|
i wouldn't say 1200 is b to be completely honest but then again i don't think you can compare the games period. sc is so much more mechanically demanding that d could beat 1100 never played bw players
but on topic, i totally agree. while elitism isn't good having a worthless opinion isn't going to contribute much to a discussion either.
i don't want team liquid to be elitist jerks though, more like arena junkies. people are still biased on arena junkies but at least their opinions aren't completely off. elitist jerks is more like ask this question we'll give you a mathematical response, but that's impossible for sc.
|
It's hardly surprising that Brood War players occupy the highest tier in SC2 - they have a set of skills that transfers quite well to SC2. And BW is harder than SC2, by which I mean that performing tasks generally takes more actions in BW than they do in SC2.
Nevertheless the elitism is disappointing . It reminds me of the kind of personal attacks and Ad Hominem attacks that are the staple of WoW forums. The culture of argument from authority is bad.
"You aren't a 1200+ diamond player? Well then sorry you don't get to voice your opinion. If you do we'll just tell you that you suck and therefore anything you say is wrong."
|
On August 25 2010 02:19 Saracen wrote: If you are at all familiar with Brood War and iCCup rankings, here's what it would look like: Bronze: I play B.net custom games. I can give the computer a good fight. Silver: I play Fastest Possible Map Ever. Gold: I play BGH and some low maps. I know who Boxer is. Platinum: Computer (E) rank Low diamond (~300): D- Mid diamond (~600): D High diamond (~900): D+ through C Top diamond (~1200): B
That ranking is so bad it is funny. Well i guess that White-Ra is just your average B Iccup no name and TLO is a D+ player.
It is almost as bad than Testie's WGT ranking where everyone below A is either a retard or a monkey.
|
On August 25 2010 08:26 3clipse wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 07:26 oskuboi wrote:On August 25 2010 07:21 3clipse wrote: I really hate these "600pt = D+" comparisons. Bw and sc2 are two very different games in very different stages of their development which are ranked on very different ladders. You cannot translate one into the other. I've beaten former B bw players and lost to former D- bw players. There's no standard measure of skill; apm is inadequate, winrate is inadequate, etc. It's also tough to compare a percentile ranking because the sc2 ladder incorporates the full population while iccup was and is a fairly elite, self-selecting group.
That said, your point is solid, Saracen. The game is in its infancy and very few players have developed the understanding necessary to criticize the game's best. The worth of all-in strategies is inflated and will win more games now than any other time because timings and capabilities are not yet well established. All opinions must be taken with a grain of salt at this time. Im prety sure that he doesnt means that if u were D+ in bw u are 600pt now. He ment that with same ammount of skill/knowing the game 600pt here would be D+ in sc1 imo Yes, I know. It's still an invalid comparison. No its not, its true in most cases ofc they are some exeptions. think about it its a new game top players mb played (beta counted too) like 5 months (i dont remember when beta started) if u played sc1 5 months u would be like D+/C- mb ( players who were really good in sc1 probaply know more of game than others who played sc2 sametime as them) ok so those medi diamond players know about sc2 about as much D+ players in iccup knows about sc1 (unless they made diamond by only cheesing then they know about as much as D- players know about sc1)
|
lmao do you people even know what "elitist" means? There are elite players, and their opinions mean more than a 600 point diamond player (like me). That is the basic point of the thread. Also, people need to stop taking the "iCCup vs SC2" scale too literally. It's approximately correct imo, but obviously it's not a perfect match and there are exceptions all over the place. This should be obvious.
|
I agree with msot of what OP said, I'm a ~600 Diamond player and I'm terrible. Most of the people I play (low to mid Diamond) are not that good either, even though I still lose to a lot of them.
I think everyone has to remember what Diamond represents. According to sc2ranks, Blizzard has decided that Diamond league is equal to approximately 6% of the laddering SC2 population. 6% is a LOT of people. Being in the top 6% of a game played by millions doesn't really mean a hell of a lot. Realistically, being in the top 1% doesn't really mean anything either, other than that you can probably beat your friends. Only a really miniscule percent of the player pool will ever be truly competitive at a tournament level, and those are the guys whose opinions we should value (as OP pointed out).
It's hard to accurately guess what percentage of BW players ICCUP represents, but it's certainly not 6%. If I had to pull a number out of thin air I would imagine ICCUP probably consists of less than 0.5% of the BW population (that is, less than 1 out of every 200 players who ever laddered BW would play on ICCUP). Of that group, only a much smaller number would ever achieve B- or higher. To draw an analogy, Diamond league is like a college basketball league...although all of the players need a certain requisite level of skill to make it into the league, only a tiny tiny percent of them are actually good enough to go pro.
