|
1 placement match is probably just to remove all the inactive people from the divisions.
|
On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote:
Question: Will reapers be made to not suck and be viable in mid-game armies? Answer: We're balancing for top players, Terran was OP early game, we had to nerf. Reapers being looked at but we're watching and waiting.
You got this totally wrong. He said they balanced it based on 2v2. He said half of the top 2v2 teams where zerg and terran
|
On October 23 2010 06:19 InToTheWannaB wrote: why is the dev panel like a long ass day[9] daily for noobs? Tell us something interesting!
It's not the only SC2 dev panel. It's basically the topic here.
|
if 2% is at 1900 i think i can make it =D
plz someone ask about lan mode!
|
On October 23 2010 06:22 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:20 swuSC2 wrote:On October 23 2010 06:16 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:13 swuSC2 wrote: I'm slightly confused. If they are keeping the MMR then that means players will still play players around their level. But does that mean they are making it that players with higher MMR wins more points per win and less points lost per loss? Because if they don't then higher level players will either have a harder time getting Ladder points and/or ladder points between lower level players and higher level players would be similar. The higher your MMR the longer you will be getting good points per win when you are starting fresh at 0 ladder points. In WoW when a fresh season starts you are getting 50-30 points per win until you get close in rating to your MMR. The numbers may be slightly different for sc2, but sc2 also has a bonus pool that will increase the rate of climbing dramatically. The issue is for the like the first 1000+ points you played through the lesser players because everyone had a low MMR so if you were good you got a good base to start off with and you plateaued when you got to your level. But if the MMR stays and you start playing with people of your level you already start at your plateaued level. If everyone starts off fresh with 0 points in season 2 (which they will) and you have 2900 mmr (say you are huk or something) and you play qxc (let's assume he will also have a very high mmr) you will gain big points for much longer, than if you were playing people with crap mmr. Someone with 1500 mmr isn't going to give you good points for any significant length of time if you are at 2900 mmr.
This is the issue in the current system. If QXC plays Huks if Huk wins he gains around +8 and if he plays him again he loses around -8. So if they start off already at facing each other and trade off they don't get substantial points compared to lower levels playing each other.
|
On October 23 2010 06:23 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote:
Question: Will reapers be made to not suck and be viable in mid-game armies? Answer: We're balancing for top players, Terran was OP early game, we had to nerf. Reapers being looked at but we're watching and waiting. You got this totally wrong. He said they balanced it based on 2v2. He said half of the top 2v2 teams where zerg and terran
No I didn't. He said they nerfed reapers because terran had too many openings. It also helped in team games, but the motivation was primarily 1v1.
|
Any questions about LAN yet?
|
Its official, The queen is supposed to be hard to utilize
|
On October 23 2010 06:23 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote:
Question: Will reapers be made to not suck and be viable in mid-game armies? Answer: We're balancing for top players, Terran was OP early game, we had to nerf. Reapers being looked at but we're watching and waiting. You got this totally wrong. He said they balanced it based on 2v2. He said half of the top 2v2 teams where zerg and terran
They did go on to say that terran had too many options in the early game. This would pertain to 1v1 not 2v2.
The reason they chose to nerf reapers is because they had to fix an OP 2v2 strategy and the OP amount of options terran had early/mid game in 1v1.
|
On October 23 2010 06:24 Zeroes wrote: if 2% is at 1900 i think i can make it =D
plz someone ask about lan mode! according to sc2ranks 2% is actually more like 1600 for the US
|
more more keep it coming i love the updates!! thanks so much kojinshugi keep up the good work!!
|
On October 23 2010 06:25 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:23 Tabbris wrote:On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote:
Question: Will reapers be made to not suck and be viable in mid-game armies? Answer: We're balancing for top players, Terran was OP early game, we had to nerf. Reapers being looked at but we're watching and waiting. You got this totally wrong. He said they balanced it based on 2v2. He said half of the top 2v2 teams where zerg and terran No I didn't. He said they nerfed reapers because terran had too many openings. It also helped in team games, but the motivation was primarily 1v1. He said nothing about 1v1 he specifically talked about 2v2 on this issue. Unless you feel outing words in there mouth is okey.
|
On October 23 2010 06:24 swuSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:22 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:20 swuSC2 wrote:On October 23 2010 06:16 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:13 swuSC2 wrote: I'm slightly confused. If they are keeping the MMR then that means players will still play players around their level. But does that mean they are making it that players with higher MMR wins more points per win and less points lost per loss? Because if they don't then higher level players will either have a harder time getting Ladder points and/or ladder points between lower level players and higher level players would be similar. The higher your MMR the longer you will be getting good points per win when you are starting fresh at 0 ladder points. In WoW when a fresh season starts you are getting 50-30 points per win until you get close in rating to your MMR. The numbers may be slightly different for sc2, but sc2 also has a bonus pool that will increase the rate of climbing dramatically. The issue is for the like the first 1000+ points you played through the lesser players because everyone had a low MMR so if you were good you got a good base to start off with and you plateaued when you got to your level. But if the MMR stays and you start playing with people of your level you already start at your plateaued level. If everyone starts off fresh with 0 points in season 2 (which they will) and you have 2900 mmr (say you are huk or something) and you play qxc (let's assume he will also have a very high mmr) you will gain big points for much longer, than if you were playing people with crap mmr. Someone with 1500 mmr isn't going to give you good points for any significant length of time if you are at 2900 mmr. This is the issue in the current system. If QXC plays Huks if Huk wins he gains around +8 and if he plays him again he loses around -8. So if they start off already at facing each other and trade off they don't get substantial points compared to lower levels playing each other.
