|
I am a 2500 Master League Zerg on the NA server, but I came from the SEA server. I stopped playing the SEA server once I became diamond, so I don't know how good the people in SEA are, but I really want to be playing on the server which has more skill.
Do you guys know which server is better in terms of skill? Keep in mind that I am a mid-level Master League Zerg on NA, so you can get an idea of where I am in terms of skill. Perhaps the NA server has bad players in the lower ranks but better players in the higher ranks, or vice versa etc.
Thanks!
|
One major difference (or minor, depending on your perspective) is the addition of a gold expo on Jungle Basin on SEA, and also on SEA Shakuras Plateau is still a ladder map in 1v1.
I think many people would agree that there are both a higher number and higher quotient of good players on NA than SEA. This is supported by the data here: http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all
SEA has the highest percent of Bronze players (re: casual/inactive players), while NA has the lowest.
|
Obviously purely an opinion based on a limited dataset here, but I've played on both and I found the top diamond players (before masters league) of considerably lower quality on NA than on SEA.
|
I had a very easy time going masters league on NA with a latency disadvantage as opposed to SEA.
It's like, until you get to the top 10-15 players, the NA region is just below par to EU/SEA.
|
There is A LOT more people on NA than SEA, as sad as it is, on peak time my Que times are better on NA than SEA...
By virtue of the size of NA, there are more poor players on NA, bu there are a lot more quality players on NA than SEA too, especially since most top players on SEA have moved to NA anyway. If your 2500 Masters you should probably stay in NA, if you were less I doubt it would matter.
|
I use to play on SEA, then started on NA. I left SEA at platinum and am around 2400-2500 diamond on NA (low- mid i guess) went back and laddered on SEA and was getting completely rofl stomped by platinum SEA's. So back to NA I went, I dunno if its more skill or different play style but I was still surprised I couldnt beat some platinums or low diamonds over there.
|
I play on both, equivalent rank SEA players are better than their NA counterparts.
|
This is stupid .... 1.NA has more people 2.Matchmaking gives you games against players of similar skill level 3.No matter what skill level you are NA will have players of your caliber. The difference in skill level should not matter at all and obviously top NA>top SEA.
|
You're also probably not going to get balanced opinions until NA wakes up.
|
Sea has more skill by percentage imo, ladder matches at equivalent points are somewhat harder on Sea. But it's really hard to play on Sea at a high level cos queue times are ~5 mins.
|
On January 24 2011 20:33 mlbrandow wrote: You're also probably not going to get balanced opinions until NA wakes up. Yeah that is what i was thinking as well, at first I found NA a little bit easy but then I realized I was playing people who were staying up till 3-5am US time, in the mornings here in Australia when its Peak time in US there is a noticeable change with the type of players you meet
|
Assuming the skill is divided amongst the population evenly we get a few points.
1) There are probably 30-50 fantastic players on the NA ladder. SEA probably have 3-5 2) The point spread is less tight on NA, because there are 'more' better people, you can play against people who are higher than you and get more points. 3) Likewise there are 'more' bad people. 'More' cheesy people etc 4) The Meta-Game on SEA is different from NA. Due to the timezone similarity with Korea, lots of SEA players watch the GSL and try and copy builds. So there's probably a quicker translation of the 'newest' build to SEA as opposed to NA. 5) Lower population garners lower queue times, however queue times during SEA peak are better than queue times in NA off peak.
All in all, if you have a SEA account, there is NO REASON whatsoever you shouldn't play both servers, work both ladders and thus be a more rounded player, since you can adapt to both metagames. That is unless you think "HAVING A BAZILLION POINTS AND ICONS MUST MEAN I'M GOOD"
|
It comes down to what time do you play? If you're SEA based, SEA tourneys will be at times you can play, you'll get a more diverse spread of players when laddering (I assume there aren't many NA players laddering at 4am on a weeknight), and if you're entering tourneys on SEA, laddering on SEA gets you practice against the same players so you will understand how the SEA metagame works out.
|
IDK, I play on SEA mainly and I find getting into diamond much harder (still high plat there) there than on NA (Been in diamond since about 30 games in). Depends really, but at least I find that SEA players get a bit more tricky to deal with.
