|
Suppose I, a fairly vanilla user, just posted the following reply to a post:
Show nested quote +On February 27 2014 16:05 cLAN.Anax wrote: One's personal inclinations towards charity are mutually exclusive to the policies they advocate the state to enforce. Generosity is best given freely, not redistributed by force. I think I just got eye cancer reading this post.
What will happen to me? I think it's fair to say that I will receive at least a warning about this. However, if you are a contributor for TL, you can apparently to do this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=444643¤tpage=17#328
On February 28 2014 10:39 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2014 10:37 mr_tolkien wrote:On February 28 2014 10:36 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On February 28 2014 10:32 Ketara wrote:On February 28 2014 10:27 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: I have no comments about the change, and you are trying to conflate a separate issue into one in some stupid attempt to "prove a point" (you don't have one), because you have no idea what you're talking about.
This change has absolutely nothing to do with balance. This change is the equivalent of saying "we made Veigar's Dark Matter hot pink instead of black, and this will really help us balance Veigar." I just wanted to point out that he's not lying. You said he was lying. Saying it has nothing to do with balance is I think a bit hyperbolic. It probably doesn't have very much to do with balance, but to say it will never help anyone play TF ever I think is not going to prove correct. When they added directional indicators to Wild Cards, did that have anything to do with balance? This is kinda similar. On February 28 2014 09:45 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:In reality, the Live Team tends to buff about as much as they nerf. A few factors lead to the perception that our balance is nerf heavy:
First, players trend toward playing overpowered champions, and tend to focus on champions they play when reading the patch notes. For example, Corki's playrate increased 8x within a 1 month period around September of last year (Trinity Force buffs made him very strong). It's only natural to focus on the champions you play when reading the patch notes and pay less attention to the (previously underpowered) champions you don't. That's why I don't fault you for missing the straight buffs to Corki, Ryze and Skarner in 4.3, despite the fact that it's written in clear English.
Second, players tend to read net neutral changes (buffs + nerfs) as nerfs. For example, community sentiment was largely that our recent changes to Kayle's Q ratio was a nerf, when in fact the buff to her W's movement speed made her about the same strength, if not more potent -- We reduced Kayle's burst while increasing her team utility and ability to deal sustained damage. Since players were used to bursting with Kayle, they focused on the reduction to their ability to 1 shot a dude over the gains. This isn't true of all players, mind you, but it happens to a lot of us (even Yours Truly).
Third, buffs are often hard to associate with a particular champion, but nerfs feel very specific. Returning to Corki, when we buffed Trinity Force before Worlds, very few players saw this as a dramatic gain for Corki on patch day. Nonetheless, he was immediately overpowered. When we made subsequent changes to Corki which resulted in a net decrease in power, everyone saw that as a dramatic loss for Corki. Again returning to 4.3, we expect all Tear of the Goddess and Spellthief's Edge users to be stronger in this patch. However, it will take a while for these buffs to be fully appreciated.
Finally, if you are posting here, you likely read posts here, and players are much more likely to write a forum post when they feel frustrated or aggrieved than when they feel content. Thus, all of the above is magnified because the "TLDR" of the patch notes often seems like a litany of nerfs because a huge portion of the posts on this forum are just players venting about specific nerfs to their favorite overpowered champion. All of the champions you listed ["why is Fiora/Viktor/Brand/Heimer/my favorite champion still unviable/clunky/outdated/otherwise disadvantaged?"] are perfectly viable. Unfortunately, they do not feel viable (for a number of reasons specific to each).
Take Fiora. If you cannot win with Fiora, that's likely because you are playing her wrong. I did not mean to imply everyone played champions for power, only that our more powerful champions on average tend to see more play than our less powerful champions.
I also agree with you that the major nerfs we did to Urgot (and Olaf) were unfortunate and tarnished our balance reputation. It is of course unfortunate that some champions are dramatically more powerful in the hands of a pro than our average player, as were Olaf and Urgot (who both saw/see success in competitive after we "destroyed" them). What we should have done was alter their underlying mechanics so that they could be relatively fun while still being unique and balanced at the highest levels of play.
Indeed, this is a lesson that the Live team has taken to heart. SmashGizmo did a phenomenal re-work on Olaf that retained his core identity (Berserker) while removing the competitive balance problems (massive true damage on a CC immune bruiser whose offensive itemization was full health/CDR). More recently, this patch's Twisted Fate changes, while they may seem minor, are designed to make him balanceable across the entire spectrum of players. The Kha'zix changes almost certainly reduce his overall power level, but they also help fulfill his identity as a hunter/assassin in the process. I actually enjoy playing this patch's version of Kha'Zix much more than the previous version -- I may not take Dragon/Baron as quickly, or annihilate underleveled targets instantly when I am ahead, but I can make game defining turn-around plays and can drop aggro in skirmishes when needed and move to isolated targets more effectively.
So while it is fair to be critical of the Urgot/Olaf approach, it is not fair to portray that as reflective of our current approach to game balance. I have bolded the many lies for your convenience. Well that could be useful with all the shit you're posting. Thanks for pointing the 1% of your posts actually having anything to do with the discussion. I made a graphic interface change to my post. I believe this will really allow responders to make thoughtful responses, thus sorting out the good posters from the great posters. You fall in the third category of posters. Show nested quote +On February 28 2014 10:39 Sufficiency wrote:On February 28 2014 10:17 Harem wrote:On February 28 2014 10:08 Ketara wrote: I'm not sure I understand how he's lying?
