New to SC2, been spamming a few 1v1 games...

[Turbonium]

...and I'm totally not surprised that this game is dying and arguably already dead in many ways.

Summary of my "awesome" experience with SC2 so far as a new player:

Game 1 vs. Gold - loss
Game 2 vs. Gold - loss
Game 3 vs. Gold - loss

However the algorithm works, by now it should really be homing in on the fact that I should be at Bronze, Silver at best, right?

Game 4 vs. Gold - loss

Um, kay, surely by now it knows?

Game 5 vs. Silver - win

Finally, it's catching on. Might as well keep playing.

Game 6 vs. Gold - loss

I guess it just wanted to make sure I hadn't magically gotten better due to 1 win. It should pit me vs. Silver at best from now on, I should be fine.

Game 7 vs. Platinum - loss

What in the actual REMOVED?

Yea, REMOVED this game. And REMOVED Blizzard.




No cursing in PC Gaming

Anandtech Moderator
KeithTalent

 

[blastingcap]

...and I'm totally not surprised that this game is dying and arguably already dead in many ways.

Summary of my "awesome" experience with SC2 so far as a new player:

Game 1 vs. Gold - loss
Game 2 vs. Gold - loss
Game 3 vs. Gold - loss

However the algorithm works, by now it should really be homing in on the fact that I should be at Bronze, Silver at best, right?

Game 4 vs. Gold - loss

Um, kay, surely by now it knows?

Game 5 vs. Silver - win

Finally, it's catching on. Might as well keep playing.

Game 6 vs. Gold - loss

I guess it just wanted to make sure I hadn't magically gotten better due to 1 win. It should pit me vs. Silver at best from now on, I should be fine.

Game 7 vs. Platinum - loss

What in the actual REMOVED?

Yea, REMOVED this game. And REMOVED Blizzard.

It takes a while before you get shifted up or down. When I first started I had to clobber a lot of players before moving up a rank. Think about it, if you were a Gold player would you want to lose that status on the basis of a brief run of losses, then have to play less-skilled Bronzes and Silvers as punishment for a while before bouncing back up? Too-frequent league switches aren't fun, either.

 

[Fenixgoon]

isnt the placement period like 10 games? hell, it tells you.

 

[Turbonium]

It takes a while before you get shifted up or down. When I first started I had to clobber a lot of players before moving up a rank. Think about it, if you were a Gold player would you want to lose that status on the basis of a brief run of losses, then have to play less-skilled Bronzes and Silvers as punishment for a while before bouncing back up? Too-frequent league switches aren't fun, either.

Sure, but why the REMOVED is it starting me out at Gold? And then moving me UP to REMOVED Platinum opponents when I clearly have a 0% winning record vs. Gold players? And this is somehow supposed to motivate me to stay and learn the game?



No cursing.

Anandtech Moderator
KeithTalent

 

[Turbonium]

isnt the placement period like 10 games? hell, it tells you.

I don't know, does it?

These are all unranked, 1v1 matches. I'm going under the assumption that both ranked and unranked matches in the 1v1 category have/use the same MMR.

 

[blastingcap]

Sure, but why the REMOVED is it starting me out at Gold? And then moving me UP to REMOVED Platinum opponents when I clearly have a 0% winning record vs. Gold players? And this is somehow supposed to motivate me to stay and learn the game?

I'm not sure, that does sound odd. Are you sure you haven't played SC2 before or something? I thought brand new players always start bronze.

Edit: actually yeah I vaguely recall a placement match process where you start off as unranked and have to play a bunch of games first, then get ranked. My memory is foggy since it's been a while since I played SC2.

 

[Turbonium]

I'm not sure, that does sound odd. Are you sure you haven't played SC2 before or something? I thought brand new players always start bronze.

Edit: actually yeah I vaguely recall a placement match process where you start off as unranked and have to play a bunch of games first, then get ranked. My memory is foggy since it's been a while since I played SC2.

I've played maybe 2-3 matches before (all unranked 2v2 matches), and I've lost at LEAST one of them, I don't remember.

Ok to clarify: I'm literally playing the unranked games. Like there is four options:

tutorial, vs. AI, unranked, ranked

I'm doing the unranked...

Also: when I say I play vs. a Gold/Platinum player or whatever, I'm talking about their best finish ever in 1v1 as seen in their profile. Does the rank thing reset every "season" or something?

 

[finbarqs]

they are also different leagues, you could be playing a platinum player from a lower league. It's the "hidden" rating. Some people will start a whole new race, and work their way up very quickly to platinum/diamond, but they need to step on a few gold/silver players first (which could be you). And someone in platinum playing you means that the platinum player is about to get demoted into gold, 'cause they probably lost too much against platinum, and you're not doing too well in gold, so it puts them against a crappy gold player. If he lost the match, it would've been an immediate demotion to gold for him, maybe even silver.

