EPTThe Truth About Diamond League - Page 52
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
fevax
Turkey142 Posts
| ||
|
KaienFEMC
Canada127 Posts
SC2 is a much easier game to master, and the "friendly" interface/UI/AI/mechanics may have closed the gap between player skills. For example, people mentioned there were a huge difference in between A- and A+ on iccup and you can't really differentiate the skill level between 2000 and 2200 players right now. I do not think this is solely due to the ladder system, I think the change in game mechanics also played a role here. What I am saying here is that the difference between the stringent division of skill level at iccup is probably not as accurate at measuring SC2 skill level, since it really requires "less skill" to become good. To translate, if you were C- at iccup age, you probably will do just as well as some C+ iccup or even B- iccup players now on SC2. Just my two cents. Edit: I guess someone pointed out what I wanted to say just a little bit earlier :D | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
| ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
On October 08 2010 05:48 FabledIntegral wrote: Very, very off imo. I even know a few ppl that are 1800 + and were C- in BW. A very rough estimate... 0-500 Diamond D- 501 - 900 D 901 - 1300 D+ 1301 - 1450 C- 1600 - 1700 C 1701 - 1800 C+ 1801 - 1875 B- 1876 - 1950 B 1951 - 2025 B+ 2026 - 2100 A- 2101 - 2250 A 2251+ A+ Check the date. His list was only valid back then but now it means nothing. | ||
|
Black Gun
Germany4482 Posts
On October 08 2010 06:02 Lumb wrote: That would be six people in the entire world right now.. i hope you do realize that about 50% of all A+ players on iccup were actually korean progamers smurfing and the other 50% were semipros, practice partners and retired pros with years of experience and probably at the very least 40 hours of practice a week. i dont think there has ever been a point in time where a foreigner who wasnt among the top5 foreigners at that moment consistently could hold A+. basically A+ on iccup was representing a skill lvl that wont be seen for at least 2 more years in sc2. if we were assigning the ranks by skill and not by rarity, no one on sc2 would be equivalent to A+ right now. | ||
|
Crt
247 Posts
| ||
|
Carefoot
Canada410 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On October 08 2010 06:32 R0YAL wrote: Check the date. His list was only valid back then but now it means nothing. What are you talking about. His list was posted the exact same day as mine. I suggest you check the date! | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
eg. http://www.sc2ranks.com/team/4030009 You can even check out important events in your ranking (like switching to zerg at the end of september XD) | ||
|
Lightspeed
130 Posts
| ||
|
dinmsab
Malaysia2246 Posts
On October 09 2010 01:07 Lightspeed wrote: The truth about diamond, imho, is that the majority of diamond players are really not much better than a lot of silver, gold and plat players. I believe that the SC2 skill curve starts really low in bronze, climbs very steep to high bronze/low silver, then climbs relatively slowly to about 3-400 bonus pool adjusted diamond and then starts to climb very steeply again to high diamond. I also guess that if the MMR cutoff points continued at the same interval after diamond, we would have 3 or 4 more division ranks by now. I dare say that the line between low-diamond and high plat has always been kinda blurry, although if you're claiming that people in mid diamond are "not much better" than a silver/gold player then your just making shit up. Its true that low-diamond players are not exactly good, but they're decent enough in the macro department to get where they are. Silver/Gold players still struggle to pull off a decent BO. | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
On October 09 2010 01:21 dinmsab wrote: I dare say that the line between low-diamond and high plat has always been kinda blurry, although if you're claiming that people in mid diamond are "not much better" than a silver/gold player then your just making shit up. Its true that low-diamond players are not exactly good, but they're decent enough in the macro department to get where they are. Silver/Gold players still struggle to pull off a decent BO. No, he's right. Bronze through plat are identical. Entirely. And the difference between low-mid diamond is negligible. Really it's just how lucky you got with your placement matches and who you fought. If you ever play a new account, or start a new 2v2 team, this fact becomes apparent quite readily. You're playing people ranked in silver, and you lose, and the next game you beat diamond. I have managed to get to 1200 pts diamond, and yet sometimes I've lost to platinum players who are getting placed. The game has a sharp upturn around 1500 pts, but before that its safe to say that everyone is a noob... | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On October 09 2010 03:28 ToxNub wrote: