|
On July 20 2012 02:52 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 00:49 korona wrote:On July 20 2012 00:16 dacimvrl wrote: what's the big deal?
i only see it as a smurf account that will go inactive in a season
most pros have smurf accounts, so? One big difference is that a top level player's smurf will not start from bronze level. If they have had their MMR reset their MMR will start around platinum/diamond level if and when they win all their 5 placement matches. It does not take many matches for them to start facing master level opponents after that. But if you level a bronze account, it takes some 50 to 100 straight wins to level it up to master. Lots of low level opponents are crushed during that journey. And if the leveler seeks to humiliate his opponents like e.g. Dragon often does, it makes it even worse. The SC2 userbase is getting smaller and ladder anxiety is a real issue. The ladder is the only competitive arena for large portion of the active players, who are not good enough to compete in tournaments. Powerleveling should be frowned upon and if somebody does it publicly there should be consequences. Lol. Do those low level opponents know the difference? Someone trying to get out of bronze as fast as possible will just 4 gate/2 rax/x pool. I can't imagine a bronze league player will analyze the game and immediately conclude their opponent was several leagues above them on a smurf. And really, if they did come to that conclusion, how often do they analyze ANY game they lose overwhelmingly and conclude it was a smurf for the sake of feeling better? I can just imagine... " Shit, that four gate hit 30 seconds faster than normal. What a fucking smurfer. I NEED TO GO ON TL AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS RIGHT AWAY!" It just goes back to the supposed smurfing players who are apparently rampant in low leagues tanking their MMR and fucking with low level players. How in the world do you distinguish a loss where the player doesn't immediately leave? How do you enforce players always playing to their full potential with such objectivity? You can't. There is nothing funny here. Things are not black and white. Yes the lowest level of players most likely do things by a feeling and not take the game too seriously. But there are lots of people between lowest bronze & masters and 'all of them' are 'low level' compared to the professional. RTS games are not casual games. The higher you go, the more dedicated in general people are. Many are trying to improve and care about their ladder rankings. Most likely you have noticed that there are already 'too many' threads about ladder anxiety here in TL and thus you should have understood that it is not a laughing matter, but reality for some people.
On July 20 2012 02:52 rd wrote: Like, you almost imply the only opponents these players fight are smurfs and that the ladder is such a failure they actually can't compete with their peers which is just total bullshit. Also lol @ ladder anxiety. Things are not black and white. I am not implying that most players at lower levels are smurfs. It should be easy for anybody to understand that the smurfs are a minority at any level. But even minorities can affect individuals experience. For example if gamer A commits one evening per week for SC2 (~ 5 games) and he is unlucky and gets paired with a smurf, then suddenly a significant portion of his opponents that evening were smurfs.
And yes. The lowest level of casual players do not care about community sites and come here shouting when they face a smurf. But it is little puzzling when some people seem to come here shouting how it is ok to cheat the system and how people should not complain about it.
|
On July 20 2012 04:14 TRaFFiC wrote: These people should all be banned and furthermore, there should only be 1 account allowed in GM per person. It's disrespectful to the high masters trying to squeeze in and bad for GROWTH of sc2 overall.
It's a good idea, how do you propose to do it? People have to send in their ID and submit a form to get in GM?
|
I'm sure tons of people have already said this in the thread, but paying to have someone "level" your account just makes zero sense at all.
As far as punishment, I don't think the effort required to catch and punish these people really would be worth it, as they aren't really hurting anyone, other than you may randomly happen upon playing some progamer who's account is in platinum or diamond and get destroyed. It's really up to Blizzard if they think it's worth spending resources on it.
|
I still find it hilarious how some consider this a serious threat to the "competitive integrity" of the ladder, while GM on the most competitive server (KR) has more anonymous barcode accounts than ones with proper names. Account sharing (which boosting is a form of) does not make the ladder less competitive (unlike hacking, for instance) - it just makes ranks and points less meaningful. Still, this is a weird thing to be upset about, since it's Blizzard themselves who cooked up this weird league/division system with hidden MMR and extremely unclear promotion/demotion criteria.