My point is that going around posting "Diamond players suck" isn't particularly helpful. We already know that being in the top 6% of players doesn't mean anything, but perhaps this thread will help to put things in perspective for some people.
|
On August 25 2010 18:26 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 02:19 Saracen wrote: If you are at all familiar with Brood War and iCCup rankings, here's what it would look like: Bronze: I play B.net custom games. I can give the computer a good fight. Silver: I play Fastest Possible Map Ever. Gold: I play BGH and some low maps. I know who Boxer is. Platinum: Computer (E) rank Low diamond (~300): D- Mid diamond (~600): D High diamond (~900): D+ through C Top diamond (~1200): B
That ranking is so bad it is funny. Well i guess that White-Ra is just your average B Iccup no name and TLO is a D+ player. It is almost as bad than Testie's WGT ranking where everyone below A is either a retard or a monkey. Only so bad its funny is how well you understanded this. It doesnt mean that they are B or D+ players in SC1 it means that if they knew as much they know about sc2 in sc1 and played sc1 they would be those ranked players and like i said there are exeptions ofc u cant assume that every single player in expample in low diamond have same knowledge as other who are same ranked and TLO probaply have talent and knowledge to reach top diamond. And really u CANT claim that someone who played this very new game few months (even he were the best player there is) knows sc2 as good as sc1 progamers who played sc1 10 years know about sc1. The reason why even sc1 players reach top rankings so easily is that there are so many noobs who havent even played sc1 or played it years ago. theres even ppl who doesent have much experience in rts games. and no matter what ppl say playing sc1 gives you small advantage over players who didnt even tho games are very different
|
United Kingdom12021 Posts
Can I make a request? Please can people stop reffering to iCCUP ranks when it comes to SC2? I was only a D in Starcraft but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to be good at SC2. Starcraft 1 was a completely different kettle of fish when it comes to how much people may have played so far, or how much better people are at the game.
I'll be serious here in saying I could never play Brood War properly due to the limitations put in place by my mindset and some nof the control options baffled me along with some of the hotkeys. Where as in Starcraft 2 these have all been ironed out and made better meaning I'm better at the game than I was at Brood War, just because someone was D at Brood War doesn't mean they'll be bad at Starcraft 2 and just because someone was A at Starcraft, it doesn't mean they're going to be really good at SC2 either. Using Brood War as an example to discredit people opinions on a new game where not even the "pros" are good at it yet (well properly anyway, nobody is, it's a new game!) really annoys me.
|
On August 25 2010 18:55 Qikz wrote: Can I make a request? Please can people stop reffering to iCCUP ranks when it comes to SC2? I was only a D in Starcraft but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to be good at SC2. Starcraft 1 was a completely different kettle of fish when it comes to how much people may have played so far, or how much better people are at the game.
I'll be serious here in saying I could never play Brood War properly due to the limitations put in place by my mindset and some nof the control options baffled me along with some of the hotkeys. Where as in Starcraft 2 these have all been ironed out and made better meaning I'm better at the game than I was at Brood War, just because someone was D at Brood War doesn't mean they'll be bad at Starcraft 2 and just because someone was A at Starcraft, it doesn't mean they're going to be really good at SC2 either. Using Brood War as an example to discredit people opinions on a new game where not even the "pros" are good at it yet (well properly anyway, nobody is, it's a new game!) really annoys me. plz read before posting.. no one said that being D cant make u good player in sc2.. seriously so many ppl take just a look at OP and dont even read and start complaining without knowing what ranking reffery really means...
|
I thought we already knew "the truth" of diamond league. I just think that the arguments are already over-killed by now. Another thing is; an abusive build could be an opener rather than an all in; i.e. morrow's build vs idra 5rax reaper was pretty nice... This sort of reminds me of sc1 cries of all-in/cheese, etc... Anything is viable, no1 plays the same and standard should be non existent, maybe a "standard opener". In general, just play how you want, and remember that not every1 is playing competitively, if you want to learn - learn whose threads to read on how to improve and just have fun... It's a game after all and those who want to be pro can be pro, but don't rage on people who want to be a noob
|
I wouldn't mind special threads where only top tier players can post and discuss certain matters and give their point of view, but I consider it bad to make this a standard habit. And I don't think that people don't have the proper respect, maybe they are just lacking facts or it is not very well explained and so they disagree with top players.
