|
As someone who isn't particularly good at SC2, but who loves watching tournament play, it has been really cool to see map dynamics shift. It has also been wonderful to see some of these new maps make it into the ladder map pool. However, there has consistently been a tension between map-makers and Blizzard. Map-makers want to make the coolest, most interesting, most competitive maps possible. Blizzard, however, needs maps that preserve and amplify the breadth of their customer base. We cannot pretend that Blizzard has the choice to ignore casual gamers. They are a for-profit company, they need casual gamers more than they need esports, and to begrudge them for it is to bite the hand that feeds us.
This tension has grown more apparent as new maps have been added, for example with the de-watering of Ohana (which used to be THE PRETTIEST MAP EVER!). It is most apparent with the uniquely interesting, and potentially innovative, ideas brought up by Barrin recently (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=321242). However, Barrin's map ideas might lead to gameplay that is intrinsically more difficult for casual players to manage, thus hurting Blizzard significantly (and would, again, be us biting the hand that feeds us) if they were to make it into the ladder rotation. Given the predilection of some tournaments to focus on ladder maps, tournament play winds up restricted to maps that are particularly conducive to the "terrible, terrible damage" psychology discussed by Barrin, but not quite as conducive to a more elegant and entertaining gameplay style that could exist.
Blizzard's reasons for restricting the ladder map pool are completely legitimate. They answer to shareholders who want to see the money, most of which comes from players in Platinum or below (like myself). If these players are thrown off by the map itself, they won't tell their friends to buy the game, will stop playing sooner, won't buy future blizzard titles,etc.
Yet the E-sports community is not without value to Blizzard. A vibrant SC2 esports scene can draw more people into SC2, keep existing customers engaged, generate customer loyalty, and create spontaneous voluntary Blizzard marketing machines (because that's precisely what we esports fans are :D ).
Regarding maps, how could Blizzard handle the reality that it has two distinct customer bases to cater to, both of which are incredibly valuable, but that have meaningfully different gameplay needs, particularly regarding maps?
The answer lies in customer stratification. The goal of any business is (and should be) the stratification of customers to better meet the needs of each customer. Kellogg's does this by having a different line of cereal for each type of taste in cereal. Grocery stores do this through membership rewards cards. Stadiums do this by having different seating sections with different pricing.
Blizzard has it easier. Their customer base is already stratified. Blizzard has the Battle.net ladder.
What I want to hear about from all of you is, how do you feel about the idea of map stratification by ladder? It could be something as simple as adding the water back to Ohana in the diamond league. Or it could be only having a Barrin-style 6m2g maps included in ladder from diamond up.
Obviously we have no control over this, Blizzard does. However, I am curious to hear people's thoughts on the potential for map stratification by ladder.
Hat-tip: I've mentioned him already a few times, but thanks to Barrin for his very deeply thought out map post that, whether or not I agree with it, has got me thinking a lot about map design. (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=321242)
|
You have to understand that most of the water was removed from Ohana because the large amount of computers (aka ladder players) have to be able to handle the map without suffering water, terrain, or just graphic glitches in general --- as hard as it is to believe since everything looked fine in the NASL and ESV Korean Weekly.
I had asked Blizzard in the process of getting the map ready if I could let the no-water version be for ladder, and put rivers back in for the tournament version (because pros have better computers, which they should). They simply said no and that it needs to be the same for everything.
The rivers were totally unique to the concept of Ohana, and added that extra touch. It gave the map a soul. As much as I would love to put the rivers back in, I'm simply not allowed according to Blizzard.
I e-mailed them this:
Is it possible to still have rivers flowing through the map, but just make it unbuildable while still pathable? Or do rivers in general cause graphic issues? Let me know what you guys prefer. Either the rivers remain out, or I can add them back in and put unbuildable blockers on them.
And their response was this:
Spoke with the team and the response I got was:
"Problem is that because the river location changes, it looks like you can build somewhere that you cannot."
So no go on the pathable river unfortunately.
As for the 6m2g deal, that is something that would have to be experimented more in HotS. If we try that right now, every build order and timed push changes, and even pros have to re-learn the game. It would have to come from a whole new expansion where the entire metagame must be started from scratch.
|
On March 17 2012 22:20 Arcane86 wrote:
What I want to hear about from all of you is, how do you feel about the idea of map stratification by ladder? It could be something as simple as adding the water back to Ohana in the diamond league. Or it could be only having a Barrin-style 6m2g maps included in ladder from diamond up.
What about a high Platinum player playing a Diamond player? Which version of the map gets played? and how does the Plat/Dia player know which version is going to be played? I'm sure there are many Diamond and Master players who play on low settings due to their computers.
|
On March 17 2012 23:18 IronManSC wrote:
I'm simply not allowed according to Blizzard.
What the fuck? You can't do what you want with your own map outside of ladder? You can't make multiple versions or revisions? A tournament can't decide to make their own version of the map - even though that's what tournaments did for many other blizzard ladder maps that were bad and had problems (removing close spawns, removing gold minerals)?
Why is it that the blizzard map team generally does the dumbest thing possible, every opportunity they get?
|
On March 18 2012 05:40 darkscream wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2012 23:18 IronManSC wrote:
I'm simply not allowed according to Blizzard. What the fuck? You can't do what you want with your own map outside of ladder? You can't make multiple versions or revisions? A tournament can't decide to make their own version of the map - even though that's what tournaments did for many other blizzard ladder maps that were bad and had problems (removing close spawns, removing gold minerals)? Why is it that the blizzard map team generally does the dumbest thing possible, every opportunity they get?
Every map you create, and anything you do inside the map editor BELONGS to blizzard. It says so in the terms of agreement i think, or somewhere.
This does not mean I can't do whatever I want on a map if it's going into a tournament. The main difference here is that Ohana (with the rivers) was only in the NASL and ESV Korean Weekly. It had no complaints and no issues. Everything was fine.
Blizzard decides to add it to Ladder. They gave me a criteria to meet and that's something I have to honor. When a map gets to ladder, it has to meet their needs, as well as the tournament versions because they don't want multiple versions to cause confusion. When a map is only in tournaments, that's one thing, but when it hits ladder, everything changes.
|
On March 18 2012 03:34 SpeCtor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2012 22:20 Arcane86 wrote:
What I want to hear about from all of you is, how do you feel about the idea of map stratification by ladder? It could be something as simple as adding the water back to Ohana in the diamond league. Or it could be only having a Barrin-style 6m2g maps included in ladder from diamond up.
What about a high Platinum player playing a Diamond player? Which version of the map gets played? and how does the Plat/Dia player know which version is going to be played? I'm sure there are many Diamond and Master players who play on low settings due to their computers.
Let's assume for the moment that the map-distinction-cliff is at the platinum/diamond interface. The easiest way to handle this would be for there to be some shared maps between the "competitive" pool and the "casual pool." When you have play across the interface, you could limit it to maps that are shared between pools. You would probably want at least 6 maps shared across the two map pools. With a total map pool of 10, this could be manageable.
Another way to manage this would be to tie your map availability to your MMR, keeping in mind that the leagues are truly only an after-the-fact stratification based on MMR. As such, as you start to poke into the higher leagues,you would start seeing more of the maps in the more "competitive" pool, and see less of the maps in the "casual" pool.
Of these two options, I would prefer the some-shared-maps way of handling this, but there may be better ways that I haven't thought of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