In essence, if you want ladder rank to mean something, convince Blizzard to change GM and make MMR visible for everyone. As opposed to complaining about fringe phenomena like this.
|
If you're willing to pay to have your SC2 account power-laddered to Grandmaster, surely you'd be willing to pay a professional gamer money to give you coaching lessons and perhaps get you to that level.
|
On July 20 2012 04:50 korona wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 02:52 rd wrote:On July 20 2012 00:49 korona wrote:On July 20 2012 00:16 dacimvrl wrote: what's the big deal?
i only see it as a smurf account that will go inactive in a season
most pros have smurf accounts, so? One big difference is that a top level player's smurf will not start from bronze level. If they have had their MMR reset their MMR will start around platinum/diamond level if and when they win all their 5 placement matches. It does not take many matches for them to start facing master level opponents after that. But if you level a bronze account, it takes some 50 to 100 straight wins to level it up to master. Lots of low level opponents are crushed during that journey. And if the leveler seeks to humiliate his opponents like e.g. Dragon often does, it makes it even worse. The SC2 userbase is getting smaller and ladder anxiety is a real issue. The ladder is the only competitive arena for large portion of the active players, who are not good enough to compete in tournaments. Powerleveling should be frowned upon and if somebody does it publicly there should be consequences. Lol. Do those low level opponents know the difference? Someone trying to get out of bronze as fast as possible will just 4 gate/2 rax/x pool. I can't imagine a bronze league player will analyze the game and immediately conclude their opponent was several leagues above them on a smurf. And really, if they did come to that conclusion, how often do they analyze ANY game they lose overwhelmingly and conclude it was a smurf for the sake of feeling better? I can just imagine... " Shit, that four gate hit 30 seconds faster than normal. What a fucking smurfer. I NEED TO GO ON TL AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS RIGHT AWAY!" It just goes back to the supposed smurfing players who are apparently rampant in low leagues tanking their MMR and fucking with low level players. How in the world do you distinguish a loss where the player doesn't immediately leave? How do you enforce players always playing to their full potential with such objectivity? You can't. There is nothing funny here. Things are not black and white. Yes the lowest level of players most likely do things by a feeling and not take the game too seriously. But there are lots of people between lowest bronze & masters and 'all of them' are 'low level' compared to the professional. RTS games are not casual games. The higher you go, the more dedicated in general people are. Many are trying to improve and care about their ladder rankings. Most likely you have noticed that there are already 'too many' threads about ladder anxiety here in TL and thus you should have understood that it is not a laughing matter, but reality for some people. Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 02:52 rd wrote: Like, you almost imply the only opponents these players fight are smurfs and that the ladder is such a failure they actually can't compete with their peers which is just total bullshit. Also lol @ ladder anxiety. Things are not black and white. I am not implying that most players at lower levels are smurfs. It should be easy for anybody to understand that the smurfs are a minority at any level. But even minorities can affect individuals experience. For example if gamer A commits one evening per week for SC2 (~ 5 games) and he is unlucky and gets paired with a smurf, then suddenly a significant portion of his opponents that evening were smurfs. And yes. The lowest level of casual players do not care about community sites and come here shouting when they face a smurf. But it is little puzzling when some people seem to come here shouting how it is ok to cheat the system and how people should not complain about it.
When did I say people weren't trying to improve their ranking? I assure you, that most likely, 95-99% of players have not been affected by this. The 1% who actually were affected this probably didn't even know it was a smurf 90% of the time. I just don't see any posts about players pointing to games with an actual smurf they lost horrendously to and how traumatized they were -- but thats probably because I just don't read them. Not consecutive games. Not a majority of games in a sample. Not even often, nor frequently. Just once. It probably happens more often than we realize but it's simply distinguishing differences between what is ultimately a loss.
I probably ran into a couple smurfs too. I'd have no idea though because I don't check every opponent I fight to see if they were a smurf, and if they were I wouldn't really care otherwise. If anything had I known, the replay would have been that much more valuable to me. One of the reasons why some people pay for this service is to get games vs much higher level players and getting to see the stark contrast in skill play out so they have a reference to improve upon.
And still, ladder anxiety. lol. The ridiculous irony is that part of the reason for ladder anxiety is created by the very ladder system whose integrity you're trying to uphold.
|
Doesn't this also mean that all the people like ST_Bomber, MKP, Creator, and the IM teamhouse would get banned? We all know that IM_TV is a GM account used a lot by IM players when they decide to stream. Bomber has his main and Ares, MKP and Creator have god knows how many barcode accounts. Hell, in that case then HuK should get banned cuz of Sad, Depression, and his main.
|
On July 20 2012 05:41 Whatson wrote: Doesn't this also mean that all the people like ST_Bomber, MKP, Creator, and the IM teamhouse would get banned? We all know that IM_TV is a GM account used a lot by IM players when they decide to stream. Bomber has his main and Ares, MKP and Creator have god knows how many barcode accounts. Hell, in that case then HuK should get banned cuz of Sad, Depression, and his main.