I think shutting a large part of the community away from active discussion and dialog is not very good. But I 100% agree with the I am a bla Diamond player. I think it is on the one side good to know sometimes on what level someone is playing when he is posting something bronze or platinum ? But some use it just to make their point. I mean if you explain something it should make sense and the conclusion should come out of the explanation. The points are not the thing that gives validity, its whats written and how it is written.
|
seems pretty accurate, ladder heroes need to realize their place.
|
On August 25 2010 06:15 iEchoic wrote: In fact, SC1 is the simplest, most kiddy pc RTS I've literally ever played. It got popular because it was accessible to all, similar to the way Halo did. User was warned for this post YES YOU ARE SO RIGHT! Being an astronaut is really simple too just mostly sitting and clicking some buttons and mb fix something if something get broken really ez.. Also building nuclear bomb is really simple just put some parts together and done! easiest things iv done in my life besides breathing...
|
On August 25 2010 20:13 oskuboi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 06:15 iEchoic wrote: In fact, SC1 is the simplest, most kiddy pc RTS I've literally ever played. It got popular because it was accessible to all, similar to the way Halo did. User was warned for this post YES YOU ARE SO RIGHT! Being an astronaut is really simple too just mostly sitting and clicking some buttons and mb fix something if something get broken really ez.. Also building nuclear bomb is really simple just put some parts together and done! easiest things iv done in my life besides breathing... While he worded that horribly, your analogy is downright terrible. Starcraft doesn't seem complex before you actually get into it a bit, there are less resources than other games, it has less units than a lot of games. That's not where the complexity lies in Starcraft, and he obviously didn't know that as he's barely played it. But what the fuck does that have to do with constructing a nuke?
|
On August 25 2010 18:26 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 02:19 Saracen wrote: If you are at all familiar with Brood War and iCCup rankings, here's what it would look like: Bronze: I play B.net custom games. I can give the computer a good fight. Silver: I play Fastest Possible Map Ever. Gold: I play BGH and some low maps. I know who Boxer is. Platinum: Computer (E) rank Low diamond (~300): D- Mid diamond (~600): D High diamond (~900): D+ through C Top diamond (~1200): B
That ranking is so bad it is funny. Well i guess that White-Ra is just your average B Iccup no name and TLO is a D+ player. It is almost as bad than Testie's WGT ranking where everyone below A is either a retard or a monkey.
that's probably just because they don't play that many ladder games so they haven't played enough to get a crapload of points like other players who grind ladder
even jaedong or flash would be D+ rank if they didn't actually play many iccup ladder games.
it's not about judging how many points every single player has at any given time, it's the amount of points they would actually peak at, assuming they play a ton of ladder games.
|
I personally think these rankings r quite accurate in comparison to ICCUP~
|
I am platinum player and I was C on icc.
|
On August 25 2010 20:19 vyyye wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2010 20:13 oskuboi wrote:On August 25 2010 06:15 iEchoic wrote: In fact, SC1 is the simplest, most kiddy pc RTS I've literally ever played. It got popular because it was accessible to all, similar to the way Halo did. User was warned for this post YES YOU ARE SO RIGHT! Being an astronaut is really simple too just mostly sitting and clicking some buttons and mb fix something if something get broken really ez.. Also building nuclear bomb is really simple just put some parts together and done! easiest things iv done in my life besides breathing... While he worded that horribly, your analogy is downright terrible. Starcraft doesn't seem complex before you actually get into it a bit, there are less resources than other games, it has less units than a lot of games. That's not where the complexity lies in Starcraft, and he obviously didn't know that as he's barely played it. But what the fuck does that have to do with constructing a nuke? Im just saying that putting like that it sounds really simple like some ppl maid sc1 sounding like simple when in reality its not
|
On August 25 2010 20:24 UFO wrote: I am platinum player and I was C on icc. i am damned right now :D
|
I really never cared for ranking in any game. I play this game to be competitive against friends, I really don't care about how I do against random players. So I really don't care that much for what league I'm in.
My issue with the ladder is that you can't have multiple accounts for ranking. I play random and I trash most of my opponents at Platinum level if I get Terran (my main race :D) while I struggle against low gold level players as Zerg (I have like 2 BO that I can perform okay'ish and if they mess with my BO I usually panic and get way behind.). Either way, I think that ranking needs improving, cause if you rank up as random and you're not as good with all 3 races as you are with your main, you'll always get either super easy games or super hard games.
|
|
|
|