Maybe you could explain? The stuff you quoted seems very reasonable and well thought out to me, aside from possibly the Fiora comment, which is sort of a half truth. Err, the TF change? It was just a particle change and he is acting like a politician how it is the greatest thing ever. I am not a cognitive scientist but I have a theory of what he means. First, try to do this test yourself: http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/This tests your reaction time when a box of red turns green. My own reaction time is around 250ms and according to this website the average is around 200ms. Regardless this test seems awfully hard to do and I am sure everyone here agrees that our reaction time in game is far less than 200ms. My theory here is that we are bad at detecting quick change of colour with our eyes because of how our cone cells work in our eyes. I think if we change the red -> green transition to a black -> white transition or some sort of movement cue we will be able to perform the test with much greater proficiency. Similarly, provided my theory is correct, we should be able to detect the card colour more quickly with the current PAC setup than what it was previous. Again this is just my theorycrafting on human cognition. If someone can make an applet to test this it would be great. I think I just got eye cancer reading this post.
As a blatant and rude reply without any repercussions. Adding insults to injury, you can't even report such users because apparently he has special status.
The thing is, being a TL contributor or anyone with special icon on the TL forum makes the said person highly visible, and as such should act as role models for other users. Unfortunately, some distinguished users on TL abuse their status and portray themselves negatively with immunity. While I can understand certain crude acts to be forgiven for a distinguished user at the heat of the moment, to use these special privileges to constantly verbal abuse other users is not acceptable and need to be moderated.
You may think I am writing this as a personal vendetta against the user above, but no. I am writing this because I care about Teamliquid in general. The easiest way for the TL community to collapse, which was built on its strict moderation policy and polite/intelligent user base, is to have its distinguished users break the rules first.
|
|
let's investigate then.
I think I just got eye cancer reading this post.
|
Aren't you the guy that gets everything wrong? o_O
|
Its just standard shitposting in an unmoderated thread, don't worry about it, those posts are fine and nobody really cares if you make posts of that quality there.
|
I dont think the community is going to collapse, lol.
Look at belial or roffles, contributing posters and star posters arent immune to bans.
|
^ I think he specifically is mentioning CSheep, who cannot be reported. data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/44632/446320620b2797481b98f0248bf47d03f83e2600" alt=""
Because when he says "You may think this is a personal vendetta", I say: "No. I know this is a personal vendetta."
|
Hyrule18968 Posts
Generally, a staffed user has contributed enough to balance out some occasional terrible posts.
|
lol gd is a cesspool of terrible posts anyway. Csheeps post was not really more terrible or more rude than others, especially because its an obvious hyperbole. the veteran status is nothing new anyway, even tho its pretty retarded at times
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
Does csheep ever post anything good though?
|
Just because you shouldn't be using the computer too much when you have eye cancer doesn't mean we should ban affected users from a website.
|
On February 28 2014 23:26 Souma wrote: Does csheep ever post anything good though?
Long ago, csheep lived together with his friends in harmony.
Then, everything changed when the Roffles Nation attacked.
Only the moderators, masters of the hammer, could stop them. But when the forums needed them most, they were like "yolo"
Years later, we stumbled upon a new band of heroes, led by a stout warrior named Sufficiency, and while his post count is high, he's got a lot to learn before he's ready to battle shitposters.
But I believe...Sufficiency can save TL.
|
Haha, who gets fucking eye-cancer!?
I laughed so hard that I got nipple-cancer from reading this.
|
On March 06 2014 12:09 ninazerg wrote: Haha, who gets fucking eye-cancer!?
I laughed so hard that I got nipple-cancer from reading this. As someone who suffers from cancer of the pinkie toenail, I am quite offended by your casual derision of obscure cancers.
|
I completely understand where the OP is coming from. I've been posting and getting warnings and bans for posting the same content that other "respected veterans" are posting. Only reason they get a slide is because they are known figures in the SC2 community. That's a terrible way of moderation and it encourages people to keep on breaking these rules TL has set. Either do it right or don't do it at all.
|
Hyrule18968 Posts
Our rules clearly state "This is our house" which means our friends can get away with stuff a stranger can't. In fact, the rules say people who contribute (are a pro, staff, whatever) get more leniency than those who don't (only post in LR threads and General forum, etc)
|
Yo Sufficiency tattling to mommy and daddy is just gonna get you picked on more
|
Yeah burn cheep at the stake burn the witch
|
On February 28 2014 15:01 Aveng3r wrote: I dont think the community is going to collapse, lol.
Look at belial or roffles, contributing posters and star posters arent immune to bans. Can confirm. Community collapsed.
|
number of "vets" has grown so much that the term no longer applies the same
number of "get the tl forum noob banned first" baiters has exploded and died down since sc2 came out, still.. , this has considerably tarnished the "vet" status
moderation is good on tl, but like for taxes, not enough people appointed to id "internet sewer machines" makes for a lot of things being missed
the report function or pm-ing mods is awful for people who have a country history with collaboration .. but it is the only wall against shit tl.. and we don't want that (at east i don't)
thank you moderators, have, keep and make a good tl (and do find subtle and appropriate ways to communicate to "vets" when they do cross lines)
|
|
|
|