I don't have any problem with people leveling up multiple accounts if they feel it necessary, especially if its a barcode account. The issue I have with doing it for others is that it gives them legitimacy not deserved. For example, that person would say that they are GM and would offer coaching. Or they'd simply use it to brag and act like they knew what they were talking about.
|
On July 20 2012 05:45 ronpaul012 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 05:41 Whatson wrote: Doesn't this also mean that all the people like ST_Bomber, MKP, Creator, and the IM teamhouse would get banned? We all know that IM_TV is a GM account used a lot by IM players when they decide to stream. Bomber has his main and Ares, MKP and Creator have god knows how many barcode accounts. Hell, in that case then HuK should get banned cuz of Sad, Depression, and his main. I don't have any problem with people leveling up multiple accounts if they feel it necessary, especially if its a barcode account. The issue I have with doing it for others is that it gives them legitimacy not deserved. For example, that person would say that they are GM and would offer coaching. Or they'd simply use it to brag and act like they knew what they were talking about.
Why do you give a fuck what people do with their accounts?
Do you also think black belts should be illegal for market because with them people can lie that they are good at Karate when they are not.
|
On July 20 2012 05:38 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 04:50 korona wrote:On July 20 2012 02:52 rd wrote:On July 20 2012 00:49 korona wrote:On July 20 2012 00:16 dacimvrl wrote: what's the big deal?
i only see it as a smurf account that will go inactive in a season
most pros have smurf accounts, so? One big difference is that a top level player's smurf will not start from bronze level. If they have had their MMR reset their MMR will start around platinum/diamond level if and when they win all their 5 placement matches. It does not take many matches for them to start facing master level opponents after that. But if you level a bronze account, it takes some 50 to 100 straight wins to level it up to master. Lots of low level opponents are crushed during that journey. And if the leveler seeks to humiliate his opponents like e.g. Dragon often does, it makes it even worse. The SC2 userbase is getting smaller and ladder anxiety is a real issue. The ladder is the only competitive arena for large portion of the active players, who are not good enough to compete in tournaments. Powerleveling should be frowned upon and if somebody does it publicly there should be consequences. Lol. Do those low level opponents know the difference? Someone trying to get out of bronze as fast as possible will just 4 gate/2 rax/x pool. I can't imagine a bronze league player will analyze the game and immediately conclude their opponent was several leagues above them on a smurf. And really, if they did come to that conclusion, how often do they analyze ANY game they lose overwhelmingly and conclude it was a smurf for the sake of feeling better? I can just imagine... " Shit, that four gate hit 30 seconds faster than normal. What a fucking smurfer. I NEED TO GO ON TL AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS RIGHT AWAY!" It just goes back to the supposed smurfing players who are apparently rampant in low leagues tanking their MMR and fucking with low level players. How in the world do you distinguish a loss where the player doesn't immediately leave? How do you enforce players always playing to their full potential with such objectivity? You can't. There is nothing funny here. Things are not black and white. Yes the lowest level of players most likely do things by a feeling and not take the game too seriously. But there are lots of people between lowest bronze & masters and 'all of them' are 'low level' compared to the professional. RTS games are not casual games. The higher you go, the more dedicated in general people are. Many are trying to improve and care about their ladder rankings. Most likely you have noticed that there are already 'too many' threads about ladder anxiety here in TL and thus you should have understood that it is not a laughing matter, but reality for some people. On July 20 2012 02:52 rd wrote: Like, you almost imply the only opponents these players fight are smurfs and that the ladder is such a failure they actually can't compete with their peers which is just total bullshit. Also lol @ ladder anxiety. Things are not black and white. I am not implying that most players at lower levels are smurfs. It should be easy for anybody to understand that the smurfs are a minority at any level. But even minorities can affect individuals experience. For example if gamer A commits one evening per week for SC2 (~ 5 games) and he is unlucky and gets paired with a smurf, then suddenly a significant portion of his opponents that evening were smurfs. And yes. The lowest level of casual players do not care about community sites and come here shouting when they face a smurf. But it is little puzzling when some people seem to come here shouting how it is ok to cheat the system and how people should not complain about it. When did I say people weren't trying to improve their ranking? I assure you, that most likely, 95-99% of players have not been affected by this. The 1% who actually were affected this probably didn't even know it was a smurf 90% of the time. I just don't see any posts about players pointing to games with an actual smurf they lost horrendously to and how traumatized they were -- but thats probably because I just don't read them. Not consecutive games. Not a majority of games in a sample. Not even often, nor frequently. Just once. It probably happens more often than we realize but it's simply distinguishing differences between what is ultimately a loss. I probably ran into a couple smurfs too. I'd have no idea though because I don't check every opponent I fight to see if they were a smurf, and if they were I wouldn't really care otherwise. If anything had I known, the replay would have been that much more valuable to me. One of the reasons why some people pay for this service is to get games vs much higher level players and getting to see the stark contrast in skill play out so they have a reference to improve upon. And still, ladder anxiety. lol. The ridiculous irony is that part of the reason for ladder anxiety is created by the very ladder system whose integrity you're trying to uphold. You also stated earlier e.g. that powerleveling has ruined the game for less than 10 people. You often generalize things and state extremes. Instead of arguing that people who are concerned about MMR abuse, powerleveling & smurfing are misguided, it would be better for you to try explain why you think cheating the system & MMR abuse is ok.