No, he's right. Bronze through plat are identical. Entirely. And the difference between low-mid diamond is negligible. Really it's just how lucky you got with your placement matches and who you fought. If you ever play a new account, or start a new 2v2 team, this fact becomes apparent quite readily. You're playing people ranked in silver, and you lose, and the next game you beat diamond. I have managed to get to 1200 pts diamond, and yet sometimes I've lost to platinum players who are getting placed. The game has a sharp upturn around 1500 pts, but before that its safe to say that everyone is a noob... Don't be naiive. That's completely ludicrous. It's just because YOU are at that skill level you notice a difference. It's like that for almost everyone at their skill level. Do you not remember B players talking about how they noticed nearly no difference between D/D+/C- players in iCCuP? And that the actual "skill difference" you started noting "around B level." That's bullshit to all the D players that would get STOMPED by C- players, and vice versa to the C- players that could literally go 15-0 on their way to C-. And what did the A- players say? That there's a massive jump between B+/A-/A. So please, don't be ignorant stating that just wherever you're at has a noticable skill difference. Because I personally don't notice the difference whatsoever between a ~1000 player and a ~1300 diamond player. | ||
|
Chewits
Northern Ireland1200 Posts
I feel this is because i started playing sc2 with quick matches, learning the game, without playing single player. So I probably lost to alot of bad players early on, as i only placed in Gold, and made my way up. | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
On October 09 2010 03:38 FabledIntegral wrote: Don't be naiive. That's completely ludicrous. It's just because YOU are at that skill level you notice a difference. It's like that for almost everyone at their skill level. Do you not remember B players talking about how they noticed nearly no difference between D/D+/C- players in iCCuP? And that the actual "skill difference" you started noting "around B level." That's bullshit to all the D players that would get STOMPED by C- players, and vice versa to the C- players that could literally go 15-0 on their way to C-. And what did the A- players say? That there's a massive jump between B+/A-/A. So please, don't be ignorant stating that just wherever you're at has a noticable skill difference. Because I personally don't notice the difference whatsoever between a ~1000 player and a ~1300 diamond player. I'm not really sure what you're ranting about. If I can lose to silvers through plat, at 1200 diamond, then the fact is that I can't be that good. In your example, people are going 15-0 on a single ranking difference. So how exactly does this analogy apply? It's not because I slam them 15-0 and rate them all of having a skill of 3/10 from my fuzzy vantage point. It's because THEY BEAT ME. The idea that it is harder to distinguish differentskill levels the farther your own skill level is has some merit, but it is hardly a refutation that bronze-through mid diamond are all pretty equivalent. I use 1500 because that's around the top 1k players. I suppose you could draw the line anywhere, but the smaller the percentile, the steeper the curve. | ||
|
abominare
United States1216 Posts
Somehow you are baffled by the fact that this actually completely shifts rankings.Guess what abcde doesnt mean anything like it used to because of the giant, absolute ridiculous shift in the paradigm. Dont care what the 1000 point zerg has to say? Then don't listen to him. To the people who are butt hurt I called sc1's community small. Take in account how many people played in iccup this season, even if we assume all the alt accounts are actually unique people go compare that to how many people are on wow, or sc2, or halo reach right now. Its tiny cope. | ||
|
Lightspeed
130 Posts
On October 09 2010 01:21 dinmsab wrote: I dare say that the line between low-diamond and high plat has always been kinda blurry, although if you're claiming that people in mid diamond are "not much better" than a silver/gold player then your just making shit up. Its true that low-diamond players are not exactly good, but they're decent enough in the macro department to get where they are. Silver/Gold players still struggle to pull off a decent BO. Exactly lack of knowledge of a proper BO is probably all that's holding these players back, mechanically they should all be able to get to current low diamond. 