|
On March 14 2013 10:53 WhiteFlash wrote:
Hey guys, I was currently a masters toss and terran on my US account and just played my placements on HOTS and got placed in Gold... I am looking at all of my friends list and my GM friend got placed in plat as well as other top masters friends being placed in Plat.. What is going on?
That's just what happens when everyones MMR gets reset. Usually you would get it back up very quickly because you would get matched against players with high MMRs, but since everyone restarted there were no players with high MMRs so most people got placed in to platinum or lower and have to work their way back up.
|
On March 14 2013 15:08 Emzeeshady wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2013 03:16 Treehead wrote:
Just another example of Blizzard shamelessly catering to casuals. I personally feel offended by the amount of work I had to put into playing at the Gold level to have it just GIVEN to horrible players.
I keed, I keed. Doesn't affect me either. I would find it hilarious and amusing, though, if they did something like this and greatly expanded master's league. I wonder how differently that would be receieved... Is there really a big difference between bronze and gold players... No offence but they are all awful :p
there are different levels of awful where bronze is high awful, silver are moderate awful and gold is lightly awful.
What differentiates these levels are things like speed, understanding, determination to win, goal or aim at playing multiplayer and overall understanding of the game.
Hope this helped you to see the differences between leagues.
|
On March 14 2013 17:08 Inori wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2013 16:37 [F_]aths wrote:On March 14 2013 15:08 Emzeeshady wrote:On March 12 2013 03:16 Treehead wrote:
Just another example of Blizzard shamelessly catering to casuals. I personally feel offended by the amount of work I had to put into playing at the Gold level to have it just GIVEN to horrible players.
I keed, I keed. Doesn't affect me either. I would find it hilarious and amusing, though, if they did something like this and greatly expanded master's league. I wonder how differently that would be receieved... Is there really a big difference between bronze and gold players... No offence but they are all awful :p You are better than me in SC2 (I am in gold league) but you lack social skills. And the insight what the game is about. + Show Spoiler + He could've worded it better or not say it at all, but doesn't mean he's wrong. I can guarantee you that everyone below masters is just one mass of awful skill (myself included, so no, not elitism). Look at it this way: if we were on iccup then everyone below masters would be D.
But that is not the point. Of course, causal gamer do not play the game on the level the top 2% do. But SC2 is not intended to cater only to the best. It is fun with lower skill, too. Except for a handful of players, the game is played to have fun playing around, not to become in any reasonable sense good.
|
On March 14 2013 17:08 Inori wrote:
Look at it this way: if we were on iccup then everyone below masters would be D.
Sure, but there were huges difference in a iccup ranking too. Everyone who started out and lost 24 of their first 25 games can tell you that.
|
|
|
On March 14 2013 19:56 Inori wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2013 19:44 blackone wrote:On March 14 2013 17:08 Inori wrote:
Look at it this way: if we were on iccup then everyone below masters would be D. Sure, but there were huges difference in a iccup ranking too. Everyone who started out and lost 24 of their first 25 games can tell you that. Of course, but everyone were under one letter for a reason. Didn't matter if you were D+ or D-, you were still awful and worlds apart from solid C.
I don't see why that is inherently better.
|
Also, dont forget who is playing HotS right now.
Mostly dedicated players who played until the end of WoL, have higher ladder ranks etc.
WoL's lower players are not even playing or going to play HotS. That makes it even harder to get a higher ranking right now.
|
i dont know. i think that many players who have stoped playing wol month ago will come back and try again 
|
Probably, but I don't they'll start laddering right away.
|
On March 14 2013 19:56 Inori wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2013 19:44 blackone wrote:On March 14 2013 17:08 Inori wrote:
Look at it this way: if we were on iccup then everyone below masters would be D. Sure, but there were huges difference in a iccup ranking too. Everyone who started out and lost 24 of their first 25 games can tell you that. Of course, but everyone were under one letter for a reason. Didn't matter if you were D+ or D-, you were still awful and worlds apart from solid C.
A ranking system where your only possibilites are "you suck" and then varying levels of elite-level skill where you've got 95% of the playing population in the same category is useless. I'm not saying it's not true that most players are objectively nowhere near "good" - I play at a low Master level and I'm very aware of how much room for improvement there still is when you reach that point - but that a ranking system that gives the vast majority of players the same rank is completely useless to almost everyone.
|
There's a big chance that those "lower tier" players will play more unranked games in any case.
|
|
|
On March 14 2013 21:30 Inori wrote:
ICCUP ranking system was relative to skill, SC2 one is relative to other people.
When you achieve B+/A- you know you're getting close to mastering the game.