|
i found on sea i am in gold and am pretty evenly placed with high gold to mid plat where as on na i am in plat and i am vsing diamonds on ladder and winning
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On the whole SEA is a harder server since there are less overall people (meaning platinum on SEA is often mid diamond on NA). However, there are more good players on NA so the skill cap of NA is significantly higher than that of SEA which makes the upper end of NA harder than SEA (and more playable).
|
On January 24 2011 21:06 Plexa wrote: On the whole SEA is a harder server since there are less overall people (meaning platinum on SEA is often mid diamond on NA). However, there are more good players on NA so the skill cap of NA is significantly higher than that of SEA which makes the upper end of NA harder than SEA (and more playable).
Completely agree. I am Mid diamond NA and high plat/ very low diamond SEA.
|
On January 24 2011 20:33 mlbrandow wrote: You're also probably not going to get balanced opinions until NA wakes up.
I will have to disagree with you here, as the majority of NA players will not have an SEA account so they will not be able to judge (unless I'm mistaken and the cross-realm offer from Blizz works both ways).
|
i was plat in SEA and diamond in na as well. And imo NA players bm a lot and more cheesy than SEA.
|
The top-tier of SEA players usually don't play on SEA, so as Plexa says, the skill cap is lower there.
|
What is buggin me is if Europe or NA is better.. didnt want to start an extra thread though
|
NA players BM a lot is probably because its time for them to sleep whilst we on the other slide wakes up with a beautiful and shiny sun^^
I would be a bit BM when i lose and find out that its 3 freaking AM and i should really get some sleep.
|
SEA is definitely harder than NA in the Platinum / Diamond level until you reach Masters. The general skill level of SEA is higher but its skill ceiling is certainly lower.
I also find NA players to be more cheesy, I guess there's a larger ratio of people who cheese to get up there, now you know why the general skill level in NA is lower in the Diamond level.
|
I dunno about one server having more cheese than the other but I found NA to have more BM players at my level.
|
On January 24 2011 21:16 Mitchlew wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2011 21:06 Plexa wrote: On the whole SEA is a harder server since there are less overall people (meaning platinum on SEA is often mid diamond on NA). However, there are more good players on NA so the skill cap of NA is significantly higher than that of SEA which makes the upper end of NA harder than SEA (and more playable). Completely agree. I am Mid diamond NA and high plat/ very low diamond SEA.
It's weird cause i'm the opposite. Early on I ranked up to diamond on SEA then NA. It was far easier going to diamond on NA. However, it's been very different now I'm there. I was only playing on SEA till recently at rank 3 diamond (2600~), then went over to NA for a change, with about 1700 bonus pool, at rank 53. I'm losing the majority of games in NA as a mid diamond, and winning the majority as high diamond in SEA.
I find NA are more aggressive early on, more 4gates, earlier MMM, etc. I play Zerg and am fairly macro oriented, so SEA suits my playstyle more (which is why I'm gonna try stick with NA for a bit to get better at defending earlier on). I also find the attacks themselves are more sophisticated in NA (multifaceted, leaving when necessary, more harrass based, whereas in SEA there tends to be a lot of macro macro macro - bigger army wins). In saying this, the longer the game goes, the more comfortable I feel a SEA is.
Very broad, generalised analysis I know, but that's just my experience of the two.
|
I would say NA is easier, but I probably can't judge seeing as my rank gap is huge. Bronze SEA Plat versing diamonds in NA.
I haven't been able to play much lately so this may have changed, but one thing i did notice when i first went to NA was that NA players were, not so much cheesy, but tried smaller cuter tactics a lot. Smaller groups of units with the intention of dealing a bit of damage but nothing more.
Or bunkers or cannons for contains even if the contain was weak. Like the guys that line the bottom of my cliff near the ramp with cannons that had no vision, when I play terran. Siege tanks not hard to get. :S
Or a lot of drop harass, or HT warp ins whatever you like.
Where as SEA was always kinda, build 100+ food worth of army as fast as freakin possible, then shove it up their ramp and down their throat. Basically just who can macro faster while trying to get a couple run bys or drops in before your big killer death ball arives.
