing. Yea, the problem is people like you account sharing. Still irrelevant if you use my idea of community chosen people. Beyond that, why would folks like you want to share your account name and poison the discussion forum? I care more what my partner thinks of me rather than an internet society I'll never meet and probably wouldn't want to meet? Also, your idea is totally stupid.
If you care more about what your friends think, than why are you even having this discussion? How would it affect you? I get the impression you wouldn't be posting in the subforum anyway.
My idea is great actually, unless you have noticed some glaring hole in it. Otherwise, it's apparent you are just taking digs without anything to back it up.
|
On September 21 2010 22:01 peachsncream wrote:
IMO, the problem is there is a ton of players with X amount of points in diamond that makes them think they are top tier and understand the game or even good when in reality they are pretty awful. You might aswell leave it be. Odds are all the top players will have each others msn and discuss stuff there
Yea thats true, for example, some players with 1400+ are 4 gating all in toss players. BUT the point is that it will weed out 90% of all the nonsense in the strategy section. Sure there will still be some horrible posts, but there will also be a huge improvement.
|
On September 21 2010 22:05 Reubachi wrote:
Well yeah I know most golds think they're diamond, however there's no way to weed them out without screwing a lot of people. The best thing to do wod be what someone else said and to just create a new sub forum, and let people vote on who gets in based on renown.
That'd be me. We can name the process after me! Or maybe it has a name already..democ-something or other. We tried it for a while in the US before we sold the government to big business.
|
The problem with the idea is that you can get around it and it wont stop idiots posting.
Do you even read the AJ forums? Did you read the AJ forums during S5 when heroic DK/Pally teams roflstomped anyone and posted things along the similar line of "L2P MAN LOLOLOLOL /TRLL".
|
Purely thinking about the implementation of such a plan, requiring someone to be in diamond at xxxx points is problematic. As others have shown, the bonus pool inflation of scores would eventually allow any diamond player to post in this sub-forum.
Not to be discouraging, if TL were to do this, I have two ideas. First, I think it'd have to be some kind of invitational basis. Second, perhaps another of blizzard's skill measurements can be used -- the players who hit blizzards top 200 are allowed in or only those players in the "proleague" that's supposed to be coming.
Honestly, I don't know if I agree with the idea... I can see how people think its elitist and others think it's allowing for good high-level discussion, but I voted for it and suppose its worth a shot. It's not like it couldn't be taken down if it doesn't work out.
|
On September 21 2010 15:33 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 15:16 -orb- wrote:On September 21 2010 15:14 BadWithNames wrote:
In my experience the "pro" only forum doesn't work. In order to have successful communication it's up to the whole of the community to stop and think about what they post. Everyone has to hold themselves to a high standard of quality, and when that standard of quality isn't met the mods should step in and remind everyone.
Why does it start at the ground up? Because making a place where the "shitty threads" theoretically can't be posted isn't going to stop the shit threads from being posted elsewhere, in the end you're treating the symptoms and not the problem. What's "your experience?" This system worked absolute wonders for arenajunkies You're joking right? I've probably said this a million times these past 2 days. Arena Junkies is absolute SHIT. Have you ever even been on Arenajunkies? The only reason that anyone goes on Arenajunkies is either to troll or for drama. There is 0 serious discussion. In S1-S2 arenajunkies was a nice place, after that it just got out of control. See the thing is, being good at a video game doesnt mean anything. You can be mentally handicaped and still be good at Sc2/WoW. BadWithNames was actually spot on. You cant just make an "elite" forum and just hope that it will keep the bad posts away, because trust me it wont.
I'll have to agree. Arenajunkies is absolutely shit. But that's because they have crappy moderation and they don't care. TL doesn't have to be like this.
Plus their rating requirements currently, like 2400 I believe, is a joke to attain.
|
On September 21 2010 22:08 Cranberries wrote:
The problem with the idea is that you can get around it and it wont stop idiots posting.
Do you even read the AJ forums? Did you read the AJ forums during S5 when heroic DK/Pally teams roflstomped anyone and posted things along the similar line of "L2P MAN LOLOLOLOL /TRLL".
WIth mod and community based choices, there will be a limited selection of people in there. Anyone trolling will be obvious very fast, and lose their access. We already know TL mods are quick to notice and take action, why would this be any different, except maybe MORE heavily moderated.
The community that would allow this to happen would not allow trolls to live long their. I just saw a patch 1.1 troll post that got locked and the user temp banned before I could even type a response and hit reply.
|
The obvious problem with this is that all the good players will stop posting in the normal strategy forum, so that will deteriorate even further and it'll be harder for new players to get good advice. I would much prefer if we somehow managed to get the quality in the normal strategy forum back up, but if that's hopeless, then I guess it's a high-level subforum's a good last resort.
|
On September 21 2010 22:12 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 22:08 Cranberries wrote:
The problem with the idea is that you can get around it and it wont stop idiots posting.
Do you even read the AJ forums? Did you read the AJ forums during S5 when heroic DK/Pally teams roflstomped anyone and posted things along the similar line of "L2P MAN LOLOLOLOL /TRLL". WIth mod and community based choices, there will be a limited selection of people in there. Anyone trolling will be obvious very fast, and lose their access. We already know TL mods are quick to notice and take action, why would this be any different, except maybe MORE heavily moderated. The community that would allow this to happen would not allow trolls to live long their. I just saw a patch 1.1 troll post that got locked and the user temp banned before I could even type a response and hit reply.
Instating communism and autocratic idiocy into a SC2 public forum is bad.
Do you want TL to be hated as much as Elitist Jerks?
|
On September 21 2010 22:09 Truenappa wrote:
Purely thinking about the implementation of such a plan, requiring someone to be in diamond at xxxx points is problematic. As others have shown, the bonus pool inflation of scores would eventually allow any diamond player to post in this sub-forum.
Not to be discouraging, if TL were to do this, I have two ideas. First, I think it'd have to be some kind of invitational basis. Second, perhaps another of blizzard's skill measurements can be used -- the players who hit blizzards top 200 are allowed in or only those players in the "proleague" that's supposed to be coming.
Honestly, I don't know if I agree with the idea... I can see how people think its elitist and others think it's allowing for good high-level discussion, but I voted for it and suppose its worth a shot. It's not like it couldn't be taken down if it doesn't work out.
You would need more than top 200 to even have a discussion started in the forum, especially since a lot of players don't even post. I would say top 1000 in the world. Currently the top 1000 ends just below 1400 points.
|
On September 21 2010 22:13 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 22:12 TechDeft wrote:On September 21 2010 22:08 Cranberries wrote:
The problem with the idea is that you can get around it and it wont stop idiots posting.
Do you even read the AJ forums? Did you read the AJ forums during S5 when heroic DK/Pally teams roflstomped anyone and posted things along the similar line of "L2P MAN LOLOLOLOL /TRLL". WIth mod and community based choices, there will be a limited selection of people in there. Anyone trolling will be obvious very fast, and lose their access. We already know TL mods are quick to notice and take action, why would this be any different, except maybe MORE heavily moderated. The community that would allow this to happen would not allow trolls to live long their. I just saw a patch 1.1 troll post that got locked and the user temp banned before I could even type a response and hit reply. Instating communism and autocratic idiocy into a SC2 public forum is bad. Do you want TL to be hated as much as Elitist Jerks?
?? TL is already well known for being quick to ban 'tards.
Communism? Communism is shared wealth and responsibility, with communal ownership. Has nothing to do with this.
Autocracy? In an autocratic government, ONE person has the power.
TL is probably closest to a Republic under military control. And they are fair about it. It is THEIR playground, don't forget.
Learn what you are talking about before you start throwing "big" words around to try and sound smart.
And Elitist Jerks is still a good website to go to, if you want up to date and thorough knowledge. It doesn't bother me how rude they are to the folks that are foolish, it maintains a higher level of quality in the discussions.
I'm learning. If I wanna talk to other people who are learning, I go to wow.com/TL main SC2 forums. If I wanna read what the "experts" are talking about, I go to EJ/Proposed TL subforum.
|
I like the way TL.net now, but i wouldn't mind seeing some pro-gamer discussion threads of strategies without interference. Im not quite sure why there would be a no public read forum though, team liquid promotes becoming a better SC player...not keeping it a secret. Im not super great at SC2 but i still like to learn the game and get better. Im not terrible either (imo) but that doesnt mean i want to try to discuss balance and strategy with a pro-gamer
|
and how do you set the points in 3 months? Because of the bonus points inflation there will be all diamondplayers aboive 1200. You just have to wait long enough.
|
On September 21 2010 23:33 ArdentZeal wrote:
and how do you set the points in 3 months? Because of the bonus points inflation there will be all diamondplayers aboive 1200. You just have to wait long enough.
Why is everyone so hung up on points? Points should have nothing to do with it already. Lots of points CAN indicate a good player, but it can also indicate a player with time to grind. And even some talented players might not be able to offer anything to meaningful discussion. No, these people should be chosen.
|
i would totaly love see this happen.
|
On September 21 2010 22:25 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 22:13 Cranberries wrote:On September 21 2010 22:12 TechDeft wrote:On September 21 2010 22:08 Cranberries wrote:
The problem with the idea is that you can get around it and it wont stop idiots posting.
Do you even read the AJ forums? Did you read the AJ forums during S5 when heroic DK/Pally teams roflstomped anyone and posted things along the similar line of "L2P MAN LOLOLOLOL /TRLL". WIth mod and community based choices, there will be a limited selection of people in there. Anyone trolling will be obvious very fast, and lose their access. We already know TL mods are quick to notice and take action, why would this be any different, except maybe MORE heavily moderated. The community that would allow this to happen would not allow trolls to live long their. I just saw a patch 1.1 troll post that got locked and the user temp banned before I could even type a response and hit reply. Instating communism and autocratic idiocy into a SC2 public forum is bad. Do you want TL to be hated as much as Elitist Jerks? ?? TL is already well known for being quick to ban 'tards. Communism? Communism is shared wealth and responsibility, with communal ownership. Has nothing to do with this. Autocracy? In an autocratic government, ONE person has the power. TL is probably closest to a Republic under military control. And they are fair about it. It is THEIR playground, don't forget. Learn what you are talking about before you start throwing "big" words around to try and sound smart. And Elitist Jerks is still a good website to go to, if you want up to date and thorough knowledge. It doesn't bother me how rude they are to the folks that are foolish, it maintains a higher level of quality in the discussions. I'm learning. If I wanna talk to other people who are learning, I go to wow.com/TL main SC2 forums. If I wanna read what the "experts" are talking about, I go to EJ/Proposed TL subforum.
Dont start with Cranberries, he is a high level player from wow, they like big words that make them sound smart. Maybe that works on wow forum where he comes from. Just wait, he will soon come with 4 new words he just learned to get back at you.
On-topic
I like the way TL is right now, not sure if its a good idea to try split the community up, making a 1400 diamond player think he is God-sent and starts preaching his way. We still have people often state that his rank to prove his point, but TL users have learned to not take that as a valid point, instead TL wants us to provide replays and discussion, no matter player rank.
Also people recognize the good ones, those who have streams or have proven them self and gained some reputation, it could be from a previous good post about strategy even.
So basically, let TL admins set standards on what a new post on strategy forums should be. It will take some time for all the new users to learn what is tolerated or not. I think it will be fine in a few months without a sub forum. Mean while we can use liquidpedia and do the best out of the current strategy forum. As the game matures, so will the strategy forum. That is what I hope for atleast
|
On September 21 2010 21:30 okrane wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 16:39 Grond wrote: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 decidesThis is where it gets problematic to put it mildly. Not quite. It can be done in multiple ways: Application BasedPlayer writes an application on the TL forums, posts relevant replays and stats, explains his knowledge. He can then even be tested in game to prove his worth. Tournament BasedShow nested quote +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 Vouch BasedAn already posting player can vouch for others. Much better than 1300 rank ladder crap.
I doubt the TL staff wants to review hundreds of applications or even worse vet players applications.
Vouching will cause all kinds of problems, I could list several off the top of my head but it really should be pretty obvious. You will inevitably end up with people posting that shouldn't.
|
I voted for knowing the level of the player posting, if getting flamed by a bronzie it would be nice for the mods to know that and warn them or delete the post...Sure we could have an elitist sub-forum (and it would be EPIC) but it isn't in the spirit of TL.
|
I'm only posting because I can actually weigh in with AJ: It wasn't useful in the slightest. It wasn't bad either, I definitely wouldn't say it was only for trolling or whining, but it didn't "work" the way people seem to think.
I feel hesitant to say it, but it's true: I didn't care what the average gladiator had to say about strategy, because the average gladiator was UTTER SHIT compared to me and other top players.
It very well may be the same in SC2. (I'm not a top player, so I can't necessarily tell). Ratings mean nothing. Most professional players don't ladder much like HuK does.
I think this option couldn't hurt, but it's not going to be some magical place where only useful, construction discussion takes place. It's fairly likely that the top players will feel alienated, again, by the lack of understanding among the lesser skilled players who simply make the rating requirement.
Basically, scoring systems in games don't accurately measure skill or understanding.
On September 21 2010 22:13 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 22:12 TechDeft wrote:On September 21 2010 22:08 Cranberries wrote:
The problem with the idea is that you can get around it and it wont stop idiots posting.
Do you even read the AJ forums? Did you read the AJ forums during S5 when heroic DK/Pally teams roflstomped anyone and posted things along the similar line of "L2P MAN LOLOLOLOL /TRLL". WIth mod and community based choices, there will be a limited selection of people in there. Anyone trolling will be obvious very fast, and lose their access. We already know TL mods are quick to notice and take action, why would this be any different, except maybe MORE heavily moderated. The community that would allow this to happen would not allow trolls to live long their. I just saw a patch 1.1 troll post that got locked and the user temp banned before I could even type a response and hit reply. Instating communism and autocratic idiocy into a SC2 public forum is bad. Do you want TL to be hated as much as Elitist Jerks?
EJ is hated? Are you retarded or did I miss something since I quit WoW a few years back?
|
No, EJ isn't hated. The only people who hate it are the same people who get shit on here...folks with nothing meaningful to offer.
|
I see two problems:
1. What abput players, that are actually really good but decided that they don't want to ladder and just play custom games against (also high level) buddies! They would be forced to go against their will and ladder just to discuss in these threads!
2. What exactly should these subforums be all about?
i.e. if this is to discuss strategies on a "high level" ... well just being good doesn't mean you have "full" knowledge of the game and be a good strategist!
There are definitely players out there that "see" instantly positive and negative sides of new strategies and can elaborate about them ... but as a player don't have the micro/macro/multitasking skills to back them up! (if I want to brag I could say, that I'm one of them...)
