|
On February 13 2024 08:29 jinjin5000 wrote:
You may be confusing MMR deflation to it increasing skill level really. I haven't really noticed much difference in skill level from HOTS-LOTV era (altho I quit around 2017 LOTV), despite me being high master in hots and lotv myself at around 5-5.2k mmr back when I did play. I don't really notice anything drastically different if I hop on and play vs master or d1 players from time to time at all.
The entry requirement to master league never really changed and haven't really changed since HOTS even if MMR may have changed (4.2k is master requirement now, used to be 4.4-4.5k earlier LOTV)
I'm not sure if i understand the MMR deflation vs skill thing, do you mean that the skill is the same and it's just an arbitrary MMR number varying up and down?
I feel though that MMR deflation hasn't been in a constant steady decline.
I remember that in early LotV, in the months I was playing it, the threshold to enter Masters used to be around 4k, but then it slowly rose season to season to 4400 and it did feel harder and harder skill wise. After a while, it seems to have dropped back down to 4200
From what I understand, in HotS there were too many players in masters (it was supposed to be top 2% but it was more like 5%), and in LotV they made it much closer to 2%, so early LotV the threshold was around 4k.
I do agree that masters is where you really start to understand the basics of the game enough to start "playing" the game (like making real strategies and decisions and reads), but I feel like low masters players have a bit more understanding of the game than in HotS and WoL, but it just might be harder for you to notice those small differences since you were a 5k mmr player. For example, I remember I used to be able to play random at a low masters level and would be able to pull off all sorts of stupid things, for example half-assing an all-in with 4 proxy barracks, and faking them out by not fully committing and triple expanding behind it and then being ahead. Or doing flimsy canon rushes and then double expanding behind it with secret bases and then just winning however I feel like. Or for example i would do silly strategies like open with mass raven/viking/banshee and expand all over the map.
Now though, I feel low masters players are significantly tighter when it comes to the important timings and mechanics. For example as a Terran now, when I'm playing seriously and not trying to goof around, if I slip up my macro for 10-15 seconds and I didn't swap my Barracks and Factor in order to make 1 Tank and make marines before the first blink stalkers come, I just die. I don't remember that level of unforgiveness when I was playing at mid/high masters in HotS. Since early LotV, like 6 years ago, I haven't once been able to make it back into masters.
In my exp, Diamond 1 players is where mid-masters used to be in HotS or early LotV.
I think another example why I believe this is because, back then when I would offrace (despite never learning or practicing Protoss or Zerg), i could still just wing it and focus on macro and still be ranked low masters. But in LotV if i try to macro and wing it, I only got Diamond 3 with them.
I feel like if it's purely MMR deflation and the skill hasn't increased, then I should still be mid or high masters like in HotS
On February 13 2024 08:29 jinjin5000 wrote:
Do you really think master players can win vs MVP? He got 6k+ MMR when he tried out LOTV after taking break since early HOTS. Sure he might have kept up here and there but he took significant time off and guess what? He slotted back in even when he played casually. How about MC that made it to GSL code S when he worked largely as "Whyman" or other off-jobs instead of focusing on SC2?
That's actually super cool, I didn't know that. Definitely makes me appreciate and trust that early SC2 games were still relatively high level. I suppose another piece of evidence is, the Gamers8 legends match where MC beat Stephano pretty handily. Stephano isn't competing seriously anymore, but he still enters and qualifies for group stages of tournaments sometimes, meaning he's at least a semi-pro level. So MC being able to beat Stephano despite being much less practiced really proves that the capability of the person is a huge factor, their relative skill doesn't just "freeze" in time when they stopped playing while other players get comparatively better.
I wonder if this applies backwards as much though. If Serral is dominating the scene so hard now, including usually beating Maru, then does that heavily imply that despite the lack of the Kespa-era infrastructure like proper teams, coaches, more fame and viewership etc., that Serral would likely be at the top back then too?
That also reminds me, in 2019-2021 there had been old players like Bomber Taeja MMA trying to qualify for GSL. Perhaps it's because the scene seemed decently promising, since 2016-2018 were still pretty decent years, with WCs like Blizzcon actually increasing the prize pool, rather than the scene purely declining, and maybe SC2 in 2019 seemed like it might be a decent prospect and attracted those old players to try again.
