|
On January 11 2011 20:07 BetterFasterStronger wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 20:00 Silent_Marine wrote:
+ Repairing SCVs now assume the same threat priority as the unit they’re repairing.
-> where is micro to kill repairing scv ? just press attack .... this change was really needed though. It was impossible to kill a PF without Storm, Fungle Growth, Collosis, and Ultras/banes ect. I am really disappointed that there is no ladder reset. A lot of people including myself took this as time to relax and play casually. Getting back to the top is going to be difficult. Im honestly not getting why we waited this long for chat channels though. They were out in the PTR and thats really the only thing thats going to change. The patches are not going to affect anything (unless you are idra and think that 10 second phoenix will destroy the match-ups)
To be honest, the claim that there will be a ladder-reset with 1.2 has always been backed up with....nothing at all but hot air.
I'm 100% fine the way it is right now because of two reasons:
First, I want to play casually and test all the new stuff (especially phoenixes, will definitely try to incorporate them better in PvT vs 111 builds; also in PvZ one stargate will now be much better suited to provide the necessary number of phoenixes for effective harassment). I don't want to start at zero when I haven't had time to play around with changes, even if they are not that big. Also due to phoenix-buildtime-reduction, there will definitely be some BOs that lead to quick wins in PvZ. Zergs will have to adapt. I'd hate so see some toss players grinding up and zerg players struggling just because the pro-zergs haven't had the time to develop decent counter-strategies.
Second, there has never been a Blizzard-patch that didn't introduce one or more minor bugs. Since 1.2 is pretty huge, I wouldn't be surprised if they did screw up something (remember phoenix graviton bug, and this was only a small patch?). Now it would be so extremely annoying if a ladder-reset were done exactly at the time when new bugs turned up. I'd like a ladder-reset once the dust has settled, once bugs are fixed (or its confirmed that there are none) and once people had time to adjust to the changes.
|
Blizzard should make a simple notification pop up before patching saying something like "The servers will be shut down in 15 minutes for maintenance , please log out." , that wouldn't be too hard to make...
|
On January 11 2011 20:28 Xswordy wrote:
Blizzard should make a simple notification pop up before patching saying something like "The servers will be shut down in 15 minutes for maintenance , please log out." , that wouldn't be too hard to make...
it usually does do this.. maybe it disables them when you disable the pop ups?
|
O well, 8 hours.. time to patch the SEA version so i don't have to wait for the US to patch :D
|
I personally don't understand why so many of you are looking that much forward to the (never announced) ladder reset since only the points not the MMR is set to 0. Only setting MMR to 0 would be nice for a restart in my opinion
|
|
|
way more than a ladder reset i would have appreciated 1-2 good maps in the pool...
|
On January 11 2011 20:34 Markus138 wrote:
I personally don't understand why so many of you are looking that much forward to the (never announced) ladder reset since only the points not the MMR is set to 0. Only setting MMR to 0 would be nice for a restart in my opinion
Simply because I have 1200 bonus points - I play one game vs a 1400 player with roughly the same amount of bonus points. The next game I play vs a 2700 player with zero bonus points.
Retarded? Oh yes definitely, 100%. Points have inflated to a point where they have lost all meaning. Earlier (August/September) you could say around 1500 is good, everybody above is pro, around 1000 is mid diamond. Resembled chess. Now it's just ridiculous, nobody really knows how to value ranking any more. The only thing that's still possible is determine the high diamond players at I'd say ~3200 and above. The meaning of everything below has been reduced to some random number.
|
On January 11 2011 19:42 sleepingdog wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 19:03 Lurk wrote:
Yes of course this can and will happen. But you have to ask yourself, is that really a problem (for yourself) ? Other than taking up space in the ladders and the players in question being able to brag about being in masters (and everyone knowing the system knowing they don't deserve being there), it doesn't directly affect the people actually playing. It becomes a problem because of "fixed" percentages per league - if there only is a certain percentage of diamond players in masters league, this means that this certain player "takes up" a spot in masters league that indeed belongs to another player. Since there's no way his MMR ever decreases, he'll be in masters league..."forever" unless at a point in the very far away future there are so many players playing sc2 that there are enough among them with an insanely high MMR to kick him out. There's an underlying, very fundamental problem with league-placement being percentage-wise based on MMR. Since there's no decay/decrease of MMR if you just stop playing, inactive players with a high MMR will "block" spots in higher leagues as long as this system exists. Even if they don't want to (this is important!), they can't just drop out until they actively delete their accounts. And why in God's name would they do that?
This isn't a problem if you think about it. Why ? Because players go inactive all the time in all leagues. So while a few people are inactive in master's league, there are probably 19 times as much people inactive in diamond, thus there are more places in master's to begin with due to inactive people.
