Skill level, matchmaking.

[itsarabbit]

EDIT: My method got scrapped, any idea on how to seperate all the players into grades?

[Gamewiz]

This isn't very reliable. Going against a comp player is a completely different strategy than facing a human opponent. I could be frickin' awesome against the best computer AI out there, but could be slaughtered by a human player.

It's two completely different playstyles.

[cyricc]

This isn't very reliable. Going against a comp player is a completely different strategy than facing a human opponent. I could be frickin' awesome against the best computer AI out there, but could be slaughtered by a human player.

It's two completely different playstyles.

Exactly, a human has what a comp wont for a long time, reasoning skills. We can make on the fly strategies and decisions while comps can only look through a list of "if's" and "else's". Not only that but it could work backwards also, someones weak strats against a comp could be very effective against humans.

[ProoM]

Was piece of cake for me against 5.1 so far ^^. You can add me to the list.

[RaTcHeT302]

You should also include a list for people that aren't bad but they neither are extremely good. Can't find the right word now...

[itsarabbit]

Thisisn't very reliable. Going against a comp player is a completelydifferent strategy than facing a human opponent. I could be frickin'awesome against the best computer AI out there, but could beslaughtered by a human player.

It's two completely different playstyles.

Its the closest we can come up with right now.

You should also include a list for people that aren't bad but they neither are extremely good. Can't find the right word now...

Yeah, thats basically mediocre, I think.

Anyways, the point of this threads is that the newbies won't get slaughtered by the pros, due to basic and advanced knowledge on how the game works.

[PreTenD]

I suppose if that's the criteria put me as Pro

[itsarabbit]

Oh, and By the way, since the 5.1 isn't so hard I will adjust this after the next version or something

[ProoM]

Why not grouping people based on they Iccup ranks on sc1 ;P?

[itsarabbit]

Why not grouping people based on they Iccup ranks on sc1 ;P?

Because everyone haven't played SC1.
I don't even know what Iccup is, but I still know alot of different builds and strategies thanks to youtube and SC2.
Besides, SC2 is a different game.

[Xenoris]

I believe im in the mediocre section although i beat it so many times.

[TokeGaming]

I think iccup ratings would be best.


Someone who was "good" at starcraft broodwar WILL be better than someone who plays different RTS's occasionally and has watched some starcraft 2 streams and knows all the units, simply because if you are very good at the basics you can adjust in game.


I never watched any SC2 streams or anything, and Ive been playing 1v1/FFA against the AI's sense v4 and have yet to lose a game or even come close using random build orders and random matchups. I think this is because I was a "strong" (using that vaguely) SC:BW player (C+/B- iccup).


I think a rating should go...


New to RTS's
Casual gamer (this would be beating comps or on their relative level)
RTS gamer (beating comps easily)
ICCUP ranking (starcraft was one of the most competetive RTS's and most iccup gamers were very good compared to the competition in other RTS games)


Thats just my opinion

[itsarabbit]

So people who haven't played starcraft online is autonoob?

[Gaspa79]

This method is just plain stupid.

I'm no pro and I can beat 5.1 AI using the mouse with my left hand.

[PreTenD]

No doubt Iccup are not bad players however, I only played 1 game on Iccup.
Does that make me bad?
I played TAOW, and Toyland, and Pogi.
No ratings there, Iccup rankings are irrelevant, on a forum where half of the people haven't played on it.