On the other side there are players, that are really good in making strategies work ... but are too "stupid" for own ideas and can't see key points in before someone else tells them so! (my favorite in this direction would propably be the well known "kolll"!)
so there are a lot of problems...
|
This is a bad idea. If other people can read the "pros only" forum then someone is bound to create a discussion topic on the regular strategy forum for every topic on the other forum, and it will turn into a moderation nightmare.
If all the self proclaimed "good" players who whine constantly about the low-level discussion in the SC2 strategy forum actually started posting there, it would become a much more pleasant place.
|
On September 22 2010 01:30 Geisterkarle wrote:
I see two problems:
1. What abput players, that are actually really good but decided that they don't want to ladder and just play custom games against (also high level) buddies! They would be forced to go against their will and ladder just to discuss in these threads!
2. What exactly should these subforums be all about?
i.e. if this is to discuss strategies on a "high level" ... well just being good doesn't mean you have "full" knowledge of the game and be a good strategist!
There are definitely players out there that "see" instantly positive and negative sides of new strategies and can elaborate about them ... but as a player don't have the micro/macro/multitasking skills to back them up! (if I want to brag I could say, that I'm one of them...)
On the other side there are players, that are really good in making strategies work ... but are too "stupid" for own ideas and can't see key points in before someone else tells them so! (my favorite in this direction would propably be the well known "kolll"!)
so there are a lot of problems...
Which is why the participants should be mod/community chosen.
|
I think this is such a great idea. You can already see useless post and people trolling. I do believe it would be very hard to get a forum created that only allows access if you are at a certain point level. If possible, though I think TL should get on this idea. It's also going to hurt a lot of the guys that are not at that level, but I think the good that would come out of it out weighs that.
Or.. At least TL needs to ramp up the modding on the forums.. removing bad threads, banning trolls, warning whiners.. ect.
|
On September 22 2010 01:36 imaROBOT wrote:
I think this is such a great idea. You can already see useless post and people trolling. I do believe it would be very hard to get a forum created that only allows access if you are at a certain point level. If possible, though I think TL should get on this idea. It's also going to hurt a lot of the guys that are not at that level, but I think the good that would come out of it out weighs that.
Or.. At least TL needs to ramp up the modding on the forums.. removing bad threads, banning trolls, warning whiners.. ect.
NO POINTS. What don't people get about points having very little to do with actual skill or ability to discuss things in an informative manner?! How many people post here everyday saying I'm 1x00 diamond, here is what I think...and it's a bunch of nonsensical bullshit.
|
I'd hate to see such thing being implemented around here.
As Day[9] proved in Day[9] Daily #182, even a "not-so-hot" player can come up with an interesting build order or a technique.
Myself personally doesn't even play SC2 right now, but I love reading strategy discussions. I do stay my noobish ass out of them thou. Not because I got nothing to say, but because someone already said it before me.
I would agree (somewhat) with "you need n points in Diamond League in order to reply to this tread", but I would hate it if I see a "you need n points in Diamond League in order to read in this forum".
|
In the 1.1.0 patch notes thread:
On September 22 2010 01:53 bonifaceviii wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 01:51 landaishan wrote:
all of these posters make me wanna quit teamliquid You know what, this thread has convinced me that maybe the high-level only forum is a good idea
|
I don't think high level players would post more if there was such a rule.
I'm ok with it because I don't really care too much ><
|
The problem with a ratings determined forum is that Blizzard doesn't release matchmaking ratings and the points of each player inflates because of bonus pool so the cutoff has to be changed weekly, which might be a pain. I like the idea though.
|
I think that this is generally a bad idea as it is exclusive and is generally against the ethos of TL (as TL staff have stated on several occasions).
Even if such a system was to be created, it should be on an invitational basis with posters chosen by the TL staff rather than something based on the abortion of a league system set up by blizzard.
|
The problem with this idea is that it is implicitly assuming that anyone who is high up on the ladder is able to coherently communicate ideas, can spell and use punctuation properly and also has an understanding of the game. Any four gating protoss can get high up enough on the ladder to qualify to post in the elitist sub forum, but chances are they won't have an in depth understanding of the game (cause four gating is just so easy according to Day9 ) and their ladder rank has no correlation with their ability to post coherently or to spell.
I don't see how you can seriously consider this idea given that all it will accomplish is to give tl.net an elitist reputation without any real benefits. Sure, there will be a random subforum with a smaller amount of posts and therefore a smaller amount of bad posts than the main forum, but the percentage of bad posts to quality posts is not likely to improve.
If you want some way to highlight posters who make quality posts, there should be some sort of system like on the b.net forums where you can rate up/down posts. Rating up someones post should give that person points which can be made visible to identify the quality posters from the trollers.
|
As much as "we hate elitism here at teamliquid", there is no question that the way the game is played changes across the massive range of skill levels. For that reason I would support splitting up the strategy section into subforums for beginners, intermediates, and experts. That said, I don't think there has to be a hard ladder rank limitation. Possibly a soft guideline, but that's all. I don't expect many bad players to venture into the Expert forum anyway, and if they do, it can't be that hard to moderate.
|
On September 22 2010 02:31 SnakeChomp wrote:The problem with this idea is that it is implicitly assuming that anyone who is high up on the ladder is able to coherently communicate ideas, can spell and use punctuation properly and also has an understanding of the game. Any four gating protoss can get high up enough on the ladder to qualify to post in the elitist sub forum, but chances are they won't have an in depth understanding of the game (cause four gating is just so easy according to Day9 ) and their ladder rank has no correlation with their ability to post coherently or to spell. I don't see how you can seriously consider this idea given that all it will accomplish is to give tl.net an elitist reputation without any real benefits. Sure, there will be a random subforum with a smaller amount of posts and therefore a smaller amount of bad posts than the main forum, but the percentage of bad posts to quality posts is not likely to improve. If you want some way to highlight posters who make quality posts, there should be some sort of system like on the b.net forums where you can rate up/down posts. Rating up someones post should give that person points which can be made visible to identify the quality posters from the trollers.
I don't know where you people get the funny idea that you can 4gate your way up to 1200 points. Seriously, what kind of rainbow ladder are you guys playing? If such a thing is even possible then why the hell isn't everyone a 1200 point toss? Why the hell aren't YOU a 1200 point toss? Come on, seriously.. we all know 4 gate is a decently easy to pull off strat and sure it can amazing, but against decent terrans who know when to scan and put down bunkers.. its a pretty balance build and I doubt anyone could reach 1200 points with this single strat.
|
that is such a dumb idea.
|
I've been thinking about this for a while, but I'm not sure how I feel about it overall. I like the idea of having a league tag next to your name in strategy threads, but it also kinda adds this level of elitism that I'm not sure really fits here.
|
I love this idea and I greatly support it. Keep these forums for public posters, but add a "elite" forum for high ranked player ONLY post but for everyone to read.
|
On September 22 2010 02:48 dinmsab wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 02:31 SnakeChomp wrote:The problem with this idea is that it is implicitly assuming that anyone who is high up on the ladder is able to coherently communicate ideas, can spell and use punctuation properly and also has an understanding of the game. Any four gating protoss can get high up enough on the ladder to qualify to post in the elitist sub forum, but chances are they won't have an in depth understanding of the game (cause four gating is just so easy according to Day9 ) and their ladder rank has no correlation with their ability to post coherently or to spell. I don't see how you can seriously consider this idea given that all it will accomplish is to give tl.net an elitist reputation without any real benefits. Sure, there will be a random subforum with a smaller amount of posts and therefore a smaller amount of bad posts than the main forum, but the percentage of bad posts to quality posts is not likely to improve. If you want some way to highlight posters who make quality posts, there should be some sort of system like on the b.net forums where you can rate up/down posts. Rating up someones post should give that person points which can be made visible to identify the quality posters from the trollers. I don't know where you people get the funny idea that you can 4gate your way up to 1200 points. Seriously, what kind of rainbow ladder are you guys playing? If such a thing is even possible then why the hell isn't everyone a 1200 point toss? Why the hell are aren't YOU a 1200 point toss? Come on, seriously.. we all know 4 gate is a decently easy to pull off strat and sure it can amazing, but against decent terrans who know when to scan and put down bunkers.. its a pretty balance build and I doubt anyone could reach 1200 points with this single strat.
day 9 said so and you know : if day9 say something everyone of lower level believe it whatever he say.....
|
I think I like the idea, but the more important poll is how many pros would actually participate, and I also agree that points probably aren't a good measurement. But I would seriously love a forum full of real pro level discussions of builds and strategies. I'm sure they already have these discussions over msn or skype or whatever, but they probably feel that their wisdom is wasted here. Then again perhaps stricter moderating and a little respectful deference from the community could solve the problem too. But trolls will be trolls, I don't know if we can hope to solve the internets overnight.
Also, OP, sorry to knitpick but it's something I see SO often it drives me crazy, nothing personal I promise. "Definitely" and "Defiantly" are completely different words with completely different meanings. If English isn't your first language then no big deal, I totally understand that it's easy to mix up, but this is so common all over the Internet, even my online college classes which is especially tragic, it drives me nuts. /rant
|
On September 22 2010 01:35 TechDeft wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 01:30 Geisterkarle wrote:
I see two problems:
1. What abput players, that are actually really good but decided that they don't want to ladder and just play custom games against (also high level) buddies! They would be forced to go against their will and ladder just to discuss in these threads!
2. What exactly should these subforums be all about?
i.e. if this is to discuss strategies on a "high level" ... well just being good doesn't mean you have "full" knowledge of the game and be a good strategist!
There are definitely players out there that "see" instantly positive and negative sides of new strategies and can elaborate about them ... but as a player don't have the micro/macro/multitasking skills to back them up! (if I want to brag I could say, that I'm one of them...)
On the other side there are players, that are really good in making strategies work ... but are too "stupid" for own ideas and can't see key points in before someone else tells them so! (my favorite in this direction would propably be the well known "kolll"!)
so there are a lot of problems... Which is why the participants should be mod/community chosen.
Do you really think there is no "TL guild section" here which is invisible to non-TL-guildees, where the guild discusses its own tactics? Strategies and discussing builds is VERY IMPORTANT and that is one of the things EVERYONE in a professional team will keep secret! So no "high level players" will post there anyways on strategies. The only things - which are happening already - are things like posts in whine-threads about balance and they dont really matter.
|
On September 21 2010 04:17 Karthane wrote:
I'd be up for having a sub forum that only "pros" can post in, just to have all their posts in one place and to be able to easily look at their strats/thoughts etc. But i think these people should not be just over 1200 rating. I think the TL staff should designate who they think should be able to post there. Hopefully people like IdrA, Huk, LzGaMeR, etc.
Yes, the only valid version of this would be a subforum that allowed professionals to post in for the benefit of the amateurs. Having 'X' number of points doesn't qualify you as an enlightened poster imo.
edit: how would this work logistically? Would Nazgul ask Blizzard if they could do a deal such that your TL account was linked with your bnet account? Sounds farfetched to me. There is no way to verify if a poster is who he says he is: welcome to the internet.
|
i think even 1k pts would work fine for illiminating the total scrubs. actually even 700 shows good understanding of the game. from there on up its all about improving handspeed and reaction time.
|
How is a forum that only pros can read or write beneficial to the community as a whole, at all?
|
Definitely allow public read!
|
On September 22 2010 03:42 Malminos wrote:
How is a forum that only pros can read or write beneficial to the community as a whole, at all?
Ones that pros could write in and that all else could read. It would be beneficial to know the pros thoughts on the game (to the extent that they would be willing to share them).
|
Just get a subforum where someone who is recognized as a top player to post, so that we would be able to see some insightful discussion between the pro players :3
If theres anything to discuss, people can always create threads to talk about it anyway.
|
silver noobie here. I voted no public write option, as a high level only section would be a great source of info for all levels of player.
|
1200pt+ to write allowing public to read would probably create the most interesting threads for anyone one to read strategy wise !
|
WoW did this with ArenaJunkies forum that required gladiator (if you didn't play, similar to high level diamond players) to post but anyone to read. Worked very well at first but slowly declined as the game got easier.
|
On September 22 2010 03:42 Malminos wrote:
How is a forum that only pros can read or write beneficial to the community as a whole, at all?
A subforum with every thread and post being from people who have a decent understanding of the game IS beneficial to the community as a whole compared to the current shitfest we now call the SC2 strategy subforum. I have nothing against beginner players but when people start to treat the strategy forums as if it was yahoo answers then we have a serious problem at hand. Improving your basic mechanics is all you need to get from bronze to platinum/low diamond and for anything else regarding build orders or basic unit counters you can always check out liquipedia.
|
On September 21 2010 04:04 dynamite wrote:
Elitist much?
User was warned for this post
|
It would be better if the site had a karma system. Say MorroW posts a bunch of good strats or something, and people rate him for it, and he ranks up in some way and is allowed to post there.
Just saying, because 1200+ doesn't mean pro.. by any means. It means you are good enough to ladder with a 55-60% win rate. 1600-1900 is a different story. And that number raises every day thanks to bonus pool.
But if someone with high karma (thus they are trusted to be a good source of information) posted something...
|
Really, there needs to be 10x more moderators. If the moderators can quickly and consistently warn/ban users for undesired posts, the quality of posts will rise.
|
Germany10157 Posts
On September 22 2010 03:57 Fa1nT wrote:
It would be better if the site had a karma system. Say MorroW posts a bunch of good strats or something, and people rate him for it, and he ranks up in some way and is allowed to post there.
Just saying, because 1200+ doesn't mean pro.. by any means. It means you are good enough to ladder with a 55-60% win rate. 1600-1900 is a different story. And that number raises every day thanks to bonus pool.
But if someone with high karma (thus they are trusted to be a good source of information) posted something...
I dont think this is a good idea.
If anyone writes anything that is unpopular he's gonna be voted down like crazy. Even if he's right.
Agree that 1200+ doesnt mean pro though and that it should be higher than that.
|
As long as I can read it, I'm for it. Imo, it would be very insightful.
|
On September 22 2010 03:57 Fa1nT wrote:
Just saying, because 1200+ doesn't mean pro.. by any means. It means you are good enough to ladder with a 55-60% win rate.