And heck, players like Ryung DID eventually breakthrough and qualify, and still manage to qualify a decent amount of times (like 1/3 to 1/2 of GSL seasons). And to a lesser extent players like Keen even find success qualifying once each year or almost each year. I wonder if MMA and Taeja stuck with it a bit longer and managed to qualify once, if it'd help motivate and give them the momentum they need to be where Ryung is now, and perhaps even higher.
|
5 years or so ago you needed 5500-5600 MMR to reach GM. Nowadays you need like 500 MMR less. But the skill required to reach GM remains roughly the same (evidenced by me being 200-300 MMR below that threshold back then and now)
|
On February 13 2024 19:52 Charoisaur wrote:
5 years or so ago you needed 5500-5600 MMR to reach GM. Nowadays you need like 500 MMR less. But the skill required to reach GM remains roughly the same (evidenced by me being 200-300 MMR below that threshold back then and now)
I see, thanks for clarifying that does make sense regarding the MMR varying and it isn't directly tied to the skill.
I'm curious though in regards to the other thing im wondering about about players getting better, do you still play regularly each year? If you do then i feel you maintaining being close to GM might indicate you're also slightly improving comparatively, but skill is relatively the same since everyone else playing regularly is also improving slightly.
I do play now and then but not really regularly, and i've been falling farther and farther from making low masters.
I don't think I've been getting worse at macro, mechanics, or apm, but that the difficulty is that other players are improving slowly comparatively in macro/mechanics/apm and also understanding of the game.
|
On February 13 2024 20:00 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2024 19:52 Charoisaur wrote:
5 years or so ago you needed 5500-5600 MMR to reach GM. Nowadays you need like 500 MMR less. But the skill required to reach GM remains roughly the same (evidenced by me being 200-300 MMR below that threshold back then and now) I see, thanks for clarifying that does make sense regarding the MMR varying and it isn't directly tied to the skill. I'm curious though in regards to the other thing im wondering about about players getting better, do you still play regularly each year? If you do then i feel you maintaining being close to GM might indicate you're also slightly improving comparatively, but skill is relatively the same since everyone else playing regularly is also improving slightly. I do play now and then but not really regularly, and i've been falling farther and farther from making low masters. I don't think I've been getting worse at macro, mechanics, or apm, but that the difficulty is that other players are improving slowly comparatively in macro/mechanics/apm and also understanding of the game.
Still play pretty regularly, probably less than I used to back when I was 5.3k but still enough to maintain my skill level
|
fuckin recency bias bullshit
MMA should be on the top 10
|
I don't see like quantized top 10, or top 5 of GOATS. For me it seems more fair to establish a league of great, legendary players, which could consists of 13, or 16 players or whatever else, but it is impossible to lock it on Top 10. I am personally Rain fan, but I will make a crime if I just put Rain in top 10 and leave MC in "honoraable mentions" out of 10. And if we put MVP, we also cannot eliminate Nestea just like that. They all have a speciall place in this League of the greatest.
|
United States1916 Posts
On February 17 2024 20:20 Veluvian wrote:
I don't see like quantized top 10, or top 5 of GOATS. For me it seems more fair to establish a league of great, legendary players, which could consists of 13, or 16 players or whatever else, but it is impossible to lock it on Top 10. I am personally Rain fan, but I will make a crime if I just put Rain in top 10 and leave MC in "honoraable mentions" out of 10. And if we put MVP, we also cannot eliminate Nestea just like that. They all have a speciall place in this League of the greatest.
People just like to use 10 or 5 because that's the convention when it comes to these sorts of things. I personally did a deep dive on 15 candidates and have extended my rankings out past the top 20, but I'll be going into the near misses etc once the series is done.
|
On February 17 2024 21:05 Mizenhauer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2024 20:20 Veluvian wrote:
I don't see like quantized top 10, or top 5 of GOATS. For me it seems more fair to establish a league of great, legendary players, which could consists of 13, or 16 players or whatever else, but it is impossible to lock it on Top 10. I am personally Rain fan, but I will make a crime if I just put Rain in top 10 and leave MC in "honoraable mentions" out of 10. And if we put MVP, we also cannot eliminate Nestea just like that. They all have a speciall place in this League of the greatest.
People just like to use 10 or 5 because that's the convention when it comes to these sorts of things. I personally did a deep dive on 15 candidates and have extended my rankings out past the top 20, but I'll be going into the near misses etc once the series is done.
Yea.. leaving Mvp or Dark is hard
|
Wheres #4 please?