Even if the smurfs are not the main topic of this thread, I would say that all active players (who have lots of matches under their belt) have faced plenty of smurfs, even if they do not know it (Of course the portion of the smurf matches of all matches is low). This should be obvious e.g. by observing (exception high masters) how suddenly the portion of opponents leaving the game in the beginning of match suddenly rises when the ladder is locked in the end of the season. By viewing the match histories it is obvious that many of these end-of-the-season-leavers are actually MMR abusers who want to smurf during the next season.
|
On July 20 2012 06:04 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 05:45 ronpaul012 wrote:On July 20 2012 05:41 Whatson wrote: Doesn't this also mean that all the people like ST_Bomber, MKP, Creator, and the IM teamhouse would get banned? We all know that IM_TV is a GM account used a lot by IM players when they decide to stream. Bomber has his main and Ares, MKP and Creator have god knows how many barcode accounts. Hell, in that case then HuK should get banned cuz of Sad, Depression, and his main. I don't have any problem with people leveling up multiple accounts if they feel it necessary, especially if its a barcode account. The issue I have with doing it for others is that it gives them legitimacy not deserved. For example, that person would say that they are GM and would offer coaching. Or they'd simply use it to brag and act like they knew what they were talking about. Why do you give a fuck what people do with their accounts? Do you also think black belts should be illegal for market because with them people can lie that they are good at Karate when they are not.
If that person with that black belt around their waste then uses it to leverage an advantage, or even worse, make money off of it, then yes I have a problem with it.
|
Personally I'm surprised that this is something that the SC2 community would accept, let alone in some cases defend, while it is not so big an issue that it would destroy the scene, it has the potential to significantly retard an up and coming players progress to becoming pro.
The biggest point people seem to use defending this is that pro-gamers need money and this is a way for them to supplement their income, that's not an acceptable excuse to abuse the system, that is a problem that their teams need to face. If their income is insufficient to sustain their career then their team management is failing them and they need to look at their contract and other options. In any sport sponsorship works off how well you do and the exposure you get, and until you're at the extreme highest levels of pay players in general are not paid a wage that completely supports them, it changes from sport to sport depending on the following and money in it, but even if you look at professional motorcycling there are riders in what would be considered very high levels of the competition who still need to work a job in order to support themselves. E-Sports is very young, the exposure is much smaller and so you can expect that a lot less of the player base would be able to completely support themselves financially by playing. This does not give them an excuse to abuse the system.
It hurts aspiring semi-pro players by limiting their exposure and sponsorship options, every comment on here is about how GM doesn't matter, everyone is still trying to get in to GM however. Being in GM broadcasts your name to anyone interested on your sever and while people following the scene closely will know the flaws in the ladder system people and potential sponsors taking a passing interest in the scene are immediately informed that the GM players are the very best 200 players on that server and that impacts them, if I have an aspiring pro player come up to me seeking some low level of sponsorship and a quick internet search shows me that he's not able to achieve even the top 200 on a server, what faith will that give me in his abilities to broadcast my companies name in tournaments?
Lastly I can see this eventually damaging the integrity of tournaments, the assumption is being made in this thread that the issue stops with leveling. If pro-gamers are supported in basically creating "fame" for other people for money I can see little stopping them from eventually playing under other peoples accounts in low-mid level online tournaments or even tournaments where they see themselves being knocked out of early, they get money, they get extra games at a high level to train with and as long as the tournament is online they can remain completely anonymous and severely slowing down the career progression of the semi-pro players who would have otherwise used that tournament to get exposure.
|
On July 20 2012 07:45 yamtaro wrote: Personally I'm surprised that this is something that the SC2 community would accept, let alone in some cases defend, while it is not so big an issue that it would destroy the scene, it has the potential to significantly retard an up and coming players progress to becoming pro.