Nah, not necessarily. There are people in the top 100 with <55%. It's not just how much you win but also who you win/lose against.
|
It would be ideal if people discussed strategies in such a forum. I would enjoy seeing strategy discussions from the tip top of Team Liquid. I think it might be tough to get them to come and actually do it though. I'm not sure about 1200 rating though. I am holding my own against such rated players, and I haven't played an RTS in over 10 years, and never played SC1. (And no, I don't do it by one base play or cheese)
Overall, I think such a forum would serve a great purpose. An alternate solution is to simply divide the strategy discussions into brackets because strategies that work in some brackets, may not work in others.
|
Haha I'm 1200~ I guess I made the cut lol. Honestly the people I play with 1k+ rating differ so much in skill, I just gave up trying to judge people at around those ratings.
But seriously, ANY goddamn rating filter to weed out posts coming from bronze level players would be great. Yes, it is elitist, but at least this will be coming from elitists who know what they are friggin talking about. This is what they do at Arenajunkies. Different game yes, but that is the system they use, and I love it. I don't have read some crap from a sup-par player and filter it out just to pick out the High-level legitimate advice I'm looking for. Plus I love how it will teach some players a lesson in humility (which SC2 players desperately need). Oh hay guyz I'm a 1xxx diamond player ! I'm great listen to meh and feed me KFC!!". This system will be a great "stfu 1900 + pt diamond players only!".
Currently it'd be difficult to implement something like that, because the skill range in the diamond is so out of whack in relation to the ratings. Only around 1600+ do I think rating has any merit for skill, and even then it is still questionable. But certainly over time as the ladder matures, and people get put in their place (people who are no longer able to 4gate to 1500 points), a sub forum for high level players can only help the community. I haven't seen this sort of system harm a community yet (except maybe destroy the epeen of less skilled players), so it's safe.
|
imo just divide the strategy section into two or three forums "beginner, (advanced,) professional" and everybody can decide for himself where he wants to post. and i'm sure the vast majority of beginners will not come and spam the professional forum if they had a place of their own. i don't see the need to block people out by force (like exact point ratings).
but the way it is now, with only one forum, it's no surprise that weak players give their (low-quality) opinions on good players' posts, because there is no specific platform for low-level players who want to learn the game. if they had one, i'm sure the problem would disappear without having to implement point filters etc.
|
Just because someone is a top player doesn't mean his or her opinion is more valuable than me, who plays at 1500 Protoss, and continually gets massacred by banshee/marine/raven timing pushes that are just undefendable due to the damage output of the Marine and Banshee while being protected by the most broken thing in the game: the PDD.
If MorroW's opinion is that "terran are fine, everyone else just needs to l2p" and then IdrA's opinion is that "x Terran player wouldn't make it to gold if they switched to Zerg" - both these opinions are just as worthless as a new player saying "6 POOL IS IMBALANCED." Forcing ratings will not suddenly increase the IQ of a poster, it just means they become elitist and ultimately become narcissists who think they can walk on water. I really, really oppose the idea.
|
I'm all for it. Those people that are against it must not realize the idea is for a sub forum. You can still post your "quality" oppinions on strategy elsewhere, so what would be wrong with it? It would be a place where you could see what the views from the players that are in shape and know their stuff. Saying they would become narcissistic? Have you seen the types of posts coming from the "bronzies"?
|
Link to bnet profile or a rank icon next to the name + just super strict moderation for dumb and incorrect posts. Chill handed out strat forum bans in BW years ago and that worked a lot.
Posting on this site isn't a right. Why should that be any different for the strat forum?? Someone can be an idiot at starcraft but a good poster otherwise. They shouldnt be kicked off the forum, but I reading about some bronze level idiot theorycraft about a concept they don't know ruins the community. It spreads bad information.
I was originally for the pro forum or whatever, but it would be such a very small community, and that would prevent the very rare new poster/low ranking guy who has a valid point from contributing. I think those people are few and far between, but you should at least have the opportunity to prove that you aren't an idiot...
|
Imo the only way would be an invite system by TL.net staff. The upper point limit changes all the time so saying a point limit is meaningless. This could make TL even more of a SC hub imo as it would probably result in some really golden threads that could be transformed into quality Liquipedia pages for strategies and such. Basically it would just be a super (Okay maybe not super, but quite) clever way for TL to lure the pros back with promises of them being "special" so that they produce awesome content for everyone else to enjoy! Muhahahaha (and they can enjoy being special, so everyone wins) :D
1. Give special rights to pros
2. Get resurgence of pro strat posting
3. ???
4. Profit!
Pro should be semi liberally used though, as some of the best threads so far have been from relatively unknown posters imo, like the 5 roach rush thread and tricks like the Fazing and the minboost trick. Maybe it could be an apply system like the Stream thing where you could send in Strategy OPs and if they are good, you could be accepted into the awesomesauce club? Strategy has too much of a Q and A feel atm, instead of it being discussion of good strategies and so on (I`ll stop here as this is preaching to the choir)
|
this was discussed in bw too and the final resolution was that low level players could get good advice from good players if the forums were all the same and that some things could be pointed out by lower level players that could be beneficial to good players.
|
On September 22 2010 03:42 Malminos wrote:
How is a forum that only pros can read or write beneficial to the community as a whole, at all?
You'll note the bulk of votes are for allowing anyone to read.
|
TL just needs more mods imo. like someone to move this thread into website feedback.
|
There for sure should be like a 1500+ forum, why not? Is it "rude" to accept the fact that higher ranked players have better opinions? I am only 1000~ pts and I know any advice I give isn't that great compared to what a really experienced player would give, and given how not everyone signs their posts with "btw i'm n points," either for hassle or desire to not come off as a jackass and get banned or flamed, it would be definitely useful.
A forum only pros can even READ would be pretty lame though, and I can see how that would go against TL's ideals. However, a forum only "pros" can contribute to would be a GREAT place to filter out quality opinions backed by experience, not theorycraft or bias (as much, at least).
|
I'm a scrub - but I think high level discussion section is definitely good just to see what they think, I would however like read access to it.
|
On September 22 2010 06:06 Hawk wrote:
I was originally for the pro forum or whatever, but it would be such a very small community, and that would prevent the very rare new poster/low ranking guy who has a valid point from contributing. I think those people are few and far between, but you should at least have the opportunity to prove that you aren't an idiot...
I'm sure there would still be an open normal strategy forum new people can post in. More people would quickly realize how terrible and misleading newbie information can be and why a pro forum is needed. If someone has worthwhile information worth posting, then they should have a decent point ranking and have access already.
There will always be bads that wont deserve to make the cut for the Pro forum, but then at least the bads wont outnumber the decent pros 10:1 like how its happening right now in the SC2 Strat forum.
The only people left that would decline this idea are bads who think they are hot shit when their not and are terrified their coveted 1000pt diamond rank wont vouch for anything anymore.
More refined legit strategy posts= more improvement from lower ranked players, instead of reading misleading information from a terribad that's gotten into diamond cheesing/only allining and posting trash info on the forums about it.
|
I would just love to have high level debates free of dumb arguments from guys who played 50games of ladder and claim stupid stuff about units or strat they have played against once or twice.
|
On September 22 2010 13:59 Mecha71 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 06:06 Hawk wrote:
I was originally for the pro forum or whatever, but it would be such a very small community, and that would prevent the very rare new poster/low ranking guy who has a valid point from contributing. I think those people are few and far between, but you should at least have the opportunity to prove that you aren't an idiot... I'm sure there would still be an open normal strategy forum new people can post in. More people would quickly realize how terrible and misleading newbie information can be and why a pro forum is needed. If someone has worthwhile information worth posting, then they should have a decent point ranking and have access already. There will always be bads that wont deserve to make the cut for the Pro forum, but then at least the bads wont outnumber the decent pros 10:1 like how its happening right now in the SC2 Strat forum. The only people left that would decline this idea are bads who think they are hot shit when their not and are terrified their coveted 1000pt diamond rank wont vouch for anything anymore. More refined legit strategy posts= more improvement from lower ranked players, instead of reading misleading information from a terribad that's gotten into diamond cheesing/only allining and posting trash info on the forums about it.
I thought this too, but think about how small the pro strat forum would be (and yes, there would obviously be the normal one too). But think how small of a pool it is. Diamond is about 6-7% of the population on every server. Of that, high diamond (like 1000+) is a fraction of that number. And not every one of those people posts on TL, so cut that number some more.
That's the reason why I'd prefer super nazi moderation over a separate forum. There would only be so many posts.
|
This will just support mass gamers and exclude them from those with a normal "circle of life".
Just to think about people who are still pretty good players and have a lot of experience when it comes to Starcraft and RTS, but...
are casters and simply dont have time to play
are organizers of a team or league and mainly play custom games
are in semi-good teams who prefer spending time on refining their builds instead of grinding games vs random players of really different quality
are having a demanding job or are moving a lot, so basicly are smart but just dont have obviously the opportunity to "mass game"
etc. pp
So basicly what will happen is, that it excludes some trolls PROPABLY, and if I see some 1k+ players who basicly know nothing about the game except the time period of a 4 gate or 5 rax all-in thats just a vast minority. What it exlcudes for sure is players who actually CARE about the community, doing useful stuff like torunaments, teams, casts or whatever content instead of just grinding posts on tl.net.
Furthermore it just makes an "elitist" group up (of people who propably arent) and excludes people from content, which is, basicly just one thing: discrimination.
I utterly shocked how many people support that, I am sorry, obvious crap without any further thought. I know the quality of this is not like wikipedia, simply because this is a private moderated INTERNET forum. If you want to do something against it rather donate to the tl.net staff and help them by getting more moderators that can help cleaning out useless content in everyones interests. That would be a much more wise solution - in my opinion.
Edit: to clarify - "excluding from content" also includes also giving feedback and opinions, of course.
|
A pro forum that only pros could read and post into would be kind of pointless imo. TL is a huge community. Though I do like the idea of a forum that only pros can post so the rest of us can read and educate ourselves.
|
Point inflation would be a problem but thank God we have R1CH on our team heh :p
Im for this idea, but 1200 point is faaar from pro level... But yeah, it would create good discussions
|
On September 22 2010 22:47 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 13:59 Mecha71 wrote:On September 22 2010 06:06 Hawk wrote:
I was originally for the pro forum or whatever, but it would be such a very small community, and that would prevent the very rare new poster/low ranking guy who has a valid point from contributing. I think those people are few and far between, but you should at least have the opportunity to prove that you aren't an idiot... I'm sure there would still be an open normal strategy forum new people can post in. More people would quickly realize how terrible and misleading newbie information can be and why a pro forum is needed. If someone has worthwhile information worth posting, then they should have a decent point ranking and have access already. There will always be bads that wont deserve to make the cut for the Pro forum, but then at least the bads wont outnumber the decent pros 10:1 like how its happening right now in the SC2 Strat forum. The only people left that would decline this idea are bads who think they are hot shit when their not and are terrified their coveted 1000pt diamond rank wont vouch for anything anymore. More refined legit strategy posts= more improvement from lower ranked players, instead of reading misleading information from a terribad that's gotten into diamond cheesing/only allining and posting trash info on the forums about it. I thought this too, but think about how small the pro strat forum would be (and yes, there would obviously be the normal one too). But think how small of a pool it is. Diamond is about 6-7% of the population on every server. Of that, high diamond (like 1000+) is a fraction of that number. And not every one of those people posts on TL, so cut that number some more. That's the reason why I'd prefer super nazi moderation over a separate forum. There would only be so many posts.
I actually remember a Poll somewhere that finished with something like half of TL being in diamond.. can't remember, but someone can always hold a Poll again.
I'm for this idea. Would reduce the time it takes me to wade through all the bronzies posts etc to get to the 'good stuff'.
Honestly the cut-off should be even higher.. I remember seeing 2 posts on b.net forums one posting that Thors should have an aoe slow ability to catch muta...and another one posting that banelings should be nerfed because "Zerg just a-moves them thus requiring no micro". I was like "lol haha bronze leaguer" - went and looked it up on sc2ranks. They were both ~800 diamond players -_____-"
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
I would like to see a pro only board. Could be very interesting to read what they think about the game without troll spams in between.
|
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
It is detrimental to the community to silence or exclude opinions from those that are perceived with lesser abilities. Silencing others invalidates your own opinions.
I will not participate in a community, in gaming, real life or otherwise that segregates and censors the opinion of some of their members base on perceived ability.
|
if 1200+ is progamer status I should be winning some GSL Prelims...
|
Has anyone actually asked these high level players whether they'd actually use the forum being proposed? Are these guys really going to discover some cool new trick then rush to TL to tell everyone about it? Are they going to want to post there knowing that their every word is going to be parroted by 100 other people in the "normal people" forums?
Frankly I'd be more interested in a strategy forum where you can't post without attaching a relevant replay to your reply ... even if said replay is on YABOT or Unit Tester.
|
I voted for the 1200+ thing, but I think it should actually be like 1500+ or something, cuz 1200 aint THAT hard to reach and I dont consider myself worthy of writing there^^
|
On September 22 2010 22:59 GoDannY wrote:
This will just support mass gamers and exclude them from those with a normal "circle of life".
Just to think about people who are still pretty good players and have a lot of experience when it comes to Starcraft and RTS, but...
are casters and simply dont have time to play
are organizers of a team or league and mainly play custom games
are in semi-good teams who prefer spending time on refining their builds instead of grinding games vs random players of really different quality
are having a demanding job or are moving a lot, so basicly are smart but just dont have obviously the opportunity to "mass game"
etc. pp
So basicly what will happen is, that it excludes some trolls PROPABLY, and if I see some 1k+ players who basicly know nothing about the game except the time period of a 4 gate or 5 rax all-in thats just a vast minority.
The idea is not to ban sub-1200 point players from the forums, its only the super awesome pro stategy subforums we're talking about here that will exclude newer players from participating. For bronze level discussions their is still the regular strat forums and thus everyone should be happy!
As for casters/organizers.. they've done their part in the community, and many people respect them for that.. but the fact remains if they suck at the game then they have no say in a legit strategy discussion. As for people who are 9999 point players but don't play ladder.. come on seriously do people believe this? If you're that damn good then just play 40 ladder games and you should be up in 1200 in no time. 40 games isn't a huge deal really, especially if its spread over a long period of time.
And NO, you just can't reach 1200ish with mastering 5rax/4 gate alone. These are silly rumors spread by people who can't even reach gold. If you disagree, then be a 4 gate abuser and I will welcome your legit comments in the newer strat forums.
|
It would be like the gladiator only section on arenajunkies.com. I'm all for it!
|
On September 21 2010 04:45 Wr3k wrote:
1200 points is hardly progamer status, but it might be a start. Besides, it would be impossible to enforce. How would you determine which users have 1200+ points?
sc2ranks.com API.
|
Good idea, with the "everyone can read, only select few can write" option. As a noob myself it's hard to read through strategy threads and decide which replies are worth anything and which are from other noobs (no offence). That way I could read some guides and discussion from people I can trust (sort of, at least).