The past few nights i couldnt even sleep straight cus of the waiting. hlpme
|
On February 19 2024 05:20 Locutos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2024 21:05 Mizenhauer wrote:On February 17 2024 20:20 Veluvian wrote:
I don't see like quantized top 10, or top 5 of GOATS. For me it seems more fair to establish a league of great, legendary players, which could consists of 13, or 16 players or whatever else, but it is impossible to lock it on Top 10. I am personally Rain fan, but I will make a crime if I just put Rain in top 10 and leave MC in "honoraable mentions" out of 10. And if we put MVP, we also cannot eliminate Nestea just like that. They all have a speciall place in this League of the greatest.
People just like to use 10 or 5 because that's the convention when it comes to these sorts of things. I personally did a deep dive on 15 candidates and have extended my rankings out past the top 20, but I'll be going into the near misses etc once the series is done. Yea.. leaving Mvp or Dark is hard
MC and Nestea > MvP. ( ya I said it)
Those 2 won almost as much as mvp during WOL when terran was clearly the stronger race and most of the maps were terran favoured
|
Northern Ireland26411 Posts
On February 19 2024 09:32 FFXthebest wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2024 05:20 Locutos wrote:On February 17 2024 21:05 Mizenhauer wrote:On February 17 2024 20:20 Veluvian wrote:
I don't see like quantized top 10, or top 5 of GOATS. For me it seems more fair to establish a league of great, legendary players, which could consists of 13, or 16 players or whatever else, but it is impossible to lock it on Top 10. I am personally Rain fan, but I will make a crime if I just put Rain in top 10 and leave MC in "honoraable mentions" out of 10. And if we put MVP, we also cannot eliminate Nestea just like that. They all have a speciall place in this League of the greatest.
People just like to use 10 or 5 because that's the convention when it comes to these sorts of things. I personally did a deep dive on 15 candidates and have extended my rankings out past the top 20, but I'll be going into the near misses etc once the series is done. Yea.. leaving Mvp or Dark is hard MC and Nestea > MvP. ( ya I said it) Those 2 won almost as much as mvp during WOL when terran was clearly the stronger race and most of the maps were terran favoured
Nope, not having it :p
|
On February 19 2024 09:32 FFXthebest wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2024 05:20 Locutos wrote:On February 17 2024 21:05 Mizenhauer wrote:On February 17 2024 20:20 Veluvian wrote:
I don't see like quantized top 10, or top 5 of GOATS. For me it seems more fair to establish a league of great, legendary players, which could consists of 13, or 16 players or whatever else, but it is impossible to lock it on Top 10. I am personally Rain fan, but I will make a crime if I just put Rain in top 10 and leave MC in "honoraable mentions" out of 10. And if we put MVP, we also cannot eliminate Nestea just like that. They all have a speciall place in this League of the greatest.
People just like to use 10 or 5 because that's the convention when it comes to these sorts of things. I personally did a deep dive on 15 candidates and have extended my rankings out past the top 20, but I'll be going into the near misses etc once the series is done. Yea.. leaving Mvp or Dark is hard MC and Nestea > MvP. ( ya I said it) Those 2 won almost as much as mvp during WOL when terran was clearly the stronger race and most of the maps were terran favoured
That's not true at all. They almost won as much as Mvp...in GSL. In 2011. They don't have a fraction of Mvp's international results, and never did as well in GSL in 2012. MC made the finals but got swept, whereas Mvp made two finals and won one, and made it to G7 in the one he lost.
|
On February 19 2024 05:20 Locutos wrote:
Wheres #4 please?
The past few nights i couldnt even sleep straight cus of the waiting. hlpme
I took off from work this whole week so I could spend as much time commenting on #4 as possible
+ Show Spoiler + this is a joke but the passion is real
|
What if Miz just ghosts us, leaves it at #5, knowing they forked up by leaving Rogue, Dark, Mvp, Maru, and Serral with only 4 left.
|
Where is part #4 ? 
Can't stand the suspension anymore
|
On February 19 2024 11:16 Blargh wrote:
What if Miz just ghosts us, leaves it at #5, knowing they forked up by leaving Rogue, Dark, Mvp, Maru, and Serral with only 4 left.
THAT would be twist. Not even George R.R. Martin would've done that
|
|
|
United States1916 Posts
|
On February 19 2024 11:16 Blargh wrote:
What if Miz just ghosts us, leaves it at #5, knowing they forked up by leaving Rogue, Dark, Mvp, Maru, and Serral with only 4 left.
What if Miz just adds an extra rank called GOAT? Then there'll be space! Also, think of all the drama. It'd be glorious.
|
Northern Ireland26411 Posts
The real GOAT is the friends we made along the way
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
soon
