|
In my opinion, there should be 3-5 accounts available for laddering.
It`s not just about playing a different race - you can play a different style, try out different approaches, check out a different mental attitude, experiment with some particular builds or generaly explore statistics in regard to some variables of your selection.
If players are not able to do the above - it diminishes the amount of possibilities, which diminishes the scope of exploration which in turn diminishes the experience of the game for many people - especially creative and talented people who are most responsible for its evolution.
Example: you reach masters with your race, let`s say Zerg - but for some reason you start slumping and you cannot figure out why. Now a great way to go about it is to play with worse players for a while - because it allows you to refresh your game sense and remove certain mental/emotional blockades which often are the cause behind slumping.
You could also simply have a desire do some research on other race because it can bring you information that cannot be obtained in other way. And you don`t want to waste massive amounts of time on wasting your masters rank Zerg account.
You could say "but hey, multiple ladder accounts would diminish the value of ladder ranks". Value of a ladder rank is defined by how hard it is to get it, not by how many accounts you use to get it. Maybe it would mean that bronze players would play with masters from time to time - but that`s not a bad thing and ml players wouldn`t flood lower leagues in any high ratio.
You could say "but I wanna see Thorzain and others on their real acc in GM league". Well what about Thorzain and others, maybe they wouldn`t always want that - and there are good reasons for that.
Imo this system could be a lot better if it contained free ability to have multiple accounts. Also, many innovative ways to go about it could be developed - for example, the portrait system could be modified so that you could get new account for portraits or for specific ladder achievements. I don`t like limitations of this kind - they are superfluous.
|
|
|
Can someone explain how unranked ladder differs from custom games? I don't get it.
|
Some people just need to man the fuck up. It's a rank. It goes up and down. Deal with it.
|
i prefer the way it is. otherwise the 1on1 ranking would be as fucked up as the 2on2 3on3 and 4on4 because of a bazillion of corpses not playing.
As Fuzzyjam stated above me.
>8-| DEAL WITH IT
|
On October 13 2011 07:38 Torte de Lini wrote:
1. You don't need a "fun" one, play custom games or join a group and practice together.
Exactly. You can always join teamliquid (the chat) to play some fun games.
|
I would like to see a total ranking that could be divided into subcategories of race and/or matchups.
|
i think there should be an unranked ladder that starts on your ranked ladder mmr
|
On October 13 2011 21:04 Tyree wrote:
A game cannot succeed unless it constantly can bring new players in it. Because no matter how hardcore the top 5% is, they are a small number and will also lose interest in the game at a slower rate but still leave the game. Thus you need to get more people in it to keep the community alive
This is exactly why Blizzard only wants you to have 1 rank for each matchup. If you had 3 other spots (random, race 1, race 2) that would increase a different type of smurfing and make it impossible for new players to even have fun.
Its not just Blizzard, look what Epic did with Gears of War 3, if you never played a GoW game you are put in special servers where its all new people, then you "graduate" and play with the rest of the GoW3 population.
Multiplayer is very important because it means people wont trade their games in (this dosent apply to most PC games however), they also buy the DLC. But in order to get people to play and even importantly KEEP playing their multiplayer they need to have a system where the newbs are protected and not thrown to the sharks.
Blizzard figures (and i happen to agree) that its much better for the hardcore 5-10% of the population who actually care about their rank to simply "suck it up" than to have a massive portion of potentially customers to get rolled in multiplayer by Plat, Diamond and Masters players. Its simply not worth it for Blizzard to change it when it will have massive consequences.
Of course it will increase smurfing by a bit, but not nearly enough to effect newer players. I don't even get how you came to that conclusion. Once you play your MMR will depend on your off-race placement matches and you will be placed in a league accordingly. If you're a diamond T and you get placed in bronze with Z, it doesn't mean that you have an advantage over other bronzies.
If you meant people who deliberately lose matches to stay bronze to farm achievements; they are on Blizzard's watch list anyway.
I want to say two more things;
1. Will people PLEASE stop suggesting unranked ladder? I understand the reasoning behind it, but it is a bad idea. Having an unranked ladder will only divert attention away from ranked ladder matches. It is the exact opposite of what this thread is trying to achieve. Increasing activity on ladder.
2. If you compare battle.net accounts from SC2 to battle.net accounts from WC3 or Brood War there is a huge difference. In SC2, you can only have one account per CD-key. In BW or WC3 you could have multiple accounts on one CD-key. If they are to limit the number of battle.net accounts a player can have, I feel it is only fair to have more than one ladder-account. It feels as if Blizzard is actually limiting the game content to 33% (maybe a little more) of what this game has to offer by only allowing a player to have one ladder-account. I've only ever experienced PvT, PvZ and PvP on ladder. Never have I experienced the adrenaline rush of a micro oriented baneling vs baneling ZvZ or the tactical tank warfare of TvT on ladder. But I simply will not sacrifice my league / status to try that at my own level.
Now to briefly touch ladder fear:
I've heard people say "No one cares about your rank except for you" and I really believe that isn't true. I feel as if friends care about rank. It's some weird social status thing which I can't really explain. When I get demoted, I don't only feel like I let myself down, but the friends who I play with aswell.
