On March 25 2016 05:06 blade55555 wrote: In terms of SC2 I wouldn't be surprised if C on iccup was GM. SC2's ranking system is pretty bad imo. I always wished they would have copied the ranking ways of iccup. There are so many players who get masters in sc2 that just doesn't feel right. There are players who only cannon rush/proxy gate/proxy rax and get to masters (sometimes even GM) with no mechanics and if you stop that it's an easy win.
To put it into perspective, when I got GM it was nice and all, but it didn't feel as rewarding as when I got C on iccup back in 09. It just didn't feel like it was that hard or as hard as it was to rank up in that system. Took me 9 grueling months of hours upon hours of play each day to get C, in sc2 I was never below the highest rank when it was released. Maybe it's because I already had the mechanics from BW or something else, but idk that's my thought process on it anyway.
I do however think the current format in sc2 where "x % is going to be at this rank no matter what" is very flawed.
I don't know the rank difference between Fish and Iccup though, I only recently started getting back into BW and haven't had the pleasure (or frustration ) of playing on Fish yet. Waiting to get to C+/B- on iccup before I start playing on it.
Fish nowadays is kind of a different matter as the ex-korean pros are on it too. Plus having unlimited amount of smurfs. I am surprised you don't mention aoe3 as a stepping stone to your sc2 skill =P
Ah that's because aoe3 was a very different RTS. It was the first RTS where I got interested in more competitive 1v1, but I only got to LT col before the competitive scene died (damn me for starting 5 years late lol). BW was my biggest stepping stone because I went from a 80 APM and no hotkeys to using all my hotkeys and get to 300.
Aoe3 was more of a stepping stone to realize that to be competitive and get good required practice and playing a lot. Back when aoe3 first came out on 05, I just thought it was all luck based xD.
On March 15 2016 03:03 blade55555 wrote: Well I mean going from sc2 and never playing BW, to playing BW is going to be difficult regardless of how good you are at sc2. You have to get used to 12 unit selection, small resolution, manual mining, buggy pathfinding.
Guarantee it if you hadn't played sc2 once, not a single game and started today you would not beat a masters player, probably not even a plat player. Maybe Gold.
I do agree with you however on the masters comment. I think the ranking system isn't very accurate in sc2. There are so many players in Masters that I don't think should be. I wish the ranking system was more like ICCUP/Fish, feel like there would be a better representation of skill that way.
So A on the old iCCip is like very bad C or high D on Fish.
I never knew the difference was that big. I also dislike the 4-5% of all ranked players to be in masters league in sc2. It's so much harder for me to get a high ranking in LoL than in sc2. I remmeber times where being Top 14% was high silver in LoL lol. Top 15% in SC2 was easily diamond.
In terms of SC2 I wouldn't be surprised if C on iccup was GM. SC2's ranking system is pretty bad imo. I always wished they would have copied the ranking ways of iccup. There are so many players who get masters in sc2 that just doesn't feel right. There are players who only cannon rush/proxy gate/proxy rax and get to masters (sometimes even GM) with no mechanics and if you stop that it's an easy win.
To put it into perspective, when I got GM it was nice and all, but it didn't feel as rewarding as when I got C on iccup back in 09. It just didn't feel like it was that hard or as hard as it was to rank up in that system. Took me 9 grueling months of hours upon hours of play each day to get C, in sc2 I was never below the highest rank when it was released. Maybe it's because I already had the mechanics from BW or something else, but idk that's my thought process on it anyway.
I do however think the current format in sc2 where "x % is going to be at this rank no matter what" is very flawed.
I don't know the rank difference between Fish and Iccup though, I only recently started getting back into BW and haven't had the pleasure (or frustration ) of playing on Fish yet. Waiting to get to C+/B- on iccup before I start playing on it.
I really dont get your perspective. MMR, even if the calc system is flawed, is infinitely better than a ladder grind system. A ladder grind system emphasizes newb bashing and cheeses just as much, if not more so...
Not really, I mean to a point it might, but if it's match making like sc2 has but with the ranking system of iccup there isn't really noob bashing as you would be matched with players around your skill level (So if you were C, you would match C-/C/C+).