The biggest point people seem to use defending this is that pro-gamers need money and this is a way for them to supplement their income, that's not an acceptable excuse to abuse the system, that is a problem that their teams need to face. If their income is insufficient to sustain their career then their team management is failing them and they need to look at their contract and other options. In any sport sponsorship works off how well you do and the exposure you get, and until you're at the extreme highest levels of pay players in general are not paid a wage that completely supports them, it changes from sport to sport depending on the following and money in it, but even if you look at professional motorcycling there are riders in what would be considered very high levels of the competition who still need to work a job in order to support themselves. E-Sports is very young, the exposure is much smaller and so you can expect that a lot less of the player base would be able to completely support themselves financially by playing. This does not give them an excuse to abuse the system.
It hurts aspiring semi-pro players by limiting their exposure and sponsorship options, every comment on here is about how GM doesn't matter, everyone is still trying to get in to GM however. Being in GM broadcasts your name to anyone interested on your sever and while people following the scene closely will know the flaws in the ladder system people and potential sponsors taking a passing interest in the scene are immediately informed that the GM players are the very best 200 players on that server and that impacts them, if I have an aspiring pro player come up to me seeking some low level of sponsorship and a quick internet search shows me that he's not able to achieve even the top 200 on a server, what faith will that give me in his abilities to broadcast my companies name in tournaments?
Lastly I can see this eventually damaging the integrity of tournaments, the assumption is being made in this thread that the issue stops with leveling. If pro-gamers are supported in basically creating "fame" for other people for money I can see little stopping them from eventually playing under other peoples accounts in low-mid level online tournaments or even tournaments where they see themselves being knocked out of early, they get money, they get extra games at a high level to train with and as long as the tournament is online they can remain completely anonymous and severely slowing down the career progression of the semi-pro players who would have otherwise used that tournament to get exposure. the problem with this argument is that you could also use it to condemn pros who have multiple accounts in GM. that's basically what leveling an account is. you're paying a pro to give you one of his accounts (functionally).
|
I really don't think anyone should expel energy caring about this...
It's just ladder, progamers would aren't making the big bucks can supplement their meager income from idiots, the person will fall back down once they do play. It's the same as having multiple accounts, pretty much
Just seems like you want to start a reddit like witch hunt to me. :/
|
Which pro's offered powerleveling then guys?
|
On July 20 2012 07:45 yamtaro wrote: Personally I'm surprised that this is something that the SC2 community would accept, let alone in some cases defend, while it is not so big an issue that it would destroy the scene, it has the potential to significantly retard an up and coming players progress to becoming pro.
The biggest point people seem to use defending this is that pro-gamers need money and this is a way for them to supplement their income, that's not an acceptable excuse to abuse the system, that is a problem that their teams need to face. If their income is insufficient to sustain their career then their team management is failing them and they need to look at their contract and other options. In any sport sponsorship works off how well you do and the exposure you get, and until you're at the extreme highest levels of pay players in general are not paid a wage that completely supports them, it changes from sport to sport depending on the following and money in it, but even if you look at professional motorcycling there are riders in what would be considered very high levels of the competition who still need to work a job in order to support themselves. E-Sports is very young, the exposure is much smaller and so you can expect that a lot less of the player base would be able to completely support themselves financially by playing. This does not give them an excuse to abuse the system.
It hurts aspiring semi-pro players by limiting their exposure and sponsorship options, every comment on here is about how GM doesn't matter, everyone is still trying to get in to GM however. Being in GM broadcasts your name to anyone interested on your sever and while people following the scene closely will know the flaws in the ladder system people and potential sponsors taking a passing interest in the scene are immediately informed that the GM players are the very best 200 players on that server and that impacts them, if I have an aspiring pro player come up to me seeking some low level of sponsorship and a quick internet search shows me that he's not able to achieve even the top 200 on a server, what faith will that give me in his abilities to broadcast my companies name in tournaments?
Lastly I can see this eventually damaging the integrity of tournaments, the assumption is being made in this thread that the issue stops with leveling. If pro-gamers are supported in basically creating "fame" for other people for money I can see little stopping them from eventually playing under other peoples accounts in low-mid level online tournaments or even tournaments where they see themselves being knocked out of early, they get money, they get extra games at a high level to train with and as long as the tournament is online they can remain completely anonymous and severely slowing down the career progression of the semi-pro players who would have otherwise used that tournament to get exposure.