As for implementation, something like the featured stream maybe? Some posters will be given the "pro" status and as such could write in the elite threads.
PS. by "pro" i don't mean only pro-players, but overall posters that have proven to be worthy.
|
Havent read much here just saying to "keep it simple". Possible give out some invites for this vip forum, from there the invited go invite other worthy ones.
We never were equals after all.
|
While I think that the idea is good, the proposed implementation of the idea is incorrect. SC2 points are not sufficent in rating skill, and a lot of lower league players actually have a lot of in-game knowledge but haven't developed the speed to compete with top players.
I also think that the amount of mindless imbalance posters will slowly diminish as they either stop playing the game, or figure out that balance is actually less of an issue as it is to just improve your overall play.
|
I would support this idea. Right now looking for tips in the strategy section is.... risky. To say the least.
|
this is teamliquid not arenajunkies =[
that being said, indifferent for me
|
BRONZIES
um.. i'm voting to leave it the way it is. i don't think the right attitude to have is that of 'cleansing' the community by dividing it up and reducing access. it's snobby and to be honest, attitudes like this have more to do with why i don't post much here than someone in bronze who doesn't know what they're talking about. you can just ignore someone who is clueless, but if the role models here are acting like this it sets the tone for the whole forum.
|
I think the idea of 1337 subforum is ok, but what I would prefer is just a mandatory signature or something similar that indicates each player's rank/points so you can judge their competence when reading the posts.
It's not like people below 1200 points can't have good ideas and taking voice away from them won't necessary be good. Also people in lower leagues may be struggling with something basic which is not necessarily obvious for top players so, for example, a platinum level player may be a better advisor to a gold level player in some cases.
The other idea would be to just create some kind of noobs section for sub-diamond players where the basics are discussed which would clean up strategy section from a lot of unnecessary threads/posts. I belive that noobs sub-forum + strategy forum is a better solution than strategy forum + 1337 sub-forum.
|
I would like to say that this is a good idea, however this won't make balance threads less frequent but more so amplify their effect on the community. As most pros (don't feel like mentioning names) voice their opinions on something they view as imba then thousands upon thousands of "scrubs" latch on to that idea and reinforce it (siege tanks being a prime example). Blowing a simple complaint way out of proportion.
If anything, this new forum would require heavy moderation if open for reading by the public. As I'm sure if a person posts something in that forum, then 10 copies of it will be made on the standard SC2 forums.
Again, good idea, but will require a good bit of thought if launched correctly.
|
First you should go and ask said pros if they would honestly post here more.
|
As Chill pointed out in one of the Weapon of Choice shows this idea is nonsense. There are so many high level players that have a huge undersatnding of the game, but they dont play as much and therefor not a high rank. And lots of good players just play custom-games. Why should they not be allowed to post in that subforum?
On the other hand lots of players with a high ranking are just massgaming and just copy other players. Those people cannot contribute much to an elitesubforum.
And the use of a subforum with just a handfull of users is pretty useless. If you have to wait two weeks for a simple answer is not that good. Also the top players are mostly not that activ in the community.
TL lives from the big communits they have. Often i get so many new insights in the game because there are so many different opinions to one question.
|
I think its a good idea. Its not like us low level players would get silenced, all the regular forums would still be there but it would be easier to find some good solid advice. Ofcourse theres still fools in 1200 diamond but it would guarantee a certain level of experience and the threads would not get so needlessly long.
I dont think its more elitist than the ladder system in general. I mean theres a reason you dont pitch bronze and diamond players against each other. And if anyone wants to gain access they can just earn their diamond ranking.
|
A filter that you can turn on and off, hiding lesser players' replies might also be an idea? Separate forums create a lot of distance/separation and people will join the 'better' forum at the moment they hit 1200 once.
|
I hope this is actually possible. I would love some good strategy reads
|
i don't think it's a bad thing to have a subforum where the higher-tier players can talk and debate strategy.. especially if it's still viewable to the public, i feel like it would also reduce the amount of flame "no your a noob do this" that tends to occur in the sc2 strategy section, so lower players can read from the top-level players on TL and see waht their thinking i s
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
We've had discussions about this in staff and theres definitely arguments on both sides ( i support it and am lobbying for some implementation of it :3 )
|
IT would be kinda educational and the best topics could even be fixed ...
maybe even posted on LP ?
|
I agree with people who say its hard to figure out whos just writing bullshit and whos actually worth listening to. I would like forum like that very much, but the requirement couldnt be too high or it would be very inactive, since top players are not VERY keen on posting new threads etc.
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 22 2010 23:49 puttputt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 04:45 Wr3k wrote:
1200 points is hardly progamer status, but it might be a start. Besides, it would be impossible to enforce. How would you determine which users have 1200+ points? sc2ranks.com API.
That would require that you register your b.net name with TL. Couldn't someone lie and pick someone's name from the top of Korean ladder that doesn't post here?
|
I like this idea, just have to make sure that threads relevant to the whole community (bnet, bugs, blizzard, tournaments) are posted on the public area. Thumbs up.
|
I think it's a great idea.
I remember there was a guide that Sheth posted during beta that a LOT of guys bashed on. It was an unbelievably fantastic guide, but some platinum players that thought they were better than everyone polluted the thread for people who were genuinely trying to learn.
|
I don't know why people are getting hung up over the 1200+ point example. It's just an example, it can be changed to any number if any.
Anyway, I think the sub forum should be on an invite basis, with those invited being able to invite others they deem 1337 enough.
|
oh its 1200 points ingame!
i thought of 1.2k posts here on tl.net. even though it wouldnt be perfect because noobish spammer are favored by this system whereas lurker who have quite some skill and knowledge, are disadvantaged.
another good thing about 1.2k (or maybe some other number) posts is, that its perhaps easier to add to the (sub)forum.
|
If this was implemented, there would be a HUGE responsibility on the +1200 or whatever Diamond players to make legitimate, well mannered, well written intelligent posts. Even they can get into some bullshit that doesn't contribute. Idra and Incontrol aren't my ideas of the best posters on teamliquid. It would have to be a forum where a certain level of professionalism is maintained to actually be beneficial to readers.
|
I would like a public read only one for "progamers", yes, but they better be real damn high level and internationally recognized, not just some kid who mass games all day with a shitty winrate that is above to knock off enough games to get to 1200.
|
Read only pro subforum. Give everyone inherit permissions to view it but only certain recognized players permissions to post.
:D
|
This is an insane idea. You would segregate the community and just exaggerate the elitist perception that people have of TL.net.
Though, I would like a way to have more intelligent discussions in the forums, this is not the way to do it. Hell, I wouldn't trust the community even to properly consider the ramifications that something this will do.
At best, I would like "high level" players or responsible members of the community given some kind of icon beside their name to indicate that they know what the hell they are talking about.
|
definately a read only pro only subforum. i'm no diamond but i'd like the option to see decent discussion by pro level posters only, will basically filter out all the crap, you could say washing it all off the diamonds xD
|
On September 22 2010 23:15 me_viet wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2010 22:47 Hawk wrote:On September 22 2010 13:59 Mecha71 wrote:On September 22 2010 06:06 Hawk wrote:
I was originally for the pro forum or whatever, but it would be such a very small community, and that would prevent the very rare new poster/low ranking guy who has a valid point from contributing. I think those people are few and far between, but you should at least have the opportunity to prove that you aren't an idiot... I'm sure there would still be an open normal strategy forum new people can post in. More people would quickly realize how terrible and misleading newbie information can be and why a pro forum is needed. If someone has worthwhile information worth posting, then they should have a decent point ranking and have access already. There will always be bads that wont deserve to make the cut for the Pro forum, but then at least the bads wont outnumber the decent pros 10:1 like how its happening right now in the SC2 Strat forum. The only people left that would decline this idea are bads who think they are hot shit when their not and are terrified their coveted 1000pt diamond rank wont vouch for anything anymore. More refined legit strategy posts= more improvement from lower ranked players, instead of reading misleading information from a terribad that's gotten into diamond cheesing/only allining and posting trash info on the forums about it. Well no one is checking the validity of those poll responses Even if you do it by an arbitrary diamond number, you are bound to get morons. For example: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=154742#3On September 21 2010 23:22 storm44 wrote:
im in diamond and I didn't know that scv's could attack lol Even beyond that, suppose you pick an arbitrary number. It would have to be high 1000, 1200+ or so, to really cut out idiots. But at the same time, there are a lot of good people who understand the game that don't have the time to play to get up to that level (1200 is as much about skill as it is about grinding away). Not everyone has time for 9hours of play a day anymore. I thought this too, but think about how small the pro strat forum would be (and yes, there would obviously be the normal one too). But think how small of a pool it is. Diamond is about 6-7% of the population on every server. Of that, high diamond (like 1000+) is a fraction of that number. And not every one of those people posts on TL, so cut that number some more. That's the reason why I'd prefer super nazi moderation over a separate forum. There would only be so many posts. I actually remember a Poll somewhere that finished with something like half of TL being in diamond.. can't remember, but someone can always hold a Poll again. I'm for this idea. Would reduce the time it takes me to wade through all the bronzies posts etc to get to the 'good stuff'. Honestly the cut-off should be even higher.. I remember seeing 2 posts on b.net forums one posting that Thors should have an aoe slow ability to catch muta...and another one posting that banelings should be nerfed because "Zerg just a-moves them thus requiring no micro". I was like "lol haha bronze leaguer" - went and looked it up on sc2ranks. They were both ~800 diamond players -_____-"
|
I would LOVE to see some people who are against this who are higher level players.
Please indulge me
|
I was listening to the State of the Game podcast last night, and I really enjoyed where Day9 and Artosis were just going back and forth on the efficacy of drops vs nydus, and what to do when you get your ramp pylon-blocked. I think more of this kind of talk should be encouraged, but maybe not necessarily based on rating.
Top 100 in your region maybe? 200? Maybe just those in TLPD that are considered to be progamers? I know Day9 and the rest joke about how easy it is to get to 1200 with 4 warp gate rushes.
|
Here's how you verify. A tlbot on bnet. msg the bot something and it versifies who you are.
There's 75% of people who want a subforum although idea of not being able to read it is ridiculous idea.
Best way to do is having a skill lvl of "good" players. Even people hundreds of points under can take games off the top. They still have knowledge and are more able converse about the game. You open up talk a lot by having a depth of people who can play well. Maybe something like top 2k global?
I don't think only pros is a good idea cause how many are we talking about that would post? They will post even less cause there's no threads. Best way to do is have it being good players.
Interesting option is to allow all people to post in subforum still but you have to expand a window to read them. It makes it more cut and dry where your getting your info from and your not bogged down by bad posts. Good players can go on talking without seeing those posts if they want and not disturb discussion.
|
High rating =/= pro gamer.
It's too easy to get a high rating on strategies such as 4 gate with little knowledge or understanding of 70% of the game.
I would not mind a forum with read for all and wright limited to 'invite only', but rating based is just not the right way to go about it.
Start with a hand picked group of high end players and allow them to give other players writing rights. Mods could revoke those rights if they feel someone without sufficient understanding of the game gets invited.
|
I wonder how many other silver scrubs like me just sit there and watch instead of posting. Sure I post, but I try to make my question as straight forward and less whiny as possible.
More people need to just shut up and watch/read and they'll be surprised with how much better they'll become.
|
I think is a really good idea, however everyone should be allowed to view the threads. But only specific people should be allowed to post. I'm kind of tired of looking through BO threads only to find it loaded with people who have no idea how to play game. It's hard to separate the shit from the gold to put it bluntly.
|
I never really post here due to my knowledge that I am terrible (1000 platinum). But the constant spam of stupid shit from people who I'd assume think they're gods (and currently sitting in Silver or something)
If such a forum does get created, I would prefer that it is possible that us midlevel players (such as myself) are still able to view, and potentially have the chance to learn from the discussion at hand.
|
I think the karma system vs this system should get its own thread
|
Wannabe-progamers 2009: Man I wish SC was more popular!
Wannabe-progamers 2010: Man SC is way too popular!
I think this idea is ridiculous and completely defies what a web community is about. If you read stuff you think is worthless and get worked up about it the problem is etirely yours IMO.
|
|
|
alright so now that i have had a little time to think about this, i think it might be a good idea (if it could even be implemented) however the level base would have to grow every week or 2. for instance this week 1200, next week 1250, and so on. there are 1200 level players that i know would get smashed by 1500+, but made it that high because they are really good at one strat such as 4 gate, 5 rax reaper, etc.
|
Yeah, so basically you have the real threads in the special category, then you have everyone else talking in the not real threads.
Guess that means unless you hit whatever quality mark you need to to be placed in the real threads, you will be posting on the unreal threads.
Why post on the unreal thread at all, when you know no matter what you say people won't even be looking or paying any attention to it.
Not to say a lot of brilliant things are said on the forums, but something like Stalife drops wouldn't have been posted about so until TLO did it or something people wouldn't have knowledge about it.
Or when Day9 makes everyone not build queens and we see timing pushes and rushes not seen on any pro level games that may be quite viable. Day9 covered 5 of the 480 he saw, but any of the 480 could post their replay on TL. But since they aren't xxxx they get lumped in the unreal forums where no one goes for information.
|
On September 23 2010 01:18 Triscuit wrote:
I was listening to the State of the Game podcast last night, and I really enjoyed where Day9 and Artosis were just going back and forth on the efficacy of drops vs nydus, and what to do when you get your ramp pylon-blocked. I think more of this kind of talk should be encouraged, but maybe not necessarily based on rating.
Top 100 in your region maybe? 200? Maybe just those in TLPD that are considered to be progamers? I know Day9 and the rest joke about how easy it is to get to 1200 with 4 warp gate rushes.
top 200 by region would exclude wayyy too many people. while it may encourage them to post more often, since they will have no fear of backlash, it will be a group of only like 50 people talking to each other since not everyone in the top 200 is a part of TL.
oh and thx for the info on the podcast. i normally dont watch those because they are so bland, but sounds like they go over very interesting strategies
|
Doing it by points at all seems like the wrong strategy. For this to not turn out terribly, TL would have to make a list of pro gamers and give them permission in a separate forum; it could take a lot of manpower and effort (not sure how much effort it would take, but it'd require cross-checking stuff, and possibly have drama associated with semi-pro gamers, that 'think' they should be included), but would be the best outcome of this 'pro-gamer-only forum.'