 

[Geosurface]

Losing puts hair on your chest.

 

[JumBie]

...and I'm totally not surprised that this game is dying and arguably already dead in many ways.

Summary of my "awesome" experience with SC2 so far as a new player:

Game 1 vs. Gold - loss
Game 2 vs. Gold - loss
Game 3 vs. Gold - loss

However the algorithm works, by now it should really be homing in on the fact that I should be at Bronze, Silver at best, right?

Game 4 vs. Gold - loss

Um, kay, surely by now it knows?

Game 5 vs. Silver - win

Finally, it's catching on. Might as well keep playing.

Game 6 vs. Gold - loss

I guess it just wanted to make sure I hadn't magically gotten better due to 1 win. It should pit me vs. Silver at best from now on, I should be fine.

Game 7 vs. Platinum - loss

What in the actual REMOVED?

Yea, REMOVED this game. And REMOVED Blizzard.

Pick zerg, rush, and user those lings to your advantage keep micro managing them till you win. Throws good players off, honestly I don't even follow build orders anymore, I just REMOVED with people. I guarantee you can make it to platinum doing that.



No cursing in PC Gaming.

Anandtech Moderator
KeithTalent

 

[Turbonium]

Pick zerg, rush, and user those lings to your advantage keep micro managing them till you win. Throws good players off, honestly I don't even follow build orders anymore, I just REMOVED with people. I guarantee you can make it to platinum doing that.

I don't like the feel of Zerg in SC2. I play Terran instead.

In all my games, I just expo early into natural, turtle up, and while pumping out a nice balance of units on the way (all used defensively), go straight to 3/3 mass BCs. This usually means I have 2+ expos by the time I achieve this, depending on the map.

It's totally a bad strat that should only really work in Bronze. This is why I'm annoyed, because I need to feel comfortable with the game before I can start being more offensive and varied, and I can't do that while going against better players. Also, going against better players (and knowing that I am from the start of the match) means I'm not going to be confident in varying my game in that instance, so I just keep doing the same thing every time.

Btw I usually wait until they attack and use my turtled position and BCs which the opponent doesn't usually know I have (I hide them in base surrounded by detectors). Then I counterhit with most/all of my defense units along with my BCs, while pumping out marines constantly with all that surplus gold I always have. I also expand again while counterhitting so that I have enough economy should the thing drag on longer. It's a bad strat, but it's fun, but only if I'm against equally bad players.

 

[dust]

I don't like the feel of Zerg in SC2. I play Terran instead.

In all my games, I just expo early into natural, turtle up, and while pumping out a nice balance of units on the way (all used defensively), go straight to 3/3 mass BCs. This usually means I have 2+ expos by the time I achieve this, depending on the map.

It's totally a bad strat that should only really work in Bronze. This is why I'm annoyed, because I need to feel comfortable with the game before I can start being more offensive and varied, and I can't do that while going against better players. Also, going against better players (and knowing that I am from the start of the match) means I'm not going to be confident in varying my game in that instance, so I just keep doing the same thing every time.

Btw I usually wait until they attack and use my turtled position and BCs which the opponent doesn't usually know I have (I hide them in base surrounded by detectors). Then I counterhit with most/all of my defense units along with my BCs, while pumping out marines constantly with all that surplus gold I always have. I also expand again while counterhitting so that I have enough economy should the thing drag on longer. It's a bad strat, but it's fun, but only if I'm against equally bad players.

But..but those amazing swarm hosts-said no one ever...

 

[Majes]

I don't play that much anymore, but I was a regular Diamond player who would have been low masters if I played more back in the day.

I play protoss and mainly 4-gate. There are two tricks with 4-gate. The first is learning to wall off your base with one zealot. The second is to time your push perfectly. Scouting helps with both of these things. You can also vary your play a bit by faking 4-gate and going for 2-3 void rays. It's pretty fun, but I've been stuck in Path of Exile for quite some time now...

 

[Spidre]

You're playing unranked, which does not share your MMR rating.

The people you are playing might be on unranked as well, meaning they are also in a different MMR then their actual. Unranked play is weird, in a sense that you could be playing someone who is much higher than you, but playing offrace, or strats they don't know.

The main thing you need to realize is if you lose to someone who has much higher MMR than you, you will lose close to nothing. If someone is an entire league ahead of you, you will lose ~1 point, where as a win will net you 30+. You need to not look at leagues, because since the expansion came out, a person's league means close to nothing. I've played former GMs that played at a silver level, since they got their GM back in beta 3 years ago and haven't played since.