Can you give me an example of a player who made it into the pro scene through his grandmaster status alone, or by large part due to his grandmaster status?
|
On July 20 2012 11:38 Harbinger631 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 07:45 yamtaro wrote: Personally I'm surprised that this is something that the SC2 community would accept, let alone in some cases defend, while it is not so big an issue that it would destroy the scene, it has the potential to significantly retard an up and coming players progress to becoming pro.
The biggest point people seem to use defending this is that pro-gamers need money and this is a way for them to supplement their income, that's not an acceptable excuse to abuse the system, that is a problem that their teams need to face. If their income is insufficient to sustain their career then their team management is failing them and they need to look at their contract and other options. In any sport sponsorship works off how well you do and the exposure you get, and until you're at the extreme highest levels of pay players in general are not paid a wage that completely supports them, it changes from sport to sport depending on the following and money in it, but even if you look at professional motorcycling there are riders in what would be considered very high levels of the competition who still need to work a job in order to support themselves. E-Sports is very young, the exposure is much smaller and so you can expect that a lot less of the player base would be able to completely support themselves financially by playing. This does not give them an excuse to abuse the system.
It hurts aspiring semi-pro players by limiting their exposure and sponsorship options, every comment on here is about how GM doesn't matter, everyone is still trying to get in to GM however. Being in GM broadcasts your name to anyone interested on your sever and while people following the scene closely will know the flaws in the ladder system people and potential sponsors taking a passing interest in the scene are immediately informed that the GM players are the very best 200 players on that server and that impacts them, if I have an aspiring pro player come up to me seeking some low level of sponsorship and a quick internet search shows me that he's not able to achieve even the top 200 on a server, what faith will that give me in his abilities to broadcast my companies name in tournaments?
Lastly I can see this eventually damaging the integrity of tournaments, the assumption is being made in this thread that the issue stops with leveling. If pro-gamers are supported in basically creating "fame" for other people for money I can see little stopping them from eventually playing under other peoples accounts in low-mid level online tournaments or even tournaments where they see themselves being knocked out of early, they get money, they get extra games at a high level to train with and as long as the tournament is online they can remain completely anonymous and severely slowing down the career progression of the semi-pro players who would have otherwise used that tournament to get exposure. Can you give me an example of a player who made it into the pro scene through his grandmaster status alone, or by large part due to his grandmaster status?
Huk is probably the biggest example, there was no GM at that time but you could still see how you stacked up with sc2 ranks. Huk made a name for himself as a ladder warrior, and it took him some time to prove himself as a true player after he signed with Liquid.
|
I would argue that Huk's multiple MLG 1st places is what got him into Liquid, not his ladder rank.
|
On July 20 2012 05:45 ronpaul012 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 05:41 Whatson wrote: Doesn't this also mean that all the people like ST_Bomber, MKP, Creator, and the IM teamhouse would get banned? We all know that IM_TV is a GM account used a lot by IM players when they decide to stream. Bomber has his main and Ares, MKP and Creator have god knows how many barcode accounts. Hell, in that case then HuK should get banned cuz of Sad, Depression, and his main. I don't have any problem with people leveling up multiple accounts if they feel it necessary, especially if its a barcode account. The issue I have with doing it for others is that it gives them legitimacy not deserved. For example, that person would say that they are GM and would offer coaching. Or they'd simply use it to brag and act like they knew what they were talking about.
You mean like people on the internet?
After watching the tasteless episode of real talk I was a bit skeptical of his harsh words on the community - but seeing how threads like this one evolve and turn nothing of importance into a shitfest, he is completely right and it is unhealthy and irresponsible to go through all this fake outrage. Just rubbish.
|
On July 20 2012 04:58 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 04:14 TRaFFiC wrote: These people should all be banned and furthermore, there should only be 1 account allowed in GM per person. It's disrespectful to the high masters trying to squeeze in and bad for GROWTH of sc2 overall. It's a good idea, how do you propose to do it? People have to send in their ID and submit a form to get in GM?
Whatever it takes. IP can be used to link accounts. I used to play other games where they banned people from IP consistently. I'm not so in the know, but I know they're ways.
"Account sharing (which boosting is a form of) does not make the ladder less competitive"
Of course it does since I bet my bottom dollar these people let these accounts sit inactive. Having inactive accounts in the highest ranks of the world is horrible. Wake up and smell the coffee, yo.
|
|
|
|