I don't think there is any reason for higher ranked players to go inactive more often than for lower ranked players. So their distribution amongst the leagues should be the same as for active players.
|
Does anybody know why Blizzard is not using something like ELO ranking?
|
On January 11 2011 21:08 graNite wrote:
Does anybody know why Blizzard is not using something like ELO ranking?
mmr does work pretty similar to elo
|
On January 11 2011 21:08 Lurk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 19:42 sleepingdog wrote:On January 11 2011 19:03 Lurk wrote:
Yes of course this can and will happen. But you have to ask yourself, is that really a problem (for yourself) ? Other than taking up space in the ladders and the players in question being able to brag about being in masters (and everyone knowing the system knowing they don't deserve being there), it doesn't directly affect the people actually playing. It becomes a problem because of "fixed" percentages per league - if there only is a certain percentage of diamond players in masters league, this means that this certain player "takes up" a spot in masters league that indeed belongs to another player. Since there's no way his MMR ever decreases, he'll be in masters league..."forever" unless at a point in the very far away future there are so many players playing sc2 that there are enough among them with an insanely high MMR to kick him out. There's an underlying, very fundamental problem with league-placement being percentage-wise based on MMR. Since there's no decay/decrease of MMR if you just stop playing, inactive players with a high MMR will "block" spots in higher leagues as long as this system exists. Even if they don't want to (this is important!), they can't just drop out until they actively delete their accounts. And why in God's name would they do that? This isn't a problem if you think about it. Why ? Because players go inactive all the time in all leagues. So while a few people are inactive in master's league, there are probably 19 times as much people inactive in diamond, thus there are more places in master's to begin with due to inactive people. I don't think there is any reason for higher ranked players to go inactive more often than for lower ranked players. So their distribution amongst the leagues should be the same as for active players.
Actually your comparison doesn't really work...why? Because inactive players don't "increase" the overall number of players. Even if there are 19 times as much people inactive in diamond, then this is a problem as well - but now for platinum players. If there are 19 times as much inactive diamond players, then this wouldn't result in there being "more" overall diamond players.
By the same logic, there aren't "more" master-league spots just because there are inactive players. This is because being in diamond is ALSO percentage based, there's an overall percentage (I believe around 5% or something like that) of ALL registered players that have finished their placement matches who are in diamond.
Your comparison would make sense if there was a certain "threshold" to get into diamond, so that basicly an infinite amount of people could get there if they were skilled enough. But that's not the way it works. Everything is percentage-based, which means that inactive people with high MMR are "veiling" ratings everywhere.
|
On January 11 2011 21:17 alepov wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 21:08 graNite wrote:
Does anybody know why Blizzard is not using something like ELO ranking? mmr does work pretty similar to elo
MMR is hidden, ELO is not....
|
Europe always ALWAYS gets the short end of the stick concerning everything blizzard does.
Hah, no way. Up until SC2 Australians have had to connect to NA and deal with horrible pings and prime time maintenances. Getting a patch late is hardly a huge blow. 
|
On January 11 2011 21:27 maje.stic wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 21:17 alepov wrote:On January 11 2011 21:08 graNite wrote:
Does anybody know why Blizzard is not using something like ELO ranking? mmr does work pretty similar to elo MMR is hidden, ELO is not....
thanks for the clarification.
|
No, unless there is some underlying factor that results in people with high rating going inactive more often, it's not a problem.
Everything is percentage based, that means if we say have a total of 100k players and 10% of them are inactive. 7% of them are in diamond, meaning 7000, 700 of those are inactive. This also means that 5% of those diamond players get promoted to master's, 350. So we have 35 inactive master league players and 315 legitimate master league players.
Assuming the system would automatically kick out inactive players, we would only have a player base of 90000 (minus the 10k inactive ones). This results in only 6300 diamond spots (7%), now only filled with active players. Of those, the best 5% advance to master's. That's 315 master league players for you, exclusively active ones.
|
|
|
Europe day comes earlier but patch comes later.^^
|
On January 11 2011 21:31 Lurk wrote:
Assuming the system would automatically kick out inactive players, we would only have a player base of 90000 (minus the 10k inactive ones). This results in only 6300 diamond spots (7%), now only filled with active players. Of those, the best 5% advance to master's. That's 315 master league players for you, exclusively active ones.
If you put it this way you are correct - nevertheless just re-do the maths when you assume that the system doesn't "kick out" inactive players but re-values their skill 
Meaning, for simplification, just imagine every inactive player being dropped one league due to automatic decay and players from the lower leagues advancing instead. See what I mean? The inactive players shouldn't get "removed" but their MMR should decay when they don't play. Then you should come to the same conclusions as I do.
|
Ugh, if you're scrolled up in a chat channel and someone says something it instantly scrolls back down. Makes it painful to catch up on stuff when you've been AFK. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