50 APM and some very limited knowledge of counters is probably all that's need to get into high plat (I would know  )92,5% of diamond players are below 300 bonus pool adjusted points (granted, I don't know how much bonus pool these players have saved up, only Blizzard knows), 5% are between 300 and 500 adjusted, 1.7% are between 500 and 700, 0.6% are between 700 and 900 and only 0.2% are between 900 and 1300 For the total player base, roughly 40% are in bronze, 20% each in silver and gold, 13% in plat and 7% in diamond. Only 0.5% of total player base are above 300 bonus pool adjusted diamond level and probably reasonably capable at the game. Only within the top 0.05% of the total player base you find players that regularly compete and succeed in bigger tournaments. My point is, and I hope the numbers somewhat support this, that the difference between a silver and a low diamond player is less, much less in skill (current and ceiling) and probably also MMR than between a low dia and a top diamond player. Nearly every player on the ladder could reasonably attain current high plat/low diamond playing level/skill in a short amount of time, but only very few will be able to climb above that. There's really just a bunch of scrubs on the ladder, me included, and very few outstanding players. | ||
|
VonLego
United States519 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On October 09 2010 03:28 ToxNub wrote: On October 09 2010 01:21 dinmsab wrote: I dare say that the line between low-diamond and high plat has always been kinda blurry, although if you're claiming that people in mid diamond are "not much better" than a silver/gold player then your just making shit up. Its true that low-diamond players are not exactly good, but they're decent enough in the macro department to get where they are. Silver/Gold players still struggle to pull off a decent BO. No, he's right. Bronze through plat are identical. Entirely. And the difference between low-mid diamond is negligible. Really it's just how lucky you got with your placement matches and who you fought. If you ever play a new account, or start a new 2v2 team, this fact becomes apparent quite readily. You're playing people ranked in silver, and you lose, and the next game you beat diamond. I have managed to get to 1200 pts diamond, and yet sometimes I've lost to platinum players who are getting placed. The game has a sharp upturn around 1500 pts, but before that its safe to say that everyone is a noob... While I agree team games can be really wonky in your first placement matches -- by and large diamond players will go 5-0. I play with my silver (1v1) friends on multiple different teams and almost every team went 5-0 and any team that played more than 20-25 games went diamond. Keep in mind also that team games are not very skill dependent as they largely rely on one basing and throwing large amounts of tier one at each other, as such they're a bit of a crap shoot once you're playing decent players. From a 1v1 perspective, I've only went 4-1 once in placement (vs a diamond player) and was promoted directly to diamond relatively quickly. I want to say I was still placed in platinum after going 4-1, but I can't recall for sure (it was phase 2 beta). TLDR: Leagues are fine for what they're intended to do, which is to sort the masses into similar groups. They aren't designed for the high end player, which is well known at this point. Hopefully the fabled "pro league" will add a worth while dimension for the best players. | ||
|
Ao_Jun
Denmark396 Posts
On October 09 2010 06:33 Lightspeed wrote: Exactly lack of knowledge of a proper BO is probably all that's holding these players back, mechanically they should all be able to get to current low diamond. 50 APM and some very limited knowledge of counters is probably all that's need to get into high plat (I would know )92,5% of diamond players are below 300 bonus pool adjusted points (granted, I don't know how much bonus pool these players have saved up, only Blizzard knows), 5% are between 300 and 500 adjusted, 1.7% are between 500 and 700, 0.6% are between 700 and 900 and only 0.2% are between 900 and 1300 For the total player base, roughly 40% are in bronze, 20% each in silver and gold, 13% in plat and 7% in diamond. Only 0.5% of total player base are above 300 bonus pool adjusted diamond level and probably reasonably capable at the game. Only within the top 0.05% of the total player base you find players that regularly compete and succeed in bigger tournaments. My point is, and I hope the numbers somewhat support this, that the difference between a silver and a low diamond player is less, much less in skill (current and ceiling) and probably also MMR than between a low dia and a top diamond player. Nearly every player on the ladder could reasonably attain current high plat/low diamond playing level/skill in a short amount of time, but only very few will be able to climb above that. There's really just a bunch of scrubs on the ladder, me included, and very few outstanding players. So, i've been out of the loop for a few weeks.. How do you calculate Bonus Pool adjusted rating? | ||
|
Lightspeed
130 Posts
On October 09 2010 06:50 Ao_Jun wrote: So, i've been out of the loop for a few weeks.. How do you calculate Bonus Pool adjusted rating? Bonus pool accumulates at a constant rate since release (I think something around 15 points per day). You can select to display Points - Currently accumulated bonus pool at sc2ranks.com | ||
| ||