But really, don't let losses bother you and you will start enjoying the game. If you really want to improve, look up a nice build order (there are a ton of tutorials on youtube) and start practicing. Once you can do several build orders effectively, you can start adjusting your play based on scouting alone, and push into diamond/masters no problem. As it stands, just macro and scouting can easily carry you into high masters.

 

[looper]

Warning... semi-sideways hijack coming up... sorry....

I bought SC2 quite a while back and actually never played it. I got into FPS's like BF3 and now BF4, and also play CCTA.

What is a more current and good RTS now.... the latest Civilization?... or.....?

 

[Savatar]

Sure, but why the ****is it starting me out at Gold? And then moving me UP to fucking Platinum opponents when I clearly have a 0% winning record vs. Gold players? And this is somehow supposed to motivate me to stay and learn the game?

It used to be that Starcraft 2, when it first came out, matched new players against one of [almost] every league to try to build the matchmaking stats. You'd play a bronze, silver, gold, plat then diamond player... and it was tough. I remember winning the first one or two and then getting clobbered. Even after I placed, it seemed a little quirky, but after a dozen or so matches in a season it gets much better.

I think this system is gone now, as it places me after less games in new seasons, but it may be trying the same kind of thing with new players to the game. New seasons themselves could have that problem for awhile, as some people tend to try to 'game' it by placing in lower leagues even though they are better skilled... so it will display diamond or whatever in their 'all-time' best 1v1, but they'll be playing bronze players for that season until they get moved up.

On the whole, Starcraft 2 does seem more difficult to me than SC1, but I think the internal match-making rating (MMR?) does get better over time... and it's still an absolute blast to play with friends.

 

[mjd]

Yeah, in unranked, you could get anyone. If you want to get ranked and get matched against opponents equal to you, go play ranked.

2 base turtle BC is a fun strat, but you won't get too far with it. Most low level players climb the ladder using one-base (or, if zerg maybe two base) all-ins. Then diverge once they hit a wall.

I just played a couple ranked for the first time in a while. Looks like MMR erodes over time. I was diamond (with a master's peak in team). But I'm all bronze now. I almost feel bad for my recent bronze opponents.

-M

 

[QuantumPion]

The reason why I never liked SC2 multiplayer is that the system seems to be brilliantly tuned to always match you against the perfect opponent level to barely beat you every time. Back in the old days of RTS's it was more like 1/3 chance of either clobbering, being clobbered, or having an even game.

 

[fstime]

Are you playing the original Wings of Liberty or the expansion?

I would not be surprised if WOL is dead as most probably moved onto HOTS.

 

[JTsyo]

Playing unranked at odd times may result in a lower pool of players to choose from. After you play a bit more just play 1v1 ranked and check out your win/loss after 50 games. Don't worry about your rank and league, it'll reset at the end of the season.

Also for new players playing Terran I highly recommend watching FliterSC's marco videos on Youtube.

 

[Wardawg1001]

A lot of bad info floating around here...

First lets clear a few misconceptions and state a few relevant facts:

1. The system does not know your skill level after 3 matches
2. When you choose to play an unrankedmatch, the matchmaking system uses your ranked MMR to find an appropriate opponent.
3. You do not get a separate unranked MMR, wins and losses in unranked matches will NOT produce ANY change in how the system views your skill level, and thus losing a bunch of games will not result in you being matched against lower skilled opponents
4. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 all have their own individual MMR ratings that do not have any effect on how the system determines your opponent for 1v1 matches
5. New players are not treated as 'bronze skill level', and new players are not automatically placed in bronze league
6. Leagues are an effective measure of skill, but I wouldn't pay too much attention to PAST league ranks, especially if they are from more than one or two seasons ago

Okay, so thats cleared up. Your problem, OP, is that the system doesn't know what your skill level is, and so it is simply placing you in the 'middle of the pack' so to say, which is Gold league. Because you are playing unranked, it is not paying attention to the fact that you are losing, and continues to match you against opponents of roughly the same skill level over and over.

The solution is to go play your 5 ranked placement matches. You should be placed in a bronze or silver league. If you somehow get placed into Gold and don't feel like you are at that skill level, just continue to play ranked matches and you will be demoted to silver quite fast if you keep losing (and if you don't keep losing, then you probably belong in Gold).

Once you are satisfied with where you are placed, you can now go back to playing unranked matches if you want. It will use the MMR from your ranked matches which for the most part should result in matching you with people in your same league. Of course you could just continue playing ranked matches too, theres really no difference except that ranked matches will affect your MMR and league ranks, and the more ranked matches you play, the better the system will become at ranking you with appropriately skilled opponents.