In SC2 when you reach MASTERs league you quickly realize you don't know shit.
I'd rather know that I'm only 1/3 way there than that I'm in top2% of the playerbase.
First gives me a realistic point of view, second gives an illusion of success.
But to each his own I guess, if you feel proud about getting into gold - hey, don't let a random guy on the internets stop you!
It's the same idea. Game mastery is always relative to other people.
I don't see how the iCCup ranking is more definitive in that regard. There isn't an objective measure that can gauge how close someone is to mastering the game since there is always room for massive improvement. That is the beauty of RTS, macro, micro, BO's, and timings can always be further refined and perfected.
|
On March 14 2013 20:27 graNite wrote:
Also, dont forget who is playing HotS right now.
Mostly dedicated players who played until the end of WoL, have higher ladder ranks etc.
WoL's lower players are not even playing or going to play HotS. That makes it even harder to get a higher ranking right now.
I'm sure there will be an increase in casual interest and activity with the new release. The spike will be small, compared to WOL debut, and it will die down faster, but I think it will be easier to get a higher ranking early on then it will be a few seasons from now.
|
That's just numbers changed, but in reality it does not matter, you still gonna lose your ~50% of games no matter where you are :D
|
On March 14 2013 15:08 Emzeeshady wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2013 03:16 Treehead wrote:
Just another example of Blizzard shamelessly catering to casuals. I personally feel offended by the amount of work I had to put into playing at the Gold level to have it just GIVEN to horrible players.
I keed, I keed. Doesn't affect me either. I would find it hilarious and amusing, though, if they did something like this and greatly expanded master's league. I wonder how differently that would be receieved... Is there really a big difference between bronze and gold players... No offence but they are all awful :p
There is a massive difference. Even as a relatively high plat WoL player, I find stomping bronzies and silver players about as easy as Masters players find it.
|
One thing that I just realized is genius about the new league distribution: We will have a lot of middle league players coming back to laddering with HotS, and they will not be frustrated by being stuck in silver or even bronze for a long time, but will quickly get back to gold. That means, there is probably a higher chance that they continue playing for a longer period of time.
|
On March 14 2013 21:30 Inori wrote:
ICCUP ranking system was relative to skill, SC2 one is relative to other people.
When you achieve B+/A- you know you're getting close to mastering the game.
In SC2 when you reach MASTERs league you quickly realize you don't know shit.
I'd rather know that I'm only 1/3 way there than that I'm in top2% of the playerbase.
First gives me a realistic point of view, second gives an illusion of success.
But to each his own I guess, if you feel proud about getting into gold - hey, don't let a random guy on the internets stop you!
ICCUP ranking is not that much different from the current SC2 ranking. In ICCUP you gain and lose points depending on how your opponent ranks compared to you and the different ranks are related to different point counts. The exact same thing is true with the current SC2 system, except that SC2 obfuscates the issue by not showing your MMR (which is your true rank) and having some level of overlap between leagues.
The ICCUP ranking dropped way too many people in the same rank for it to be an effective ranking system for most players. Sure, it works to differentiate between high level players, as there's a clear difference between A+ and A- ranked players. But for the largest part of the population, there was no way to tell yourself apart from someone else, because you have the same rank.
SC2 does it the other way around, to some extent, providing lower level players with more different ranks to differentiate themselves.
Your notion of a ranking system relative to skill is silly. There is no way of measuring how skillful you are in a game like BW (or SC2) other than by comparing yourself to other players. There's no number you can assign to someones performance that can be evaluated in the absence of other players.
|
On March 14 2013 19:11 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2013 15:08 Emzeeshady wrote:On March 12 2013 03:16 Treehead wrote:
Just another example of Blizzard shamelessly catering to casuals. I personally feel offended by the amount of work I had to put into playing at the Gold level to have it just GIVEN to horrible players.
I keed, I keed. Doesn't affect me either. I would find it hilarious and amusing, though, if they did something like this and greatly expanded master's league. I wonder how differently that would be receieved... Is there really a big difference between bronze and gold players... No offence but they are all awful :p there are different levels of awful where bronze is high awful, silver are moderate awful and gold is lightly awful. What differentiates these levels are things like speed, understanding, determination to win, goal or aim at playing multiplayer and overall understanding of the game. Hope this helped you to see the differences between leagues.
This is pretty on point. I would say that players in high gold to high platinum had a solid understanding of the game and what they are supposed to be doing, but lacked depth and consistent execution. I found I could hold my own in any match up as a whole, but my expansion timings or control were not optimal.
Someone is Platinum league is the equivalent to someone who players in a week pick up league for baseball or lacrosse. They are not amazing, but they know how the game works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
