|
Hey guys,
So after a huge break from SC2 and played a large number of LoL and Dota 2, I have decided to see whether any positive points from those games can be used to improve SC2 as a game in general.
Here's some ideas:
League promotion series
The excitement knowing that you will get promoted soon is a huge part of the ladder, it represents your effort had paid off, you are better player than who you were.
Problem? Promotion comes randomly, you know it's coming when you are facing higher league players but you don't know when. Worst of all, some random guy can just cheese you a few games off and suddenly you aren't so sure if you are getting your promotion soon.
My recommendation is to have a promotion series, similar to LoL. I haven't played a promotion series before but my friend has explained it to me.
Everytime you played ranked, you will earn and lose points, just like ladder points in SC2. Once you get to around 100, you will have a promotion series.
Then you will have to win 2 games out of 3 to advance to the next league.
I think this system is going to be even better for SC2 if the promotion series can be done in this way:
The system will match 2 players together and ask if the players are ready to play a promotion series.
they will play a best of 3.
coin toss into map elimination
If any one player failed to accept the remaining games, it will be considered a win for the other player.
It will promote players to have more than just one strategy in place and adds in diversity into laddering experience.
You can even start playing mind games with your opponents.
(I remember back in WoL days, one guy kept doing blink stalkers all in for 2 games against me and when I prepared for it for the 3rd game using ling infestors style, I got crushed because he did a archon chargelot all in instead.)
Obs game
honestly I am not sure why this hasn't been added to SC2 yet. People loves watching games, not necessarily needs to be top level but being able to watch other people's play is an amazing experience.
I for one love to watch Dota 2 when my friend is playing it. The in game charts etc are all super useful and you can chat with other people about the game as well.
The only downside on why Blizzard shouldn't add this is because it might be difficult to know what games to pick for the viewers to watch. Some cheesy game might just last 5 mins and not necessarily interesting if both players are unknown
Open up for more customisation
I am sure a lot of us were excited about blizzard allowing us to customise the UI until we realise that is only for observing game.
That's not to say the obs customisation is bad or anything. But being able to watch games in a superior UI just makes playing the game in the standard UI just don't feel right.
If blizzard isn't planning to make monetary gain via selling these UIs and skins, I don't see why tools such as stronger team colour mod, dark protoss etc shouldn't be added.
More statement from the Blizzard
One thing I love about LoL is how much they talk to the crowd. They talk about balance changes they are doing and adds in a lot of effort to make sure we are informed, even if they aren't sure how to change a champion such as Rengar. There had been 7 patch notes since they are considering to change the champion, each with updates on what they changed and what they find working and not working or doesn't suit the champion.
The most amazing part is that the League official forum is simply as chaotic as the B.net forum, yet riot still respond to SOME of them.
Blizzard had this attitude once during the beta for HotS, but started to fade away as the community wants the patch to be done more 'carefully' and resulting to almost no talk of balance unless there is an interview.
This results in frustrating for the players and loss of hope for the balance team.
Honestly I think outside of the gameplay, the game is lacking in a lot of area and still needs a huge improvement. Hopefully we will see more of these changes for Lotv. As for now, I am actually quite disappointed with HotS as a game overall. WoL had a lot more polishing (anyone remember the huge patches we had to download??) and more balance patches that keeps us informed the team is looking at the game at least.
  
|
Looking at LoL's league system, I actually like that ladder format.
"Each tier (except Challenger) contains five divisions, each division is numbered using roman numerals in a descending order from V(5) to I(1), with V being the lowest and I - the highest.
Tiers from the lowest to highest:
Bronze
Silver
Gold
Platinum
Diamond
Challenger
Divisions from the lowest to highest:
V
IV
III
II
I
Promotion and Demotion
Promotion
When you reach 100LP you start your Promotion Series, where you have to win 2 out of your next 3 ranked games. If you win your Promotion Series you are promoted to the higher division and your LP is set to 0, if you lose your Promotion Series you remain in your current division, the LP lost is calculated normally.
If you reach 100LP in division I, you begin your Tier Promotion Series, where you have to win 3 out of your next 5 ranked games.
If you leave during champion selection or in-game it counts as a loss on your current Promotion Series.
In very rare occasions, it's possible to be promoted twice after one Series, due to having a high MMR. For instance, someone in Gold V that duo queues often with his/her friend in Platinum III might have an unusually high MMR due to the players that he/she is matched against. As a result, his/her MMR may be 1 or 2 divisions higher than the average MMR of their current division. After winning their Promotion Series, there is a possibility that he/she may be promoted twice. Dodging queues may also, to a smaller degree, affect the difference between your MMR and LP (-3LP per dodge).
