EPTOn September 14 2017 07:38 zenasprime wrote:
You wouldn't get that luxury in a tournament so why would you expect it on the Ladder?
You wouldn't get that luxury in a tournament so why would you expect it on the Ladder?
Aaaand full circle
Barcodes on SC2 Discussion - Ban them from ladder - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
OrangeGarage
Korea (South)319 Posts
Aaaand full circle | ||
|
DSh1
292 Posts
On September 14 2017 07:38 zenasprime wrote: You wouldn't get that luxury in a tournament so why would you expect it on the Ladder? What are you getting at? Are you saying this is not a viable stand point because this is not the case in a tournament? Are you saying my personal preference is not a valid point because I dislike something which is in a tournament? Are you saying I cannot have the desire to be anonymous because I wouldn't be anonymous in a tournament? I'm not being sarcastic, I honestly am not getting your point, because for me these two things have no logical connection right now. What do tournaments have to do with all this? | ||
|
merz
Sweden2760 Posts
The things you have to factor in to judge whether or not is fair is too situational which means a flat out ban is not justified. Unless the player base changed so drastically that everyone is basically playing the same guy over and over (despite league differences, i.e. gold players play the same gold player and so forth) you can't just make a statement that it'll always be an advantage and not fair. Because that would imply that - no matter whom you face - you'll always know their playstyle if they reveal their true identitiy. I have a hard time believing that. Basically for this to be fair - in the sense of your argumentation - players should practically be enforced to reveal details about themselves in a description of their profile or something. "Hi I'm merz, I favour standard macro-oriented play and I rarely cheese" This isn't chess, you are not entitled to more information about your opponent other than what you can deduct within the actual game itself. I'm trying to put myself in your shoes but I simply cannot see how this, objectively, could be said to always mean an un-fair advantage to the player who is a barcode, or in other ways, anonymous. Using tournament settings is a moot point because either you run into a complete no-name and you can't really do anything about the fact that he'll probably know more about your playstyle than you do about his, or you run into a well-known name and you can both gamble on builds that would potentially blind counter their prefered style of play. | ||
|
Plopus
Switzerland112 Posts
Banning the barcodes would punish many people that did nothing. Maybe the solution would be that everyone is anonymous on the ladder? It's just a proposition | ||
|
Veluvian
Bulgaria256 Posts
If a random guy is a cheesy type of player and uses barcode and there is no way to recognize him or her, you can't get excuses because you're facing a barcode player, it is simply you are not prepared to defend cheese attacks. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
That would also hellp tournaments since you would have to just switch to your tournament name | ||
|
xtorn
4060 Posts
Pros dont owe anything to anyone. They worked hard to get where they are and they should have such benefits. Also if you are good at SC2 enough you can tell precisely from playstyle who you are dealing with, so the system works as intended. | ||
|
zenasprime
United States18 Posts
because they play FOR A LIVING and it is their right to hide strategies The only "rights" they have are the ones that Blizzard has ordained them to have while logged in and playing the game. At most, Blizzard seems to exhibit a laissez faire attitude towards player naming conventions so long as they do not violate the ToS and CoC. That could change or not change based entirely on Blizzards whim. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
My bad lol. I did not mean literally to ban every person that has a barcode from the ladder itself. I just meant getting rid of the barcode anonymity via another means to end it. | ||
|
Indrajit
35 Posts
On September 14 2017 23:35 avilo wrote: Ah, i should clarify also when i wrote in the stream title "Ban them from ladder" what i meant was to force people off of barcode account names or abolish them by doing what some people in this thread and giving every account an identifier which would essentially get rid of that barcode's anonymity. My bad lol. I did not mean literally to ban every person that has a barcode from the ladder itself. I just meant getting rid of the barcode anonymity via another means to end it. Not a bad idea | ||
|
MperorM1
90 Posts
EDIT: read the clarification, I now realize I'm an idiot. | ||
|
Thalandros
Netherlands1151 Posts
On September 12 2017 06:04 Charoisaur wrote: Who cares about ladder? Ladder is just there to practice, the only time when ladder rankings are important are for the WCS challenger competition and barcodes are banned there. Can't it be argued that you get less valuable practice from ladder if you have no info on your opponent, but they do about you, giving you a disadvantage? | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
| ||
|
reneg
United States859 Posts
On September 15 2017 00:14 Thalandros wrote: Can't it be argued that you get less valuable practice from ladder if you have no info on your opponent, but they do about you, giving you a disadvantage? It means you'll need to practice scouting a little bit better, and maybe mix up your build order a little bit more. Look at printf, he cannon rushes literally every single game in GM. You know it's coming but he is really good at it. Is it unfair to know that? No more than it's unfair to have a random player (unknown race, giving him the advantage!!) Or that your opponent might see what you're doing and build units to counter you. | ||
|
Shew
United States460 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16062 Posts
On September 15 2017 00:14 Thalandros wrote: Can't it be argued that you get less valuable practice from ladder if you have no info on your opponent, but they do about you, giving you a disadvantage? I'd argue that playing without a barcode gives more quality practice because you get to play vs players who specificially try to counter your playstyle - like in a tournament. That's probably the reason quite a lot of pros still play without barcodes. You don't want to overdo it of course to not reveal all your tricks. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17439 Posts
On September 15 2017 05:19 Charoisaur wrote: I'd argue that playing without a barcode gives more quality practice because you get to play vs players who specificially try to counter your playstyle - like in a tournament. That's probably the reason quite a lot of pros still play without barcodes. You don't want to overdo it of course to not reveal all your tricks. to get a balanced practise experience why not a portion of games where you are 100% anonymous with a barcode and 100% transparent with your public nickname? | ||
|
reneg
United States859 Posts
On September 15 2017 05:22 JimmyJRaynor wrote: to get a balanced practise experience why not a portion of games where you are 100% anonymous with a barcode and 100% transparent with your public nickname? Or an option where you can just opt in for anonymity? Just check a box, and boom. Your games are now all just "player" - but your opponent is "player" as well, so it'll be completely anonymous for you. If you don't check it, then you'll see your name and theirs (if they haven't opted into anonymity). | ||
|
Plopus
Switzerland112 Posts
On September 15 2017 11:03 reneg wrote: Or an option where you can just opt in for anonymity? Just check a box, and boom. Your games are now all just "player" - but your opponent is "player" as well, so it'll be completely anonymous for you. If you don't check it, then you'll see your name and theirs (if they haven't opted into anonymity). Yeah! I like you idea! I think it's a good balance to still alow players to develop great strategies and practise them on ladder | ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
Speaking of multiple accounts, one more reason that many people use anon accounts is so they can play on an account that isn't floating at the same MMR in each region in addition to getting anonymous practice. So, would those players have to log into every single account they own, make new usernames for all of them, and check all the boxes on all of them to keep them anonymous? Then, if each account would have an "anon/hidden match history" and a "public match history" then anyone who uses the opt-in anon feature would be hiding information which is supposedly what this whole anti-barcode argument was about to begin with and ends up presenting a new issue that may/may not affect a larger/smaller number of players. And how would an opt-in anon feature be useful to someone looking to stream their gameplay on their single account without still running into the other half of the argument about stream sniping and ghosting? It seems like a whole of hassle for everyone involved for little to no payoff for the players that would actually be affected. | ||
| ||