If the pro-gamer forum is readable by the rest of the TL community, it wouldn't make any difference from the current state of the forums...since threads would just pop up talking about what the progamers are talking about...then progamers would (well, most likely if they're looking for feedback...) read the responses from "lesser players" anyway, and nothing would have changed.
TL (mods/admins/banlings) would have to close each and every one of these 'response threads' to prevent progamers from knowing what the community thinks about their ideas.
|
Maybe split into 2 strategy forums with the understanding that one is more highly moderated and you will get banned/post deleted if you degrade into bs. Similar to what blizzard did with wow class forums. There are the role forums which get blue responses and are heavily moderated and the other threads which doesn't matter. (Tbh I think blizz needs to moderate better in either case)
|
I think this would be ignorant, because lots of people (like myself) do not post a lot. I've been reading and going to TL.net for over 3 years. For the first year or so I didn't even have an account, I would just read strategies and watch the proleagues.
But because of my low post count you would immediately write me off, it would just create a lot of pointless post's, people would post on everything just to get there count up.
I disagree with this completely.
|
IMO you can't do it by rating just because people who are 800 now will be 1200 by next week if active
|
Don't like this for 2 reasons
1) you might not be a top 1500+ diamond player because you're slow at doing things manually but you could know the theory of the game.Not everyone is manually capable enough to get to 150+ apm and be fine, but they might not ignorant about the game
2) getting to 1200 points + if you're good it's just a matter of time, but you aren't guaranteed that more points= more skill= more insightfull posting.
I mean I'm almost at 800 points diamond being an ex E/D- rank on bw because I'm damn hands slow and I just know theory I can't put that in practice most of the times, still I feel I know enough to not be a terribad poster, not a good insightfull one maybe, but I feel I could partecipate in most discussions without being a dumbass.
It would just be an elite thing to brag about you're points imo.Plus most players that are high in points aren't frequent posters because...if you want to get 2k diamond you need to be good AND play a damn lot.
I've found that sometimes playing against a lower league guy helped me much more because they knew theories that I didn't know.
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 23 2010 02:38 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +Anyway, I think the sub forum should be on an invite basis, with those invited being able to invite others they deem 1337 enough. I was going to say something here, but this is a far superior idea.
I actually like this idea, seeing as it gets around a lot of the logistics issues that would otherwise be a problem.
|
On September 23 2010 02:48 Williowa wrote:
Yeah, so basically you have the real threads in the special category, then you have everyone else talking in the not real threads.
Guess that means unless you hit whatever quality mark you need to to be placed in the real threads, you will be posting on the unreal threads.
Why post on the unreal thread at all, when you know no matter what you say people won't even be looking or paying any attention to it.
Not to say a lot of brilliant things are said on the forums, but something like Stalife drops wouldn't have been posted about so until TLO did it or something people wouldn't have knowledge about it.
Or when Day9 makes everyone not build queens and we see timing pushes and rushes not seen on any pro level games that may be quite viable. Day9 covered 5 of the 480 he saw, but any of the 480 could post their replay on TL. But since they aren't xxxx they get lumped in the unreal forums where no one goes for information.
Consider the wants and needs of high Diamond players. As it currently stands, we have no real strategy forum. We can't connect with others and discuss things. Every popular thread on TL hits 50 pages overnight, and a lot of it is filled with posts that high level Diamond players would prefer they didn't read. Finding a good post in the TL strategy forums is like finding a needle in a haystack. I myself have just given up on it. If they implemented this, I would actually have a strategy forum to read and participate in. But what we have now is extremely unattractive and unusable to high diamond players.
|
On September 23 2010 03:15 sva wrote:
I think this would be ignorant, because lots of people (like myself) do not post a lot. I've been reading and going to TL.net for over 3 years. For the first year or so I didn't even have an account, I would just read strategies and watch the proleagues.
But because of my low post count you would immediately write me off, it would just create a lot of pointless post's, people would post on everything just to get there count up.
I disagree with this completely.
Did you read the OP? Whether someone is allowed to post is based on some measure of skill, not by their post count.
Having a public-read, pro-write forum is a great idea, as long as there are two separate forums. One forum would be completely public and meant for newbies to ask for help, while the other would be for higher-level discussion and only open for posts by higher-level players (although can be read publicly). Here are my rebuttals to some of the objections raised so far: (A lot of these have already been stated, but because it's usually one poster at a time stating one point, they will get missed and posted over and over again)
- low level players with good strats would not be able to post: they could still post in the 'not-high-level' forum; while it's likely that will be less read, if the strat is really viable it will be picked up and highlighted by some TL mod (just like how Fazing and other strats were picked up out of the morass of the current strat forum).
- this is elitist/impinging on my freedom of speech/etc.- go back and read the rules of TL. If you want to troll/flame/whatever then go on the public b.net forums. I think the only people who really complain about strict moderation and the such are those who prefer to dick around and waste other people's time.
- This is an organizational nightmare: well I can't really say much about this since I am not privy to the inner workings of TL. However, the fact that several mods (e.g. Kennigit) have expressed support for this issue must mean that it is feasible in some form.
- Ranks change all the time: again, this is a logistical issue and there are probably workarounds; as OP said, this was simply an idea of how to implement the forum.
- Players can just cheese to 1200 diamond: This may or may not be true, but it certainly takes some effort and is far from satisfying for most players. Currently, in order to start a flame war, all a troll has to do is to register in TL using a unique ISP and then start a thread proclaiming that Terran is OP. Should this limit be in place it's unlikely someone would spend hours cheesing just to post. Also, on a more meta level, if cheesing is really that strong, then perhaps it can be discussed as a viable strategy. For example, a large number of games in the current GSL were decided by cheeses, and some were certainly very creative and worth discussing.
- I'm not mechanically strong enough to reach diamond, but I could if I was: (yeah right) but seriously, mechanics is a pretty big part of the game, and there are a lot of potential strategies which could be executable if someone had infinite apm, but not in practice. Being a higher-level player means you have a better judgement of what might or might not actually be possible. Again, if you really come up with a feasible strategy as a lower level player, you can still post it in the public forum and it will be picked up by a mod and brought to higher-level discussion.
|
On September 21 2010 04:07 Slow Motion wrote:
I actually wouldn't mind a sub-forum where only the top players have rights to post, but the rest of us can read. I think that'd be pretty educational.
This. No replies from people where you wonder if they even played out the stuff they talk about.
I am in Silver and I'm all for this.
|
The idea is interesting but the implementation is challenging.
My best advice based on very well run forums in the past is to significantly increase moderation. As mentioned by many others, you can be 800 diamond but understand the game very well and make insightful posts. If you look at the strategy forums, we've got some 1k+ diamond players that are complete shit and have no clue what is going on at all.
So my suggestion would be to have a "qualified strategy forum" where posts are deleted, players are banned and so on for making low quality posts. A very active moderation team + high threat of being flamed to all hell = fear of making stupid posts.
(Much easier to add 5-10 qualified moderators for that sub forum alone than to keep track of who is what rank and whether thats their real alias etc).
|
For people opposing this, you'd actually not lose anything from a "pro-only" subforum being implemented. You'd still be able to post where you usually do, in the same manner, and reading the same quality of posts.
You'd actually gain the opportunity to observe quality discussions. Sometimes it best to just shut up and listen. I'm platinum and I'd love to read discussions between top tier players, knowing that every post carries weight and not having to question the relevancy of each post
So why would you oppose this? Are you just angry that you're excluded from participating in discussions where you probably wouldn't be able to come with valuable contributions? Are you afraid mods will be drawn away from the "public" forums? Are you afraid that the good players will no longer participate in the current strategy forums? (from what I can tell they've abandoned them already).
Personally I think this idea would be a huge contribution to the community. We could all get to learn so much from this. If you feel like discussing something you read on the "pro forum", take it to the public forum, I don't think the mods would frown on this kind of post copying.
|
Some people are looking at this wrong. I've already mentioned a not too terribly difficult way to do this. tlbot on bnet and you can just go by top 2k global or some other number. You could also make a simple program that follows ladder points adjusts automatically.
If you only have pros the forum will be a bit barren. Yes you get varying lvl of input from non pros but it doesn't mean pros will always say smart things or not act like a whiny bitch. You can always invite people who say non dumb shit.
On September 23 2010 01:22 CagedMind wrote:
Here's how you verify. A tlbot on bnet. msg the bot something and it versifies who you are.
There's 75% of people who want a subforum although idea of not being able to read it is ridiculous idea.
Best way to do is having a skill lvl of "good" players. Even people hundreds of points under can take games off the top. They still have knowledge and are more able converse about the game. You open up talk a lot by having a depth of people who can play well. Maybe something like top 2k global?
I don't think only pros is a good idea cause how many are we talking about that would post? They will post even less cause there's no threads. Best way to do is have it being good players.
Interesting option is to allow all people to post in subforum still but you have to expand a window to read them. It makes it more cut and dry where your getting your info from and your not bogged down by bad posts. Good players can go on talking without seeing those posts if they want and not disturb discussion.
Quoting myself cause I'm so smart.
|
|
|
On September 23 2010 00:41 Kennigit wrote:
We've had discussions about this in staff and theres definitely arguments on both sides ( i support it and am lobbying for some implementation of it :3 )
Glad to hear at least one administrator remark on this. I would like to hear more of what Team Liquid thinks on this subject. I keep hearing the shouts of this being against TL's ethos but what exactly is that ethos that this would be violating?
I personally think that the list that TL has of quality/notable players is a sufficient starting place for invites to the forum should it be created. From there I think an invite or application system with credentials would be by far the best system for screening players into such a forum. At the moment I think 1500+ would be a good cut off to get rid of 80% of the bullshit posts you find.
I personally find the strategy section of this forum worthless aside from the occasional thread such as iechonics(the format of his thread was rather superb).
|
On September 23 2010 02:50 KillerPlague wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 01:18 Triscuit wrote:
I was listening to the State of the Game podcast last night, and I really enjoyed where Day9 and Artosis were just going back and forth on the efficacy of drops vs nydus, and what to do when you get your ramp pylon-blocked. I think more of this kind of talk should be encouraged, but maybe not necessarily based on rating.
Top 100 in your region maybe? 200? Maybe just those in TLPD that are considered to be progamers? I know Day9 and the rest joke about how easy it is to get to 1200 with 4 warp gate rushes. top 200 by region would exclude wayyy too many people. while it may encourage them to post more often, since they will have no fear of backlash, it will be a group of only like 50 people talking to each other since not everyone in the top 200 is a part of TL. oh and thx for the info on the podcast. i normally dont watch those because they are so bland, but sounds like they go over very interesting strategies
Only 50 people would be a good thing.
|
I'm very curious to see what the resulting product of a Qualified Poster Only strategy sub-forum would be. A lots of peoples think that this idea would bear fruitions. I hope this idea will be given a try.
|
1200 pts is progamer? Damn, I'm only 100 points away from a progamer!
No, seriously, I'm terrible and have like 80 APM. I'm not 100 points away from a progamer. Maybe like 1600+ would work?
|
Despite all the blah di blah, never judge a book by it's cover, good players aren't good theorycrafters etc., this is just a very good way to up the standard. It's not "fair" as it generalises, but it sure is effective.
900 point Platinum, and I completely agree.
|
Because of the very flawed points system, I'd suggest a set of different entrance possibilities:
- points in diamond adjusted for inflation
- cash tournament successes in esl, zotac, etc.(e.g. a few appearances in the quarter-finals)
- world rank, region rank and region race rank percentiles according to sc2ranks.com (<#200 for instance
- the official top 200s and the gsl players anyway
I think such forums shouldn't exclude people, who are not very talented. Everyone should get a chance, if he is willing to execute the openings well, understands his match-ups and doesn't have inferior mechanics.
|
hahaha at 1200+ you would still have 50apm1a2awin terran scrubs in your precious elitist forums...
User was temp banned for this post.
|
I think it's a very good idea.
to see some really good players discuss would be very interesting to watch!
hope something like that gets implemented!
|
Lalalaland34490 Posts
The problem with setting a 'points' limit is that...well, people have to actually put a lot of time in to get those points. On one hand you could say that 'people should be actively playing constantly to have access to this' but there are people with intelligent minds that simply don't have the time to play X number of games for points.
I'm not saying I should definitely have access, but the fact is that last week, while I was free, I rose up to Diamond from Silver in 2 days. This week, while I've been at uni from 7am to 7pm on some days, I haven't played a single 1v1 game and have only played a few team games with friends. Does this mean I don't qualify? I would hope not.
|
Instead of using points to limit the entrance, tournaments top8 would be a better limiting factor.
|
A list of allowed people, no point limits because obviously some people with high points can be stupid strategically
|
As I've said back in page 12, (and saying it again, because I think this is important)
IMHO, we don't need to segregate the good users from the bad users, we need to make the good posts and threads visible and the bad posts and threads invisible.
This just screams a rating/karma system, not a separate subforum. Why? Because:
Subforum advantages:
- Easy to implement and moderate.
- Guarantees quality.
- Less flood means more organized infos.
Subforum disadvantages:
- The rigid structure means it can't be tweaked easily.
- If the structure does break down, it takes much more work to clean it up and causes an incident.
- While it assures quality, it also wastes good posts.
- Segregation by user means that when a bad user does a good post, it will not be seen...
- ...and it is much worse when the opposite happens.
- Reading interesting ideas, but being denied to help since you can't post means you get no incentive to contribute with quality either.
- This last line means that while the subforum can safeguard one "good" part of the forums, it will -not- help the forum in general. On the contrary, the rest of the forum will become a meaningless trash can that can never become a better place.
In a nutshell: easy solution, non-optimal. Fitting for your common, small SC community.
Rating/Karma system pros:
- Doesn't segregate users, only the infos (which is the part that really matters in a forum). This means that the problems from "users =/= posts" are minimized
- Can be easily tweaked and improved for optimal results even while it is working.
- Is a smaller step towards elitism than the other solution. (While the philosophy here is that there's no reason to deny elitism if it is necessary, there's no reason to make a huge step towards it if unnecessary either).
- Incentivates quality posting from Everyone. This means the community as a whole will become more skilled at doing quality posts as time goes by.
- Awards better users by giving them more tools to influence the community as a whole through more points.
- No changes to the actual forums structure means it is easy to restart if it ever goes wrong.
Rating/Karma system cons:
- More refined solution means it is much harder to implement initially, both in work spent and hardware requirements, as in technical knowledge and creativity. (in other words
- Giving power to the community means it can be abused or have the opposite results if not implemented/moderated correctly.
- While incidents concerning this kind of system wouldn't be nearly as problematic than ones caused by the other solution, the system needs to be complex enough that some accidents are to be expected.