Something else to keep in mind, is that MMR for any given player RESETS if they do not play any ranked matches through an entire season. Until these people play a few ranked matches, their MMR will not necessarily be a good indicator of their skill. You will likely end up playing against these people from time to time. Just let it go.

 

[Turbonium]

A lot of bad info floating around here...

First lets clear a few misconceptions and state a few relevant facts:

1. The system does not know your skill level after 3 matches
2. When you choose to play an unrankedmatch, the matchmaking system uses your ranked MMR to find an appropriate opponent.
3. You do not get a separate unranked MMR, wins and losses in unranked matches will NOT produce ANY change in how the system views your skill level, and thus losing a bunch of games will not result in you being matched against lower skilled opponents
4. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 all have their own individual MMR ratings that do not have any effect on how the system determines your opponent for 1v1 matches
5. New players are not treated as 'bronze skill level', and new players are not automatically placed in bronze league
6. Leagues are an effective measure of skill, but I wouldn't pay too much attention to PAST league ranks, especially if they are from more than one or two seasons ago

Okay, so thats cleared up. Your problem, OP, is that the system doesn't know what your skill level is, and so it is simply placing you in the 'middle of the pack' so to say, which is Gold league. Because you are playing unranked, it is not paying attention to the fact that you are losing, and continues to match you against opponents of roughly the same skill level over and over.

The solution is to go play your 5 ranked placement matches. You should be placed in a bronze or silver league. If you somehow get placed into Gold and don't feel like you are at that skill level, just continue to play ranked matches and you will be demoted to silver quite fast if you keep losing (and if you don't keep losing, then you probably belong in Gold).

Once you are satisfied with where you are placed, you can now go back to playing unranked matches if you want. It will use the MMR from your ranked matches which for the most part should result in matching you with people in your same league. Of course you could just continue playing ranked matches too, theres really no difference except that ranked matches will affect your MMR and league ranks, and the more ranked matches you play, the better the system will become at ranking you with appropriately skilled opponents.

Something else to keep in mind, is that MMR for any given player RESETS if they do not play any ranked matches through an entire season. Until these people play a few ranked matches, their MMR will not necessarily be a good indicator of their skill. You will likely end up playing against these people from time to time. Just let it go.

I figured since ranked and unranked 1v1 uses the same MMR, that unranked works with placement too. If it doesn't, then everything makes sense. Still really frustrating though.

I also don't consider this game that old tbh, considering I was playing WC3 as late as early 2009. Now that game was old by then. I figure it's old enough though that any players still around have an advantage, and all the casuals have moved on.

 

[blastingcap]

The reason why I never liked SC2 multiplayer is that the system seems to be brilliantly tuned to always match you against the perfect opponent level to barely beat you every time. Back in the old days of RTS's it was more like 1/3 chance of either clobbering, being clobbered, or having an even game.

I prefer the SC1 system because I preferred to play stress-free loss accounts. It meant that I rarely played 1v1 but I got to play with friends and win or lose, I always left the game. If everyone on my team was on a loss account, then the other side got a free win to boot.

I gave up on SC2 because they left way too much micro in the game, imho to placate pros who threatened to leave if SC2 were too streamlined, but also in part because of the stress of an actual win-loss record. When I play games I like to relax, like TF2, I can join or leave a game at any time and just have fun.

 

[smackababy]

I figured since ranked and unranked 1v1 uses the same MMR, that unranked works with placement too. If it doesn't, then everything makes sense. Still really frustrating though.

I also don't consider this game that old tbh, considering I was playing WC3 as late as early 2009. Now that game was old by then. I figure it's old enough though that any players still around have an advantage, and all the casuals have moved on.

Unranked doesn't effect your MMR. If you haven't done the placement matches in Ranked yet, you won't get accurate representation in unranked.

When SC2 first came out I cheesed my way through the placement games and got Plat. Oh, did I learn quickly that crap doesn't work there. Lol.

 

[Turbonium]

I prefer the SC1 system because I preferred to play stress-free loss accounts. It meant that I rarely played 1v1 but I got to play with friends and win or lose, I always left the game. If everyone on my team was on a loss account, then the other side got a free win to boot.

I gave up on SC2 because they left way too much micro in the game, imho to placate pros who threatened to leave if SC2 were too streamlined, but also in part because of the stress of an actual win-loss record. When I play games I like to relax, like TF2, I can join or leave a game at any time and just have fun.

Yea, the whole ranking system and permanent record is really a deterrent for me. I have huge OCD traits so that doesn't help.