On March 25 2016 09:27 Dazed_Spy wrote: I really dont get your perspective. MMR, even if the calc system is flawed, is infinitely better than a ladder grind system. A ladder grind system emphasizes newb bashing and cheeses just as much, if not more so...
there are many smurfs/newb bashers in sc2 too lol (not to mention all those toxic childish NA clans)... in addition to what blade said, worst is there are tons of hackers at masters and above (much more so than BW). but with automated system you are forced to face them when there are few people laddering. with BW lobby system i can immediately note and omit those fuckers like the plague. also you get to racepick in BW easily. one race mentality is just silly purist principle that only matters for those going pro, sometimes i just don't want to play mirror matchups... so "infinitely better" is complete hyperbole. its not perfect either.
isn't it much harder to hack now with lotv? i'm sure it will be harder now than it was in hots and wol, especially if blizzard keeps their promise and introduces better anticheating measures like they promised.
On February 24 2016 08:00 KawaiiSCV wrote: Like the title says, I'm a top Masters SC2 player who's switching to BW.
I really feel in love with the game in the last few weeks and now I want to go online and see how good I can become. Decided to play Terran like in SC2 and right now I'm looking for builds.
Are there solid Terran timing attacks in BW? Because I'd love to have 1 aggressive timing per match-up to practice and get into the game.
Thanks in advance~
Top Korean Terran Sea teaches you Terran with English Subtitles:
Very interesting topic when people from new game come to classic one. I fell in love with bw some months ago too, not having played the newer game seriously (well maybe on an event some times) To me it is really fun even though I'm bad and still learning the mechanics in priority, it feels more natural every week and alot of people play it.
Seems weird that you'd ask if BW had aggressive timings and strategies... Are you really masters in sc2? It seems odd if you're asking this question. Liquipedia has the main build orders under their SC strategy and build orders section. It also says what to watch out for to expect cheese.
On April 16 2016 13:37 Nymphaceae wrote: Seems weird that you'd ask if BW had aggressive timings and strategies... Are you really masters in sc2? It seems odd if you're asking this question. Liquipedia has the main build orders under their SC strategy and build orders section. It also says what to watch out for to expect cheese.
Discussion is really important no matter what level of player you are. I often ask questions that I know answers too, but hearing the responses from other players often reveals aspects of the game I didn't think about. Liquipedia is great, but open discussion can be invaluable.
On April 16 2016 13:37 Nymphaceae wrote: Seems weird that you'd ask if BW had aggressive timings and strategies... Are you really masters in sc2? It seems odd if you're asking this question. Liquipedia has the main build orders under their SC strategy and build orders section. It also says what to watch out for to expect cheese.
Discussion is really important no matter what level of player you are. I often ask questions that I know answers too, but hearing the responses from other players often reveals aspects of the game I didn't think about. Liquipedia is great, but open discussion can be invaluable.
There's like several pages for each race, on how to open just for 1 MU.
On April 16 2016 13:37 Nymphaceae wrote: Seems weird that you'd ask if BW had aggressive timings and strategies... Are you really masters in sc2? It seems odd if you're asking this question. Liquipedia has the main build orders under their SC strategy and build orders section. It also says what to watch out for to expect cheese.
Discussion is really important no matter what level of player you are. I often ask questions that I know answers too, but hearing the responses from other players often reveals aspects of the game I didn't think about. Liquipedia is great, but open discussion can be invaluable.
There's like several pages for each race, on how to open just for 1 MU.
Yeah, but will the wiki tell you what is best for the current meta? What works well for the current map pool? I feel like you missed my point when I said discussion was important. Anyone can read a build order, but discussing when and why to use one gives you a deeper understanding then just build X at time Y.
On April 16 2016 13:37 Nymphaceae wrote: Seems weird that you'd ask if BW had aggressive timings and strategies... Are you really masters in sc2? It seems odd if you're asking this question. Liquipedia has the main build orders under their SC strategy and build orders section. It also says what to watch out for to expect cheese.
Discussion is really important no matter what level of player you are. I often ask questions that I know answers too, but hearing the responses from other players often reveals aspects of the game I didn't think about. Liquipedia is great, but open discussion can be invaluable.
There's like several pages for each race, on how to open just for 1 MU.
A parallel argument to yours would be that we don't need teachers because we have textbooks, which is simply untrue.
"Seems weird that you'd ask if Calculus has constants and trigonometry identities... Are you really an Honors Trigonometry student? It seems off if you're asking this question. Textbooks have the main properties under their Calculus section. It also says what to do when you are trying to graph."
Yea, I'd rather ask someone who knows Calculus than read a textbook trying to find general information.