- If badly implemented, it won't achieve its goal.
In a nutshell: complicated, but better solution. Fitting for the best SC community in the web.
Of course, all this is just my own, personal opinion. I strongly believe that this place will inevitably become outright boring in a few years if a subforum is created and maintained. The quality community won't grow enough, and the forum's quality level will reach a ceiling.
Also, you can't really work around the conceptual disadvantages of the subforum solution, while the rating/karma system can always be fixed through better work.
|
This is a fantastic idea, and this is coming from a gold player who won't be able to post here ever.
People get defensive these days when called elitist. They shouldn't. Elitist means to accept that professionals and experts in their fields know whats up way better than laymen, and that's just common sense.
If people are really offended at the idea how about a compromise: set every non elite post to hidden by default, like you do with spoilers. Someone reading the thread can choose to turn them on if they really think it'll add to the discussion. Pros/great players can choose to read and respond IF they want to.
|
I think entry should be allowed based on a manual filter. A player will ask to be able to post, cite his credentials, such as tournament results and, of course, ELO, then be approved or denied based on his reception from moderators.
|
On September 23 2010 06:46 brocoli wrote:
Rating/Karma system pros:
- Doesn't segregate users, only the infos (which is the part that really matters in a forum). This means that the problems from "users =/= posts" are minimized
- Can be easily tweaked and improved for optimal results even while it is working.
- Is a smaller step towards elitism than the other solution. (While the philosophy here is that there's no reason to deny elitism if it is necessary, there's no reason to make a huge step towards it if unnecessary either).
- Incentivates quality posting from Everyone. This means the community as a whole will become more skilled at doing quality posts as time goes by.
- Awards better users by giving them more tools to influence the community as a whole through more points.
- No changes to the actual forums structure means it is easy to restart if it ever goes wrong.
Rating/Karma system cons:
- More refined solution means it is much harder to implement initially, both in work spent and hardware requirements, as in technical knowledge and creativity. (in other words
- Giving power to the community means it can be abused or have the opposite results if not implemented/moderated correctly.
- While incidents concerning this kind of system wouldn't be nearly as problematic than ones caused by the other solution, the system needs to be complex enough that some accidents are to be expected.
- If badly implemented, it won't achieve its goal.
In a nutshell: complicated, but better solution. Fitting for the best SC community in the web.
Major disadvantage: If this is a Karma system open to everyone, people who voice the most liked opinion are getting the most points. And when top players said they stopped posting because every of their posts gets pounced on by 10 bronzies, accept it as truth. Us low level players are the majority.
And as thus, those people will upvote each other until huge idiots with huge support rule the Karma pool.
I'll take my quality handpicked forum every day of the week. And I trust the TL staff to make good and careful choices in the participants.
|
Problem is there would be only 200 people or who could post in the section. Since there aren't that many quality players. Only a hand full off them even post on tl also.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 23 2010 06:46 brocoli wrote:
As I've said back in page 12, (and saying it again, because I think this is important)
IMHO, we don't need to segregate the good users from the bad users, we need to make the good posts and threads visible and the bad posts and threads invisible.
This just screams a rating/karma system, not a separate subforum. Why? Because:
Subforum advantages:
- Easy to implement and moderate.
- Guarantees quality.
- Less flood means more organized infos.
Subforum disadvantages:
- The rigid structure means it can't be tweaked easily.
- If the structure does break down, it takes much more work to clean it up and causes an incident.
- While it assures quality, it also wastes good posts.
- Segregation by user means that when a bad user does a good post, it will not be seen...
- ...and it is much worse when the opposite happens.
- Reading interesting ideas, but being denied to help since you can't post means you get no incentive to contribute with quality either.
- This last line means that while the subforum can safeguard one "good" part of the forums, it will -not- help the forum in general. On the contrary, the rest of the forum will become a meaningless trash can that can never become a better place.
In a nutshell: easy solution, non-optimal. Fitting for your common, small SC community.
Rating/Karma system pros:
- Doesn't segregate users, only the infos (which is the part that really matters in a forum). This means that the problems from "users =/= posts" are minimized
- Can be easily tweaked and improved for optimal results even while it is working.
- Is a smaller step towards elitism than the other solution. (While the philosophy here is that there's no reason to deny elitism if it is necessary, there's no reason to make a huge step towards it if unnecessary either).
- Incentivates quality posting from Everyone. This means the community as a whole will become more skilled at doing quality posts as time goes by.
- Awards better users by giving them more tools to influence the community as a whole through more points.
- No changes to the actual forums structure means it is easy to restart if it ever goes wrong.
Rating/Karma system cons:
- More refined solution means it is much harder to implement initially, both in work spent and hardware requirements, as in technical knowledge and creativity. (in other words
- Giving power to the community means it can be abused or have the opposite results if not implemented/moderated correctly.
- While incidents concerning this kind of system wouldn't be nearly as problematic than ones caused by the other solution, the system needs to be complex enough that some accidents are to be expected.
- If badly implemented, it won't achieve its goal.
In a nutshell: complicated, but better solution. Fitting for the best SC community in the web.
Of course, all this is just my own, personal opinion. I strongly believe that this place will inevitably become outright boring in a few years if a subforum is created and maintained. The quality community won't grow enough, and the forum's quality level will reach a ceiling.
Also, you can't really work around the conceptual disadvantages of the subforum solution, while the rating/karma system can always be fixed through better work.
Karma voting system is horrible!!!!!! its a popularity contest and basing it off of ladder points is 10 times as accurate
What do you mean it can't be tweaked easily? You have it separated by ladder points and you can change where it's cutoff at and you can also invite people in. How does it waste good posts? People contributing bad posts is part of problem so you limit how some people contribuate to some extent no matter how you do it. If we go with one of my ideas you can still post but you have to open up posts to see them.
Segregation can happen to some extent but I don't think it will be too much and overall the quality will improve. sc2 General is not gonna to become immediate trash and you can even argue that subforum will set a good example and top players will come to tl more and some posts end up in other sc2 places.
No matter if there's a subforum or not I think there should be a indication next to name of "pro and "good" players. Non restricted forums will benefit from it always. You can impose some rules that noobs can't argue and post rubbish at pros and only politely ask questions or introduce a new thought.
Karma systems are terrible lets leave it at that.
|
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
|
I don't think I agree with this. There are alot of lower level players that spend ALOT of time theory crafting. I really think that TL should encourage this, as it leads to alot of cool tricks, things that turned BW into the great game it is today.
If there is a seperate sub forum for high level diamond, then what would ever be the incentive for them to come and talk to lower levels. From there you get a large divide that keeps alot of players from theorycrafting, because who is going to going to read or listen to some "low diamond scrub" when their is a pro sub forum to read?
Also, many people watch, or study starcraft (myself included) but just don't play enough to get high (1000+) points. I have actually spent at least 3x amount of time on TL, Liquidpedia, and Watching High Level VODS, than I have actually playing.
Finally, I think that not all high diamond players are articulate or helpful. Many of them, I feel are your typical xbox live style players. TL should encourage quality posting, in my opinion, even more then skill.
My rank, if you care that much
+ Show Spoiler +low diamond (600 pts) player.
EDIT: Want an example of a high level players only forum? www.smashboards.com the main forum is just a mess, and tier lists/info come out like letters from god, mystifying people...
|
The simplest solution would be a subforum that was public to read but invite-only to post. TL.Net could get the ball rolling because they are already able to distinguish valued contributors from plebs like me.
A nice touch, if feasible, would be a 'spectator' forum, where OPs from the private forum are automatically mirrored and anyone can discuss them - but no new threads can be created.
|
On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
This is bullshit imo. If you can't play, you only think you know what you are talking about.
This is the entire problem that exists now as I see it; low level players who believe they have a higher strategic level of understanding are actually simply grasping key points and making suppositions on the basis of their level of play, where inconsistent macro from one game to the next makes discussing strategy or balance completely ridiculous, let alone the impact of good micro or the potential it has to save you.
This is not real sports; understanding SC2 requires game experience because it's an artificial environment with a set of rules arbitrarily created that requires practical ingame application to even begin to understand.
edit: besides, what "good" commentators do we have that are bad players? can anyone actually NAME one? I would say better player almost directly correlates to better caster, and I believe it's causal as well.
edit2: also, theorycrafting is bullshit. seriously, i can't even believe people are seriously discussing the value of theorycrafting. you may enjoy it, but it's utterly worthless
|
On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
You can always post in other sc2 forums as I said they might even become better quality even with subforum if some changes happen. How well do you know that stuff though? Platinum players understand some meta game and what units to make to counter things in sc2. People could be invited and maybe even have somewhat loose invites to people who post intellectually.
|
On September 23 2010 07:27 Stoli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
This is bullshit imo. If you can't play, you only think you know what you are talking about. This is the entire problem that exists now as I see it; low level players who believe they have a higher strategic level of understanding are actually simply grasping key points and making suppositions on the basis of their level of play, where inconsistent macro from one game to the next makes discussing strategy or balance completely ridiculous, let alone the impact of good micro or the potential it has to save you. This is not real sports; understanding SC2 requires game experience because it's an artificial environment with a set of rules arbitrarily created that requires practical ingame application to even begin to understand.
Guess sports commentators know nothing also by your theory?
|
voted for the 1200+ with no public write but i dont think its gonna solve that much
|
Don't forget guys its a subforum. Sub. Forum. Like, you can still post your inane shit everywhere else, but not in that sub-forum.
|
On September 23 2010 07:34 Cell.cell wrote:
Don't forget guys its a subforum. Sub. Forum. Like, you can still post your inane shit everywhere else, but not in that sub-forum.
Then it turns into lol your not in pro section stfu.
|
On September 23 2010 07:29 Maaku wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 07:27 Stoli wrote:On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
This is bullshit imo. If you can't play, you only think you know what you are talking about. This is the entire problem that exists now as I see it; low level players who believe they have a higher strategic level of understanding are actually simply grasping key points and making suppositions on the basis of their level of play, where inconsistent macro from one game to the next makes discussing strategy or balance completely ridiculous, let alone the impact of good micro or the potential it has to save you. This is not real sports; understanding SC2 requires game experience because it's an artificial environment with a set of rules arbitrarily created that requires practical ingame application to even begin to understand. Guess sports commentators know nothing also by your theory?
Well I've played one sport semi-professionally and no, they don't, unless they're former players. Lots of coaches who've worked for 30+ years still have no clue what they're talking about and it's painful to have to listen to them.
Of course SC is different from normal sports, but most people who think they're god's gift to SC analysis even though they're horrible at the game are kidding themselves.
|
On September 23 2010 06:46 brocoli wrote:
IMHO, we don't need to segregate the good users from the bad users, we need to make the good posts and threads visible and the bad posts and threads invisible.
This just screams a rating/karma system, not a separate subforum.
I think it's fascinating that this kind of Slashdot karma system is becoming popular on other sites now that Slashdot itself has receded beneath a tide of karma-whoring and meta-trolling.
|
Best way would be to base it on tournament ratings..
|
On September 23 2010 07:29 Maaku wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 07:27 Stoli wrote:On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
This is bullshit imo. If you can't play, you only think you know what you are talking about. This is the entire problem that exists now as I see it; low level players who believe they have a higher strategic level of understanding are actually simply grasping key points and making suppositions on the basis of their level of play, where inconsistent macro from one game to the next makes discussing strategy or balance completely ridiculous, let alone the impact of good micro or the potential it has to save you. This is not real sports; understanding SC2 requires game experience because it's an artificial environment with a set of rules arbitrarily created that requires practical ingame application to even begin to understand. Guess sports commentators know nothing also by your theory?
Well first, even in real sports commentators with real game experience are preferred, even common. They aren't contemporary players simply because there is so much more money to be made actually playing, but still.
Second, almost every sport has been around for more than 100 years, and the rules are relatively simple. It's common that everyone understands them and that they have a much larger history (wealth of data) that laymen can draw on to gain insight, insights which most PLAYERS know intuitively or are difficult to discern without research, and perhaps only begin to apply consciously when the research realizes what the successful players are doing.
Third, as I mentioned SC2 is an artificial environment whereas sports are based in the real world, it's far harder to "learn" the intricacies and nuances in a game where you start from scratch.
Fourth, the physical abilities of athletes is standard, and unchanging from game to game. In SC2, it's an entirely mental game, which is much more inconsistent and difficult to judge. On this basis alone, sports commentators who haven't played can judge and comment on the match.
It's really incomparable, and even if it was, it's extremely common for ex athletes to be more valued as commentators.
|
On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
You are right. This isn't perfect, but it is a hell of a lot better than what we have now. High level players have no capacity to discuss this game intelligently as it currently stands.
|
I still haven't seen a reason why anyone of value/extreme skill would even want to post on these "sub forums" if they were made.
If I was a great player, why would I want to go give away everything that makes me so in order that other players benefit from my work, while doing little to none of their own?
These forums would either be
1. a graveyard or
2. only slightly better than the normal forums, if at all.
|
On September 23 2010 07:38 Stoli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 07:29 Maaku wrote:On September 23 2010 07:27 Stoli wrote:On September 23 2010 07:21 tedster wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really account for people that know the game extremely well but don't play at the highest level.
For example, I could give detailed, high-level commentary for SC1 and describe in intimate detail the specifics of the metagame, various players, and matchups, but I am a terrible player because I've never actually taken up SC at all. There are certainly posters like this in SC2, who are great analysts or commentators but not great players, and who might have just as much, if not more, insight into the game than most players who meet some ethereal criteria.
This is bullshit imo. If you can't play, you only think you know what you are talking about. This is the entire problem that exists now as I see it; low level players who believe they have a higher strategic level of understanding are actually simply grasping key points and making suppositions on the basis of their level of play, where inconsistent macro from one game to the next makes discussing strategy or balance completely ridiculous, let alone the impact of good micro or the potential it has to save you. This is not real sports; understanding SC2 requires game experience because it's an artificial environment with a set of rules arbitrarily created that requires practical ingame application to even begin to understand. Guess sports commentators know nothing also by your theory? Well first, even in real sports commentators with real game experience are preferred, even common. They aren't contemporary players simply because there is so much more money to be made actually playing, but still. Second, almost every sport has been around for more than 100 years, and the rules are relatively simple. It's common that everyone understands them and that they have a much larger history (wealth of data) that laymen can draw on to gain insight, insights which most PLAYERS know intuitively or are difficult to discern without research, and perhaps only begin to apply consciously when the research realizes what the successful players are doing. Third, as I mentioned SC2 is an artificial environment whereas sports are based in the real world, it's far harder to "learn" the intricacies and nuances in a game where you start from scratch. Fourth, the physical abilities of athletes is standard, and unchanging from game to game. In SC2, it's an entirely mental game, which is much more inconsistent and difficult to judge. On this basis alone, sports commentators who haven't played can judge and comment on the match. It's really incomparable, and even if it was, it's extremely common for ex athletes to be more valued as commentators.