Edit: I just read one of the posts above. It said "Man the fuck up". Re-reading my ladder fear bit, I couldn't agree more. Booting SC2 for some ladder.
|
If you feel fear laddering, don't waste your time. We people have been having fun for thousands of years and for sure we don't need SC2 for that. There are plenty of stuff people can do much more fun than SC2 that don't cause anxiety or fear. Moreover, it's the best way to make Blizzard open their eyes to this issue. Nothing speaks louder than plenty of lost customers.
|
I think one main and one fun is a pretty cool concept. It would make playing a different race a little less stressful. However there are customs, but I think a "fun" component to the ladder where you are placed with other who are just messing around, it could even be unranked really. I did read a few people saying this could lead to BM and what not. I am not sure if i totally agree with this, BM is what it is, your better of playing your game and letting that person be a tool.
|
I have been hoping for this change for a while. I think it would be nice if we could get an accurate representation of our skill with a different race without purchasing a new account.
|
There should only be one 1v1 ladder rank. I don't want to be matched up against some MMX butthole who's trolling on a lower MMR because he doesn't want to practice for a tournament he's going to get kicked out of.
|
unranked "ladder" wouldnt be a ladder, just a random match making system.... and don't custom games function as this?
I don't see why people get caught up with their rank being so pristine i guess.... If you wanna switch races I don't see why your rank should be of concern as the point of it is to face you against someone of a similar skill level so if you play say diamond toss but swap to terran and your around a plat terran level, its ok if your rank drops to platinum cause that means you will face people that are appropriate for your level. If you want to swap back to toss (yes you will be rusty hence why it instantly doesn't throw you back against diamonds) you will work back into diamond (and if you improve higher).
I hear a lot from people criticize the rank up system saying its inaccurate, well if its in accurate why care about what rank it labels you?
|
I thought about the 1 rank per race choice idea, but it is too complicated and it makes 1v1 rank not matter.
I really think having a no points ranked match option would be a better option if it matched people based on skill, and would lead to more practice and participation in 1v1
|
On October 13 2011 23:30 DoubleReed wrote:
Can someone explain how unranked ladder differs from custom games? I don't get it.
You can get an opponent of any skill level in a cusom game - even within the same league the skill gap can be quite large. What people want, as far as I can tell, is a way to be able to use the standard matchmaker to find an appropriate opponent for themselves in 1v1, but their ladder rating and MMR is not affected by the outcome of the game. Essentially, a platform for them to practice 1v1 without 'worrying' about losses.
I think this would be a mistake. It would reduce the number of people playing on the actual ladder, and there's no need for this functionality! People need to get it into their heads that ladder is the ideal platform for practicing 1v1s. I used to get mega stressed by laddering; now, barely at all. You just have to realise you WILL lose approx 50% of your games regardless of how good you are, so don't fret when you lose! Losses are actually easier to learn from, and so every loss helps you become a better player!
-However-
I would like to see a ladder for each race. I haven't played a single 1v1 ladder game as anything but Zerg, despite the desire to play some terran and protoss, because it ruins the MMR for all races for a significant amount of time/games (time I simply don't have, unfortunately, as my gaming time is very limited). I want to play the occasional 1v1 game against an ideal opponent using an offrace, then go back to Zerg and play ideal opponents again on my main race, without the basically pointless intermediate games required by the current system to 'migrate' MMR. I wouldn't mind losing 30 games in a row and being demoted etc if I wanted to actually change my main race, but I don't WANT to change my main race - I simply want to be able to offrace some 1v1 against appropriate opponents.
A 1v1 'team' per race would not only solve this issue, but I believe it would encourage people to play more 1v1 ladder!
|
People should just grow a pair and play around with the one ladder account they have. It's not precious and you can easily get your MMR back up if you want to. Smurfing is FAR more annoying and with 4 or 5 1v1 ladders per account it would suck as good players will use them to warm up on lowbies.
|
one ladder account is fine, but a better custom game system would be great.
It should be possible to set up a custom game with certain parameters
- race of the opponent
- league of the opponent (maximum range: own league +- 1 to avoid noob bashing)
When I'm trying to learn a new build in a specific matchup and my usual training partners don't have time, I just have to be lucky now.
It really sucks to play "random" customs atm, yesterday I first met a master league zerg (got owned), and ran into a bronzie after that (I won by using banelings only). That's not really funny.
|
Adding in a race-specific 1v1 so people would offrace more sure sounds like a blizzard idea.
|
On October 13 2011 08:18 pt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 08:17 templar rage wrote:On October 13 2011 08:12 pt wrote:On October 13 2011 08:10 templar rage wrote:
Tbh, I'm not quite sure why Blizzard only allows one account per CD key (besides the obvious financial considerations). Isn't it fairly standard to allow like 3 uses of a CD key for a game? If they just did that, we'd be fine.
That would ruin the ranking system. How? All the accounts would be completely separate. Similar to how a lot of programs let you install the software on multiple computers. Instead of multiple computers, it's multiple accounts, all of which are completely separate from each other (besides being linked by the same CD key, but that's irrelevent). Because over half of the ladder would be inactive. It would be pointless to even have rankings.
In basically all my leagues the bottom 50 people have 0 points. I wish a league really was a league not just 100 random people. On the chess server I wasted my life on before starcraft. You could see exactly where you stood among all the players on the entire server. Hence moving up meant something. In starcraft it often just means you've played more games than the others and emptied your bonus pool. Whenever I get promoted I'm almost instantly top 8. The ladder is specifically designed to delude players into thinking they're better than they are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
