View Full Version : Stop letting less than qualified players post advice
Branket
11-07-2007, 05:12 PM
Half of the people with 2k ratings are giving people bad advice and dunno what they are doing lol
imo limits should be like 2.4k 2v2 if your playing warrior druid
2.3k 3v3 if your playing warrior warlock druid
2.4k if your playing rogue warlock
and so on and so on
Tyveris
11-08-2007, 01:35 AM
New rating restrictions will come into effect on November 20th (Season 3). In the meantime, if you find users that seem like they shouldn't be here, please send me their name and I will look into/take care of it.
Letters
11-08-2007, 10:44 AM
I'm tired of people posting the same questions over and over. I come here to see 50 new "is this combo good" posts. Need to enforce that users actually use the search function before they post something that's been asked 10 times already.
Tyveris
11-08-2007, 10:59 AM
I'm tired of people posting the same questions over and over. I come here to see 50 new "is this combo good" posts. Need to enforce that users actually use the search function before they post something that's been asked 10 times already.
That is also why we are trying to put together some pages for talent questions, general class strats, and common makeups.
We will be funneling through the posts this weekend to see what we can put together.
buena
11-08-2007, 01:41 PM
That is also why we are trying to put together some pages for talent questions, general class strats, and common makeups.
We will be funneling through the posts this weekend to see what we can put together.
IMO make a sticky "Is this rating good enough for gladiator?" thread that links the total number of teams in each BG and explains about the inactive clearing. If people still post it, delete it.
Tyveris
11-08-2007, 02:52 PM
IMO make a sticky "Is this rating good enough for gladiator?" thread that links the total number of teams in each BG and explains about the inactive clearing. If people still post it, delete it.
Good idea, doing that now.
New rating restrictions will come into effect on November 20th (Season 3). In the meantime, if you find users that seem like they shouldn't be here, please send me their name and I will look into/take care of it.
What will the new rating restrictions be?
twizta
11-10-2007, 05:27 PM
i just think its funny
Tyveris
11-10-2007, 05:47 PM
What will the new rating restrictions be?
Basically, we are going to give you a score based on your team rating/ranking (formula still to be finalized). You won't be penalized for being on teams with friends, only rewarded for high level teams. Also, we plan on using the personal rating as a validation tool to make sure only those truly active on the team will get access.
Basically, we are going to give you a score based on your team rating/ranking (formula still to be finalized). You won't be penalized for being on teams with friends, only rewarded for high level teams. Also, we plan on using the personal rating as a validation tool to make sure only those truly active on the team will get access.
Sounds good.
Will all the users have to re-qualify to post then?
Tyveris
11-10-2007, 06:15 PM
Sounds good.
Will all the users have to re-qualify to post then?
We will probably have a grace period for the first few weeks, then we may just strip access from everyone and rerun the requirements check to re-grant access. We want to wait to give everyone a chance to get going again in Season 3 first.
Strategies differ... While yours may vary from the next guys, that is not to say you are exactly wrong or far superior.
This forum would lack content if everyone thought there was only one way to do something. I am not defending poor ideas, but poor ideas still contribute to discussions. If I offer bad advice and another member adds some constructive criticism to my post, my post was that much more worth posting and now you have two players who gained some more insight instead of just one.
If you see some "poor" ideas, why not post your input as to why they could do better constructively. The OP here seems to me to be more like QQing, then offering help. If I was looking for that I can just go to the wow forums, there is plenty there to be had.
Tyveris
11-10-2007, 06:36 PM
While his post was not exactly constructed well for discussion, the topic has come up quite a few times which is why I figured I would apply. Yes, we want to leave things on a slightly more lenient side so there is discussion. We can always moderate those who cause issues.
Images
11-10-2007, 07:08 PM
Will s2 Gladiators get access instantly, or will everyone's access be determined on ratings?
Tyveris
11-10-2007, 07:32 PM
Will s2 Gladiators get access instantly, or will everyone's access be determined on ratings?
Yes, S2 gladiator will instant access and the rest will be rating based, similar to how it is now. How we deal with the first few weeks in the season is still being sorted out.
buena
11-10-2007, 09:11 PM
Hey that's pretty ballsy to actually strip access, I figured there would be some kind of grandfather clause.
Probably the right move tho even if it loses you some users at first. This site's lifeblood is credibility, and it loses some everytime an at-one-time-2k warlock posts bad advice in the public section.
Tyveris
11-10-2007, 09:25 PM
We also want to make sure posters are active in the arena and as the game is continually changing, what I remember from S1 Week 1 is no longer accurate. If someone loses it who feels they shouldn't have, we can handle it on a case by case basis.
Its possible to be good at playing without being good at making up strats
Warlocks and druids should require higher rating in 2v2 imo
igrek312
11-10-2007, 10:10 PM
Even gladiators from "sucky" battlegroups like Emberstorm and Retaliation?
Tyveris
11-10-2007, 11:01 PM
Even gladiators from "sucky" battlegroups like Emberstorm and Retaliation?
Emberstorm will have 19 2v2, 3 5v5, and 9 3v3. Who is to say that the #1 Gladiator from Emberstorm is worse than the #111 Gladiator from BG9?
Hoove
11-12-2007, 04:42 PM
Emberstorm will have 19 2v2, 3 5v5, and 9 3v3. Who is to say that the #1 Gladiator from Emberstorm is worse than the #111 Gladiator from BG9?
Considering that will probably be me I have to say yes.
Laraon
11-12-2007, 04:55 PM
I find it in bad taste to slander other battlegroups.
And, as Tyveris said before, I'm one of those people that does 3s and 5s with friends, I'd appreciate you leaving those out of any reply.
Me and my partner worked hard, going against the grain as a warrior.shammy team, in a double dps-heavy battlegroup, and recently broke 2k (neither of us arenad in s1, we started playing together about...2 months ago...so I view this as an achievement)
If you were to say that it takes more effort in a certain battlegroup, and that ability to post should vary by rankings in which battlegroup you are in, it also should take into account the battlegroups metagame. That can be "exploited" to some extent to help give yourselves an edge; if you are on one of those teams.
Yes, my advice isn't going to be as good as those who play in the 2400s in all brackets, but I do my research, and know what works for me and others. Next season I'll be playing with my shamans druid, who is almost 70. We won't have to work as hard, but I can guarantee we will be 200 points higher.
Does that mean I gained 200 ranking points worth of knowleadge, or simply went with what will do better in our battlegroup?
Arcturas
11-19-2007, 02:15 AM
Emberstorm will have 19 2v2, 3 5v5, and 9 3v3. Who is to say that the #1 Gladiator from Emberstorm is worse than the #111 Gladiator from BG9?
I completely agree. 3 freaking 5v5 gladiators, they totally gotta know their shit.
Rycho
11-23-2007, 09:34 AM
there are so many terribles posting ridiculous comments and advice its getting pretty insane
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.