Starcraft isn't so complex compared to most sports. Also its far easier to learn the intricacies off a game.
Dj wheat is one off the best casters around if not the best. For sure he isn't top off the games he commentates on.
|
On September 23 2010 07:44 On_Slaught wrote:
I still haven't seen a reason why anyone of value/extreme skill would even want to post on these "sub forums" if they were made.
If I was a great player, why would I want to go give away everything that makes me so in order that other players benefit from my work, while doing little to none of their own?
These forums would either be
1. a graveyard or
2. only slightly better than the normal forums, if at all.
Agreed
|
Here's a brilliant concept for a forum I've never seen properly implemented before.
Rule No 1 Everything you say must be supported by evidence This game is new to all of us. No one has a definite answer for every strategy related question for SC2. This game has not been tested out in every detail to the death like BW has. Thus it is extremely important that you back up everything with sound reasoning, a replay, a VOD, anything that supports the point you are making. Your word is not enough - you know just as little about the game as everybody else. That said, there are already people much more qualified to talk about strategy than others. This includes ladder top spots, Blizzard employees, good BW players that have logged a decent number of games in SC2, and people who have shown they got what it takes through streaming a lot of high level gaming. Naturally, statements by these individuals will be weighted differently than had they be posted by complete unknowns. Thus, the less reputation you have the more you need to back up your claims as described further up (Note however that this does not excuse outrageous claims by a good player – in the end everything will need proof). Also keep in mind: - Nothing is imba. If you found something imba, it's most likely not. Find a counter. - This is no place for balance discussion.- B.net league placements aren't that relevant. Your Diamond spot doesn't mean anything.Categorization Always put the right tag ([H][D][G][Q]) in your thread title Tagging your threads is very important. The difference between [D] Bisu Build and [G] Bisu Build is worlds apart. Please use thread categorization correctly as described below. Not only will the expectation to your thread depend on it but of course you will get feedback faster also. Categorizing thread makes it easy to find threads later using the search. You can search for “[H] Bisu Build ” and there you are. [H] Help threads. Post a replay, give your own analysis, get help! The classic “ Why did I lose this game?”. For these threads it is absolutely required that you post a replay. No exceptions. Nobody is going to be able to help you if you won’t post a replay.Additionally, first put some thought into what happened in the game, and include your own analysis into the thread. It might be wrong, but try your best. It doesn’t have to be long, a few point form lines is enough to give people a starting point to give you advice. Y our thread won’t last if you won’t put any effort in it.If you have specific questions, ask them along with your analysis. It’s always easier to reply if we know what exactly you need help with. [Q] Question threads Ask for help with or against a specific strategy In a [Q] thread you may ask about a specific, situational strategy, whether that is executing it yourself of playing against it. It is very important that you keep these threads specific. A general "How to FE against Zerg?" is not acceptable. This is the most important distinction from the [H] threads. Post some analysis of the problem, and what you have tried so far. This not only avoids redundant advice but also shows people you have put some effort into this yourself.As with the [H] threads, it makes it a lot easier to help you if you ask a couple of specific questions regarding the strategy you are unsure about. Feedback on [H] and [Q] threads Be respectful and accept the advice you get Be respectful of the opinions people give you – you came here looking for help. If you disagree with a reply, cite examples or give some sort of analysis supporting why you disagree. Potentially post a replay that shows the given advice is incorrect. If you engage in fruitless arguments with people trying to help you, your thread will be closed and you may be banned from the strategy section.Experienced players should be direct and give advice that is generally accepted as standard. Their advice should be as specific as possible, as open-ended advice (“play faster”) isn’t very helpful.Only reply to a help thread if you are an experienced SC2 player. Otherwise, these threads are simply NO PLACE FOR YOU TO POST. Do not make your own suggestions or ask your own questions in a help thread. If you need help, make your own [H] thread, don't derail an existing one. [D] Discussion threads Be clear about the topic and the feedback your are hoping for This is the most open form of thread. Use a Discussion thread if you are not certain about some game mechanic and you want to get the feedback from other players. This can be about strategy and tactics, the role and viability of certain units, rock paper scissor counters, etc. The building blocks of what becomes sound SC2 strategy. While the thread is less formal, please be clear and concise on the topic you want to discuss about, and open with your own opinion. Don’t make the topic too broad. This is the perfect way to post a strategy you came up with that is not quite ready to be turned into a guide (See below). Post your strategy and point out the areas where you are not sure about it’s validity and ask for feedback. Feedback on discussion threads
Be respectful and remember Rule No 1You wanted to generate discussion, so please don’t brush off suggestions you don’t agree with. Post your counter argument and back it up (Rule No 1). The same goes for people replying to such threads.
Threads like these are a welcome place for people less experienced to ask for opinions, make suggestions and engage in discussion.
[G] Guides Know what you are talking aboutGuides are complete, detailed, and comprehensive advice for a specific strategy or tactic that can be generally executed and is not situational. Guides are held up against the highest standards of quality in this forum. They are the most valuable resource for the average player. Writing a good guide may yield you wide appreciation and e-fame, but comes with a lot of work and responsibility. Naturally, do not write a guide about something you are not experienced with. If you have come up with a new build and you just won 6 games in a row with it, do not start writing a guide. Play your build more, tweak it, find out it’s weaknesses and follow-ups and branches. A good rule of thumb is to play a strategy until you lose a couple of times with it against different counters, then modify it until you win most games again, then start to think about writing a guide. A good guide does not necessarily have to be written about a build in a specific matchup, although that is most common. If you have found a new, incredibly effective way to micro Helions you can write a generic Helion micro guide. Most of the time guides will introduce builds in specific matchups though. Look through our legacy Strategy forum to get an idea on how to write good matchup build guides. There is no perfect recipe, but a few things to take care of: State the goal of the build, strengths, weaknesses, possible follow-up, and adaptations to what the opponent does. Dedicate a chapter to scouting and how to react to what you see within your build. To give you an idea of the quality we are eventually aiming for have a look at this incredible SC:BW guide: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=89265Feedback on Guides Be respectful and remember Rule No 1A guide is always evolving as the game is being more and more understood and as people find counter strategies. As the author it is your job to keep the guide up to date. If other players find weaknesses or suggest changes to the build, it is your job to alter it accordingly. If you disagree, fall back to Rule No 1: Post a replay or some other form of proof that the criticism isn’t valid.
If you think you found a hole in a posted guide, describe your findings and why you think the guide is weak there. It makes your point incredibly more believable if you post a replay along. Also don't be lazy: Make a suggestion on how to adapt the guide to address your criticism. This is how the best guides that stand the test of time are created.
ContributeContribute to this forum! Give good and meaningful advice when you can. Write good introductory OPs to spawn discussion. Even when your thread does not follow these rules here at all, if it's still a well written OP it will stay. We will always reward effort put into our forums.
This site has been the number one resource for Starcraft strategy for one reason: Because it's base of enthusiastic players put an indescribable amount of combined effort into it. Be a part of the best source for Starcraft2 Strategy from the beginning!
Seems like good use of the rules and moderation of rule breakers could make this work out pretty good. Seems to be the perfect balance of what any side of this discussion wants.
|
On September 23 2010 07:44 On_Slaught wrote:
I still haven't seen a reason why anyone of value/extreme skill would even want to post on these "sub forums" if they were made.
If I was a great player, why would I want to go give away everything that makes me so in order that other players benefit from my work, while doing little to none of their own?
These forums would either be
1. a graveyard or
2. only slightly better than the normal forums, if at all.
I disagree with this. At 1200 points (following the poll) you are not a GREAT player. I wouldn't see it as becoming a place where only pros come to post their killer strategies. Rather, it would be a place for good or semi pro players (read: high diamond) to discuss the problems they are having at their level. Only getting feedback from similarly talented players would help them tremendously, as they would not have to wade through a plethora of obviously incorrect and unhelpful replies that plague many of the SC2 strategy threads. Other lesser players would be able to look at this forum and gain knowledge that they could apply to their own gameply based on the questions being asked. Posting in this forum would be a priveledge to members (I know posting on TL is already, but people don't seem to understand that), and members that abuse this priveledge or repeatedly provide shitty advice could easily have their priveledge revoked.
On the issue of people knowing a lot about the game but not being able to play well: I believe this is only true to an extent. As mentioned above, many people who think they grasp the game well are likely deluding themselves. Skill level and ranking are much better indicators of overall game knowledge. However, there are a some exceptions. If such a forum were created (dreaming, I know), notable casters, posters, etc who have repeatedly demonstrated that they obviously have a high level understanding of the game that is not equal to their skill level would be allowed to post. I don't think this can really come from any other way other than casting at a high level, but I suppose watching Day9 religiously as well as lots of tournaments could help.
TL is worried about appearing elitist, and such a forum would likely bolster these complaints. I don't really think TL should care too much about how it appears to bnet scrubs and the like, and instead focus on the goal of generating high level gameplay discussion. Such a forum would without a doubt further this and the amount of interaction between high level players as a whole. And if some people are offended by this and refuse to post at all because there is a section of the forum they can't post in, who cares? People who stubbornly refuse to see and appreciate the benefits of having such a forum probably shouldn't be posting at all
|
You could at least enforce some quality or enforce correct spelling.
|
I also disagree with that. Like the OP has stated, if you've ever played WoW competitively, there is a site called Arena Junkies where only players with "gladiator" titles may post - you need to be among the top 0.5% ranking of WoW arena players to obtain this title. There is even an "ask a gladiator" subforum which gets a lot of new threads and posts daily as well. If this idea is brought over to sc2 it could work really well.
|
On September 23 2010 07:09 FoxSpirit wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 06:46 brocoli wrote:
Rating/Karma system pros:
- Doesn't segregate users, only the infos (which is the part that really matters in a forum). This means that the problems from "users =/= posts" are minimized
- Can be easily tweaked and improved for optimal results even while it is working.
- Is a smaller step towards elitism than the other solution. (While the philosophy here is that there's no reason to deny elitism if it is necessary, there's no reason to make a huge step towards it if unnecessary either).
- Incentivates quality posting from Everyone. This means the community as a whole will become more skilled at doing quality posts as time goes by.
- Awards better users by giving them more tools to influence the community as a whole through more points.
- No changes to the actual forums structure means it is easy to restart if it ever goes wrong.
Rating/Karma system cons:
- More refined solution means it is much harder to implement initially, both in work spent and hardware requirements, as in technical knowledge and creativity. (in other words
- Giving power to the community means it can be abused or have the opposite results if not implemented/moderated correctly.
- While incidents concerning this kind of system wouldn't be nearly as problematic than ones caused by the other solution, the system needs to be complex enough that some accidents are to be expected.
- If badly implemented, it won't achieve its goal.
In a nutshell: complicated, but better solution. Fitting for the best SC community in the web. Major disadvantage: If this is a Karma system open to everyone, people who voice the most liked opinion are getting the most points. And when top players said they stopped posting because every of their posts gets pounced on by 10 bronzies, accept it as truth. Us low level players are the majority. And as thus, those people will upvote each other until huge idiots with huge support rule the Karma pool. I'll take my quality handpicked forum every day of the week. And I trust the TL staff to make good and careful choices in the participants.
Obviously, It isn't. Only people with 1200+ ladder points would be able to vote up or down a post.
On September 23 2010 07:17 CagedMind wrote:
Karma voting system is horrible!!!!!! its a popularity contest and basing it off of ladder points is 10 times as accurate
What do you mean it can't be tweaked easily? You have it separated by ladder points and you can change where it's cutoff at and you can also invite people in. How does it waste good posts? People contributing bad posts is part of problem so you limit how some people contribuate to some extent no matter how you do it. If we go with one of my ideas you can still post but you have to open up posts to see them.
Segregation can happen to some extent but I don't think it will be too much and overall the quality will improve. sc2 General is not gonna to become immediate trash and you can even argue that subforum will set a good example and top players will come to tl more and some posts end up in other sc2 places.
No matter if there's a subforum or not I think there should be a indication next to name of "pro and "good" players. Non restricted forums will benefit from it always. You can impose some rules that noobs can't argue and post rubbish at pros and only politely ask questions or introduce a new thought.
Karma systems are terrible lets leave it at that.
Again, the karma points are based on ladder points.
Of course not everyone can have the same power. That's the issue here in tl.net. Also, if I was talking about a common system, why would it be hard to implement? Just copy paste from a pre-made solution.
The whole difficulty of the thing is deciding who has power, hoiw much power these people have, and who won't be given power.
What I'm suggesting, is having the same limits as mentioned in the OP (i.e. you can only ever vote if you have 1200+ ladder points, and even then your voting capacity is limited), except that instead of a private sub-forum, the good users would decide which posts are visible and which aren't : low rated posts would become invisible. High rated posts would show up higher on searches, and that's it.
|
This would only work if the pts were changed based on the poweredness of a race. For example its pretty common knowledge that 1200+ zerg players know alot more about the mechanics of the game then say a 1500 Terran. A 1200+ Terran would probably be equivalent to like a 250+ Zerg or something (this is because Terran players do not need to actually understand the mechanics of the game to win, thus it would be innapropriate to examine anything they say assuming you want this kind of elitist community).
|
omg, I would be able to post and I'm terrible :D
in BW what would you putted the scale on?
B? A? Olympic?
|
I'm just just curious as to how on earth anyone can even possibly remotely justify the option of both blocking both public posting and reading of the hypothetical sub-forum. Pointless elitism, much?
|
I believe a solution to both sides would be to allow a TOP level player forum for discussion (posting/reviewing) but allow LOWER level players to only view this forum so they cannot alter it in anyway but still gain knowledge and insight......
|
1200+ points are noobs aswell
|
This is a great idea to increase the efficiency of forums as we wont have to wade through trollings and general stupidity (for the most part). This MUST be accessible to the general public otherwise it IS extremely elitist as 120938 people have pointed out.
I would like to see this happen!
|
Make it possible to vote a thumbs up or down on every single post. A number of thumbs down on a specific post would make the post dissapear unless the reader chose to read it (similar to youtube).
This would give the moderators a little break and you could even give them a warning that some players were consistently making terrible posts and bans/warnings could be placed.
Nevertheless I think that this method would help a topic not to drown in flamewars/ balance whining as those subjects would eventually be thumbed down.