It effectively came down to who had more production capacity after the 2 death armies suicide into eachother. :S But hey, Bronze on SEA soooooo
|
Gold NA, Bronze/Silver SEA at the moment*. SEA is practiced 1 base (2 for zerg) all in play or cheese, basically rolling the dice using unadjusted or blind build orders read off TL etc. NA I see better macro players with econ openings who, like me suffer due to things like position, micro, bad unit comps or losing trying to defend the 1 base stuff with not quite enough army (a good way to lose IMO).
I just play both servers for a bit of everything since I can.
* Yes I suck. No it's not normally macro, it's the other stuff I mentioned. Yes everyone will still tell me it's macro without watching my replays. Yes I'd only be too happy to provide replays; free coaching is free coaching
|
Wat!?? I thought you guys knew this already. SEA level>>NA... I'm only talking bout ladder and not the players ofc. Theres a lot of GSL level strat and new wonky builds on a daily basis...
|
On January 24 2011 22:48 decaf wrote: What is buggin me is if Europe or NA is better.. didnt want to start an extra thread though
I am from EU and started a US account a couple weeks ago. I got to diamond within 70 games and on EU i am still plat, but thats mainly due to the fact i sucked when i started playing and have racked up 1000 games so my MMR is pretty stable on EU and thus, atleast it seems this way, while i play mainly 2500 diamond players I don't get promoted there.
I played on the EU server today for 2 games against plat players, lost both to strats i haven't seen in 2 weeks. The game is played quite differently from server to server so the styles can be hard to adapt to but in general I am playing 2500 diamond players on both servers and so it seems my skill level is equal on both servers
|
as a macro zerg i have to say both servers are full of 1 base all ins and the difficulty is essentially the same for bronze-diamond
|
Hard to compare, but hte way my MMR's worked out is that SEA is harder, while in hte US i can get away with more shenanigans (Zerg player).
|
Just my opinion, but people that say "Oh I played alot in SEA but I was only platinum, came to NA and now I'm in diamond" aren't really proving anything. You got pretty decent on SEA, but your MMR will move up/down a lot slower because of how many games you've already played there. So you move to the NA server, and having already gotten good/experienced at the game, you move up way more quickly. At this point, I don't think it's possible to judge one server as being more "skilled" than another. The average skill of NA players might be lower if say, hypothetically, more people in NA have disposable income, and play the game very casually, just because it's popular. Otherwise, I think the skills across all the servers are probably very similar, especially at extremely low, and extremely high rankings.
|
@Merciless: That might be true if the games played on each are inequal however I have racked up 105 games on SEA, where I am fairly solidly bronze, and 100 on NA where I'm gold (and I think that's appropriate - although I think I might also fit in silver). I would think that would mean by MMR has stabilised more or less equally so I dunno that your argument is necessarily true.
Something I've casually wondered is, if you assume the distribution of skills of players is equivalent across servers, whether that and different numbers of players is sufficient for there to be oddities where some levels seem less good and others seem more good in terms of being bronze, gold, etc.
I'm not sure, if only my stats was a little better and I had any idea how players might be distributed.
|
On SEA I'm 2800 Masters, which is 17th in the top 200 at the time of writing this. I play almost exclusively top 20, with a small number of games vs top 50 players. I've very recently started laddering on NA as it gets quite boring player the same handful of players over and over again (or when they're not on, simply not getting a game).
On NA I'm currently 2400 Masters with 700 bonus pool, implying a rating of 3100. I am mostly playing top 200 NA players now, with ratings between 3000 and 3200.
Based on my experience laddering on both servers, I think as a rule of thumb, you can basically subtract 300 points from a NA player (or add 300 points to a SEA player) and you will have a rough equivalence. I don't think this is anything to do with either server having proportionally "better" players. Its just that the "pyramid base" on NA is much broader, so the "peak" is higher.
That being said, I would have to agree that the highest tier of NA players is considerably stronger than the highest tier of SEA players. But the reason for this is that most top tier SEA players have either stopped laddering entirely, or only ladder on NA (Kowi being a great example).
Overall, whilst I think the skill distribution between the servers is largely the same, on NA you have to grind your way through 300 or 400 more points (lets say 12 to 16 wins) before you reach your "level". I can say though that, at least for me, top 200 NA players are ballers!
|
|
|
|