DemotionEdit
Demotion happens when your current League Points reach 0 and you lose enough games to get demoted. When you are demoted you go to one division below your current and get 75 LP in that division e.g. if you are in Gold II and get demoted you will fall to Gold III and have 75LP.
There is also a demotion immunity grace period for several games, in which you can't get demoted to a lower division, which activates when you get promoted to a higher division. This is to make sure you don't fall to your previous division due to bad luck.
You can't be demoted below division V of your tier unless you fallout to a lower tier due to inactivity LP decay. "
|
First thing that comes to my mind is opening up some more option for ladder games. What I mean is to not only have 1v1 teamgames and ffa but expand further. Make some competitive tower defense games playable through ladder and have rankings on those. Some tug of wars and stuff... I'm not a big fan of custom games myself but there is one I would like to have in ladder. It's Macro/Micro maps. Think about it! It has a potential. Basically it's the same as 1v1 ladder, except one player controls Macro (builds army, buildings, workers, etc) and another one controls Micro (army...pretty much). I would love that to happen, it's a shame that map isn't popular because it has a lot of potential and the idea is quite interesting, it will make more players become interested in competitive scene of SC2 and will also make SC2 to be the first to introduce such a feature in RTS.
|
Bigger maps, less minerals per base = Less deathball. Its not balancing right? Doesnt seem it to me as your not changing any of the races.
LoL's system is 100% perfect for 1v1 as long as you remove MMR as the skill baseline and make league / points the baseline. If not its a pointless cosmetic system
|
Yeah, I kinda agree with the OP. The current ladder system is just bland. It needs more diversification to keep casuals like me motivated. I don't give a shit if I'm rank 4 in diamond division Ultralisk Overdrive, I want to know where I stand in the overall ranking of my region. Of course, there are sites like nios.kr or ggtracker and there are also tools like mmrstats, but seriously: Why can't we have that stuff ingame?
The idea of promotion series sounds cool, especially when you add more layers to the ladder.
One thing that has been missing since release is automated tournaments in bnet. I still don't get why this feature isn't there.
|
I like the idea of adding promotion series to Bnet, but I would also like to see the addition of demotion series. I feel that the inability to fall below division V of one's tier works in LoL because new players are always joining to refill the Bronze league; in Starcraft, however, I feel that we may just see bloated silver and gold leagues. With demotion series, we could keep the numbers in each tier constant (or the proportion of players in that tier constant, depending on the influx of new players to the game). One guy is playing his promotion series; the other guy is in his demotion series, and they are playing for that one spot.
|
^ That assumes that one wins and one loses, which would require them to play a BoX against eachother, not going to happen on a casual ladder basis.
If both win / lose and it happens unproportionately then your system goes to shit.
|
Nerf hellbats
User was warned for this post
|
I'm not sure about the League Promotion idea. I like the current ladder system, but I would like an overall ladder within region viewable as part of your profile - and then an option to access a global rank should you wish to do so. Like others have said, knowing my place within a specific division is a little meaningless in the overall scheme of things.
I do like the Obs idea (for both 1v1 and team games). That is cool - despite areas of possible problematic implementation. I'd also like to see this added, if possible, to tournaments. I understand DOTA 2 has something similar in the client and if Blizzard could add this to SC2, I think the viewer experience could be multiplied manyfold.
I'm happy with the customization as it is. Its improved leaps and bounds since WOL. But, I suppose, further customization could be cool. I like the idea of team colours for one (as I tend to play a few team games with friends).
I disagree with your last suggestion. I think the less patches and less reports from Blizzard the better. These are for two reasons. One, because Blizzard can hardly open its mouth without being snowed under by all sorts of inane comment and whine (see any recent interview by DK and the resulting threads). I think the SC2 world can do with less of this nonsense not more. Two, the urge to have constant balance patches is just a stimulus for people who need constant doses of something new to keep them in the game (either playing or, more likely, forever talking about it). If Blizzard actually implemented this, it will lead to a constant surface churn. Superficially interesting but lacking depth and resulting, in the end, in irritation on the part of the community and the players. Moreover, Blizzard even issuing frequent reports and talking about balance patches will affect players' use of units and creation of strategies as they will not be sure if the time expended will be worth the while if Blizzard were to wield the nerf hammer or the buff wand. Overall, I think a mute distant Blizzard is the best Blizzard.
|
How about let's start with making the MMR rankings visible? Honestly man, this is the thing I dislike the most. We don't need to be babied
|
On August 14 2013 07:00 ffadicted wrote:
How about let's start with making the MMR rankings visible? Honestly man, this is the thing I dislike the most. We don't need to be babied
I would like that in any game I play, though the promo series's would be the closest thing to that, that is feasible to get. Honestly I think what sc2 needs is a lot of love from the devs in allowing stuff that the community has asked for but hasn't yet receive, like obs's and a customizable UI.
|
On August 13 2013 18:43 Capped wrote:
Bigger maps, less minerals per base = Less deathball. Its not balancing right? Doesnt seem it to me as your not changing any of the races.