Making subforum based on ladderpoints on battle.net is a terrible idea imo.
|
but many players are strongly opinionated about different things...
like for example, to counter banshees, i might suggest templars
so like 200 ppl rage and thumb it down.... now what?
|
Just leave it the way it is. Anything else - ratings of posts, link to profile, limit to certain ladder points - can and will be abused. And even if it would just be the vocal minority: abuse would happen, and it would hurt TL as a whole.
|
I laughed at the term "bronzies".
|
For all we know this already exists and the majority of the community can't see it. As I am sure there's an admin forum that no one can see.
|
On October 16 2010 16:56 CanucksJC wrote:
but many players are strongly opinionated about different things...
like for example, to counter banshees, i might suggest templars
so like 200 ppl rage and thumb it down.... now what?
Some geuine ideas might get thumbed down due to ignorance, but the thumbs up or down should not be used as a method of whether you agreed upon the post or not, it should be a rate of the
quality of the post and if it was on topic or not.
There will always be idiots who will abuse the system though, but that is a matter of moderating.
|
Whenever you post something add this quote [Don't write out arguments when you're bronze to low diamond because you don't know anything about the game yet].
|
On September 21 2010 04:04 dynamite wrote:
Elitist much?
No, more like a place where a real conversation about sc2 can happen where the people involved in the discussion know what they are talking about. If you find this "elitist" then I don't think you understand what elitist means, and I don't think you value the benefits of REAL, educated discussion about the game. I don't mean to offend you by saying this, but I would point out that you probably wouldn't concern yourself with this kind of discussion anyway.
|
My God that's ridiculous.
Just leave it ffs. Teamliquid is not supposed to be an elite club of super duper gosu players. It's SC2 community.
Some player with less skill give sometimes better advice than super skilled player, because most of the time super skilled players give answer for super skilled players.
I remember this argument between Idra and Stylish where this one was defending that if your money raise up you should add more factory regardless the optimal number depending of your base count pro gamer use.
Idra answered that Stylish didn't have a clue, that if you had 3 bases it was 8 fact and not otherwise. And that lolol he was a noob and people starting to flame Stylish arguing with a "CJ progamer".
Point is, they were both right. If you macro perfectly, you must stick to 8 facts. But the question was from a D level player, and it's fucking obvious that if you don't have the mechanics to macro very well, or rather, that if your macro is horrendous because you play 3 games a week and don't want to become next Boxer and spend your life in Korea, you should add some facilities, even knowing that it's not optimal.
|
Hmmm a lot of people might see this as elitist ...
1. Will these dudes post? I mean how many would really post and how many would actually come in to discuss?
2. If they post would they really be willing to share info on how to smash them with other pros?
3. Will there discussions really be beneficial to the majority of the population? I mean maybe they will discuss stuff that only people with 'real' apm of 100+ can do correctly, for a simple example.
4. I think that the platinum and downwards don't have a monopoly in idiots and bm.
If these questions are addressed in some way I think that these subforums would be an interesting read. (I vote for public read only)
|
If this forum turns into Arena Junkies of Starcraft, im gonna rofl my way out of here the second I see it coming.
Oh yeh even lurking that kind of shit is terrible, sure you get some nice posts time to time, but same happens without any elitist provoking system.
If you think some 1300p requirement stops trolling and critisism you are so wrong.
|
On October 16 2010 19:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Some player with less skill give sometimes better advice than super skilled player, because most of the time super skilled players give answer for super skilled players.
I completely agree with whole above post. Having elite forum will only serve the elite few. Right now, for verified, solid advices, there is always Liquipedia.
I think TL admins/mods should make that decision and publish it as official, whatever it is. The elitist requests are becoming more boredom. If Admins decide it is good overall for TL to have closed forum just for the elite few, than so be it. It will be a clear message that people with lower skills, like ones older, with <100apm, and less skilled overall should not contribute their ideas...
However as stated few pages before
rating =/= skills;
rating =/= understanding of the game;
rating =/= knowledge;
rating =/= ability to put that knowledge/understanding into words.
I do however agree that rating could be linked to TL profile and displayed for those who wish to have it enabled. SC2Ranks world rank is not inflatable as bnet points and would serve as good reference. It will enable audience to judge the posts for themselves.
|
On October 16 2010 19:40 bluesoup wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2010 19:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Some player with less skill give sometimes better advice than super skilled player, because most of the time super skilled players give answer for super skilled players.
I completely agree with whole above post. Having elite forum will only serve the elite few. Right now, for verified, solid advices, there is always Liquipedia. I think TL admins/mods should make that decision and publish it as official, whatever it is. The elitist requests are becoming more boredom. If Admins decide it is good overall for TL to have closed forum just for the elite few, than so be it. It will be a clear message that people with lower skills, like ones older, with <100apm, and less skilled overall should not contribute their ideas... However as stated few pages before rating =/= skills; rating =/= understanding of the game; rating =/= knowledge; rating =/= ability to put that knowledge/understanding into words. I do however agree that rating could be linked to TL profile and displayed for those who wish to have it enabled. SC2Ranks world rank is not inflatable as bnet points and would serve as good reference. It will enable audience to judge the posts for themselves.
Though people who are 1200 diamond are not elite lol it wont help us out much because our idols wont be posting there. There is a reason the request for a forum for above diamond players only (around 4000 per server) Because anyone below are not remotely competent at the game.
Im 1400 and daim i suck. I suck so much that if i ever decided to compile a list of replays and present it to the strategy forum the advice from copper - platinum is most likely not going to elevate my play. (brb posting.) xD.
|
I totally agree 1200 Diamond sounds good,
I mean I am 53-33 and I have 1000 points
I would like to point out that even decent diamond players can get 1500 points by just winning 50% of their games while i can climb the ladder really fast by winning 65% of my games.
So points really dont matter that much if ur Win/Loss ratio is just 50%
|
hahah when i came up with similar idea like 2 months ago everyone was bashing me and the topic got close since them there is another 2 topic and it since most of the people agree :D
|
I wouldnt mind about it, it does say + Pro gamer so probably you'd have to be quite well known or something. But it would be really interesting to actually see the posts they would make etc you know.
|
I am still amazed at the general attitude here that skill at Starcraft means you're somehow a better person than others. Some of the most closed-minded jerks I've met here were high diamond players.
While we're on stereotypes:
Lower league players: lower skills, humility from being beaten time and time again.
Upper league players: higher skills, massive ego derived from their ranking.
See? I can do it too.
If the upper league players feel they need a separate restricted subforum to be able to discuss things, go ahead. I won't mind. I just think they'll be severely disappointed with the amount of change in post quality.
|
I'd probably bump it up from 1200. People who were 1200 at the time of writing this are around 1400-1600+ now. Adjusting for rating inflation is a pain.
|
I think you could easily be an idiot and #1 diamond. Or you could be intelligent and #100 bronze.
Rank is not a measure of intelligence, skill or the ability to make quality posts.
What is really the problem here?
In my opinion, It's the result of our individual behaviors combined (the community). I think everyone has behaved poorly on the internet at some point, whether it be trolling, raging, whatever. I know i have.
Really, we need to individually evaluate how our behavior is affecting the community.
If your behavior is making the community worse, you are hurting yourself. If your behavior is making the community better, you are helping yourself.
We all affect the community and we are all affected by it. Because we are the community.
|
I don't think any of the options in the poll are ideal. It's just too elitist. The starcraft community is fantastic, creating a huge divide is just gonna cause trouble, and I don't think it's necessary.
The ideal thing would, in my opinion, be to just get more mods. And keep the rules very strict. This topic has been talked about before, and people have talked about this forum in comparison to EJ (elitist jerks, an excellent, if not the best, WoW PvE forum). EJ has absolutely BRUTAL moderation, and it keeps the topics very focused on what is actually supposed to be discussed.
So many people would LOVE to be a mod for TL,
|
TL is fine as it is. Mods and banlings will keep the forum clean.
|
On October 16 2010 20:48 DarQraven wrote:
I am still amazed at the general attitude here that skill at Starcraft means you're somehow a better person than others. Some of the most closed-minded jerks I've met here were high diamond players.
While we're on stereotypes:
Lower league players: lower skills, humility from being beaten time and time again.
Upper league players: higher skills, massive ego derived from their ranking.
See? I can do it too.
If the upper league players feel they need a separate restricted subforum to be able to discuss things, go ahead. I won't mind. I just think they'll be severely disappointed with the amount of change in post quality.
quality posts? i havent found many in the strategy forum. ;D
atleast the ability to view someones rating without much trouble would be nice because not only do you then know where the advice is coming from but you can also give it the proper amount of consideration <,<
|
Whoa, whoa, let's not draw the comparison to Arena Junkies here. I see a lot of people here who have never been to AJ, so let me tell ya, it's complete trash.
It's always been garbage even back when it was first created (and in fact I used to play with one of the admins back pre-BC and he was a stoner douchebag then and I can't imagine anyone less qualified to run such a website regardless of their glad titles) and full of drama between elite players. Rampant flaming of unpopular players like Serennia and Affix, all kinds of drama over match fixing and point selling, even when you had the occasional actual balance discussion thread they rarely went anywhere because of all the accusations of class/comp bias.
The principal mistake being made is assuming players who are higher-ranked automatically have an encyclopedic knowledge of the game and are more likely to make constructive posts. While I'm not going to argue the opposite and would actually be in favor of such a board experiment just to see if it can be effectively ran, you really can't say for certain either way and it's foolish to make the assumption based on purely just ladder ranking.
|
Check this out, one of my favorite old threads that taught me a ton about Arb play in PvT for BW.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=99492¤tpage=3
Check out Ver's post. This thread was started by a high level player, and quite a few lesser players were trying to give him advice that wasn't really all that helpful. But Ver here offers a wonderful and insightful mini-essay about the specific problems and why things work like they do.
Page 1 and 2 also have some really great posts by high level players. I would love to see a section of SC2's strategy forum that had a skill requirement AND a very harsh ban policy (like strat forum bans, but just for the special strat forum.) High level discussion is always very helpful for players like us.
|
great idea! totally support this
i hate immature people who have nothing better to do but talk nonsense and grab attention
|
This idea is completely retarded.
|
it should be at least 1600 imo
|
I think it's a good idea...
...But what about Random players?
|
Its been discussed much and I don't think it will happend, it would be great tho
|
On October 16 2010 19:50 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2010 19:40 bluesoup wrote:On October 16 2010 19:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Some player with less skill give sometimes better advice than super skilled player, because most of the time super skilled players give answer for super skilled players.
I completely agree with whole above post. Having elite forum will only serve the elite few. Right now, for verified, solid advices, there is always Liquipedia. I think TL admins/mods should make that decision and publish it as official, whatever it is. The elitist requests are becoming more boredom. If Admins decide it is good overall for TL to have closed forum just for the elite few, than so be it. It will be a clear message that people with lower skills, like ones older, with <100apm, and less skilled overall should not contribute their ideas... However as stated few pages before rating =/= skills; rating =/= understanding of the game; rating =/= knowledge; rating =/= ability to put that knowledge/understanding into words. I do however agree that rating could be linked to TL profile and displayed for those who wish to have it enabled. SC2Ranks world rank is not inflatable as bnet points and would serve as good reference. It will enable audience to judge the posts for themselves. Though people who are 1200 diamond are not elite lol it wont help us out much because our idols wont be posting there. There is a reason the request for a forum for above diamond players only (around 4000 per server) Because anyone below are not remotely competent at the game. Im 1400 and daim i suck. I suck so much that if i ever decided to compile a list of replays and present it to the strategy forum the advice from copper - platinum is most likely not going to elevate my play. (brb posting.) xD.
The OP was made 25 days ago, which means a 1200 rating when the OP was made is an 1800 rating now.
|
|
|
You know, as nazish as it is, I agree with the OP.
I mean, the sc2 strategy forums have never been very good besides a few key threads that get derailed (even compared to scbw strategy, which was only as good as it was because chill had a lot of work on his hands), at least it would be nice to strain out the imbalance whining posts.
|
On October 17 2010 03:58 Comeh wrote:
You know, as nazish as it is, I agree with the OP.
I mean, the sc2 strategy forums have never been very good besides a few key threads that get derailed (even compared to scbw strategy, which was only as good as it was because chill had a lot of work on his hands), at least it would be nice to strain out the imbalance whining posts.
I think the problem isn't the posts but the people reading them who dismiss any post that uses someones personal opinion as 'imbalance whining' 80% of the posts are on legitimate topics and while some OPs might not be as finely worded as we might like they are far from whining. Also 1200 point Diamond is not pro, I'm 1200 point Diamond and I suck still.
|
I am like 900 points diamond because i have no time to play ladder, but i practice against my brothers and they are 1600+ and i own them pretty easy...
jugding people because of their ladderrank is stupid.
|
The bar should be set lower than 1200. There shouldn't be a 'pros only' forum, but there definitely should be a bar so that we know if a player has actually played a few games before posting. Thus I think Diamond division, any ranking would be fine, since it's not that hard to get to, but people at least have to grind out the games to get it.
|
the average point are increasing due to bonus points gained every week, will u increasing the baseline every week?
|
Maybe this is the wrong approach, a strategy guide sub forum that contains good appreciated guides or threads such as the Artosis replay pack just to sort of have it gathered in one place would be awesome.
The strategy forum section will eventually be cleaned up by banlings and good moderation and overall we should probably be glad for whatever feedback we can get.
|
I don't think there should be any point regulations, but just strictly limit people from platinum down so only diamond players can post. There are a lot of players who don't have a ton of time playing, but are fairly knowledgeable of the game and I wouldn't think excluding them based off of points is a good idea. Just by accept diamond ranks will weed out majority of the scrubs. And it doesn't take that long to get to diamond so the good players should be able to get there even if they don't have a lot of time. Just my 2 cents though.
|
It's tough to say exactly what the cutoff should be because of the bonus points. If your MMR is perfectly accurate, you should win exactly 50% of your games and lose 50%, meaning no net change in points over time. But because you get bonus points when you win, your points would go up by about 1 point every 2 hours. A "good" player who is keeping their bonus pool empty, but is only winning 50% of their games can expect to see their points score increase by 100 every week. If you had played since release without getting any better, you should still have about 1000ish points right now, and that's only going to keep increasing. If you set a fixed benchmark of 1200, that might eliminate scrubs right now, but not in a few weeks.
Also, this is further compounded by the fact that blizzard likes to match you up against players who are slightly better than you, and beating them gives you more points (and losing leads to a smaller loss of points). If you play more riskier styles, this might lead you to get a higher point total than a more conservative player of the same skill, even though both of your MMRs are the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