You are forgetting the fact that they are already at a ladder point value that is close to their MMR. They are not at 0 points starting fresh. You are also not factoring in the fact that bonus pool builds up, if they go 50% vs each other with bonus pool included even at a ladder point value close to their MMR, they would still both be climbing.
Let alone when they are both at 0 points but have very high 2500+ mmr.
|
On October 23 2010 06:24 swuSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:22 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:20 swuSC2 wrote:On October 23 2010 06:16 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:13 swuSC2 wrote: I'm slightly confused. If they are keeping the MMR then that means players will still play players around their level. But does that mean they are making it that players with higher MMR wins more points per win and less points lost per loss? Because if they don't then higher level players will either have a harder time getting Ladder points and/or ladder points between lower level players and higher level players would be similar. The higher your MMR the longer you will be getting good points per win when you are starting fresh at 0 ladder points. In WoW when a fresh season starts you are getting 50-30 points per win until you get close in rating to your MMR. The numbers may be slightly different for sc2, but sc2 also has a bonus pool that will increase the rate of climbing dramatically. The issue is for the like the first 1000+ points you played through the lesser players because everyone had a low MMR so if you were good you got a good base to start off with and you plateaued when you got to your level. But if the MMR stays and you start playing with people of your level you already start at your plateaued level. If everyone starts off fresh with 0 points in season 2 (which they will) and you have 2900 mmr (say you are huk or something) and you play qxc (let's assume he will also have a very high mmr) you will gain big points for much longer, than if you were playing people with crap mmr. Someone with 1500 mmr isn't going to give you good points for any significant length of time if you are at 2900 mmr. This is the issue in the current system. If QXC plays Huks if Huk wins he gains around +8 and if he plays him again he loses around -8. So if they start off already at facing each other and trade off they don't get substantial points compared to lower levels playing each other.
Whether or not you are favored (and therfore the points you gain or lose) are based on comparing your points (actual rating) to your opponent's MMR. As such, your scenario could only occur if both players were already at a very high actual rating or have underperformed and have poor MMR.
|
plans for replay sharing! but only next year
|
On October 23 2010 06:27 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:25 kojinshugi wrote:On October 23 2010 06:23 Tabbris wrote:On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote:
Question: Will reapers be made to not suck and be viable in mid-game armies? Answer: We're balancing for top players, Terran was OP early game, we had to nerf. Reapers being looked at but we're watching and waiting. You got this totally wrong. He said they balanced it based on 2v2. He said half of the top 2v2 teams where zerg and terran No I didn't. He said they nerfed reapers because terran had too many openings. It also helped in team games, but the motivation was primarily 1v1. He said nothing about 1v1 he specifically talked about 2v2 on this issue. Unless you feel outing words in there mouth is okey. no he didn't he said 1v1 they thought terran had to many openings and reapers where a problem in 2v2. So 2 birds one stone.
|
On October 23 2010 06:27 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:25 kojinshugi wrote:On October 23 2010 06:23 Tabbris wrote:On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote:
Question: Will reapers be made to not suck and be viable in mid-game armies? Answer: We're balancing for top players, Terran was OP early game, we had to nerf. Reapers being looked at but we're watching and waiting. You got this totally wrong. He said they balanced it based on 2v2. He said half of the top 2v2 teams where zerg and terran No I didn't. He said they nerfed reapers because terran had too many openings. It also helped in team games, but the motivation was primarily 1v1. He said nothing about 1v1 he specifically talked about 2v2 on this issue. Unless you feel outing words in there mouth is okey.
He said "esports" and "top level games". I'm pretty sure there's no team game "esports" scene.
|
On October 23 2010 05:42 kojinshugi wrote: Question: Are there gonna be chat channels? Answer: Chat channels nov/dec, public and private channels. The coding is done, now being tested internally.
Everyone worried about ladder and some other shit but holy crap FINALLY.
|
On October 23 2010 06:28 TestSubject893 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 06:24 swuSC2 wrote:On October 23 2010 06:22 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:20 swuSC2 wrote:On October 23 2010 06:16 robertdinh wrote:On October 23 2010 06:13 swuSC2 wrote: I'm slightly confused. If they are keeping the MMR then that means players will still play players around their level. But does that mean they are making it that players with higher MMR wins more points per win and less points lost per loss? Because if they don't then higher level players will either have a harder time getting Ladder points and/or ladder points between lower level players and higher level players would be similar. The higher your MMR the longer you will be getting good points per win when you are starting fresh at 0 ladder points. In WoW when a fresh season starts you are getting 50-30 points per win until you get close in rating to your MMR. The numbers may be slightly different for sc2, but sc2 also has a bonus pool that will increase the rate of climbing dramatically. The issue is for the like the first 1000+ points you played through the lesser players because everyone had a low MMR so if you were good you got a good base to start off with and you plateaued when you got to your level. But if the MMR stays and you start playing with people of your level you already start at your plateaued level. If everyone starts off fresh with 0 points in season 2 (which they will) and you have 2900 mmr (say you are huk or something) and you play qxc (let's assume he will also have a very high mmr) you will gain big points for much longer, than if you were playing people with crap mmr. Someone with 1500 mmr isn't going to give you good points for any significant length of time if you are at 2900 mmr. This is the issue in the current system. If QXC plays Huks if Huk wins he gains around +8 and if he plays him again he loses around -8. So if they start off already at facing each other and trade off they don't get substantial points compared to lower levels playing each other. Whether or not you are favored (and therfore the points you gain or lose) are based on comparing your points (actual rating) to your opponent's MMR. As such, your scenario could only occur if both players were already at a very high actual rating or have underperformed and have poor MMR.
This isn't entirely accurate, it takes into account the points of both players as well as MMR of both players. The exact formula hasn't been revealed but it works the same way in WoW.
|
did they mention when they should be implementing these leagues?
|
|
|
|