LoL's system is 100% perfect for 1v1 as long as you remove MMR as the skill baseline and make league / points the baseline. If not its a pointless cosmetic system
No, it doesn't. Deathballs will still be the most effective form of combat due to the nature of unit movement and collision. You need to make units boxes bigger and make units move in formation to eliminate deathballs.
On topic, literally as soon as Riot announced this new format, I was saying, "This is going to be a horrible league format for a randomly matched 5v5 game, but it would be AWESOME for SC2." I hope they do this, but it's doubtful.
|
It seems like posts like this have been cropping up everywhere recently. HOWEVER, you guys are all forgetting that the business model for SC2 is COMPLETELY different from LoL/Dota 2. A game of SC2 is PAID UPFRONT versus LoL/Dota 2 which is FREE. Everyone wants the SC2 competitive scene to improve by leaps and bounds, but no one is considering whether this will MAKE BLIZZARD MORE MONEY.
WOL during release cost $60, and HOTS during release cost $40. If you are an eager SC2 gamer, you would have paid $100 to play this game. Would you pay LoL or Dota 2 $100 upfront just to play the game? Would ANYONE do so?
No matter how amazing all you guy's ideas are, there is always the MONEY BARRIER. Your ideas have to be so incredible that it will get people to pay up to $100 upfront for it.
The differing business model between Blizzard and LoL/Dota 2 results in different business strategies. Consider where ESPORTS stand in their respective business strategies:
Blizzard: loyal fanbase from previous games + strong promotion prior to game release -> people buying SC2 -> ESPORTS "community-building platform" increase loyalty of SC2 gamers -> more willing to buy other/future Blizzard games
LoL/Dota2 : ESPORTS -> attract viewers to try out FREE game -> limited gameplay entices player to spend money to expand their gameplay
As far as my limited knowledge goes, that how I see their business model in the most BASIC form. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Anyways, all you TL posters have really interesting ideas, but the key is how these ideas can be implemented into Blizzard's business model in order to generate a profit. In my SINCERE opinion, they cannot be implemented. Blizzard would have to completely change their business model and completely change their approach to utilizing esports.
Would that happen? Meh Idk :\
|
Daily/weekly tournaments like Warcraft 3 had. Certain days of a month will be "fun" days where things are changed around in-game maybe (like that time all workers became Warhounds, or even messing with balance and turning off ladder points for that day). Bans that should have occurred months/years ago that never happened against confirmed hackers. That kind of ties into a "report system" overhaul. The current method of reporting people is just about completely useless. Observing matches being played live (or small delay). Community interaction is nonexistent from what I can tell (correct me if I'm wrong though).
I don't know if they have changed this yet, but do you still have to add someone to your friends list in order to invite them to a game? That's a bunch of shit. Should have just been able to invite people to your game without adding them to your friends list. It's completely inefficient and redundant, especially if that's the only time you're ever going to invite that person (like for a tourny).
Blizzard dropped the ball here on a lot of these problems that should have been fixed years ago or never even existed to begin with. Their lack of getting problems solved is what is detracting the most from StarCraft 2 imo.
They did add experience and leveling to the game, which I suppose is an improvement as opposed to nothing to incentivise casuals to continue playing. It's just not enough though.
|
On August 14 2013 06:25 aZealot wrote:
I disagree with your last suggestion. I think the less patches and less reports from Blizzard the better. These are for two reasons. One, because Blizzard can hardly open its mouth without being snowed under by all sorts of inane comment and whine (see any recent interview by DK and the resulting threads). I think the SC2 world can do with less of this nonsense not more. Two, the urge to have constant balance patches is just a stimulus for people who need constant doses of something new to keep them in the game (either playing or, more likely, forever talking about it). If Blizzard actually implemented this, it will lead to a constant surface churn. Superficially interesting but lacking depth and resulting, in the end, in irritation on the part of the community and the players. Moreover, Blizzard even issuing frequent reports and talking about balance patches will affect players' use of units and creation of strategies as they will not be sure if the time expended will be worth the while if Blizzard were to wield the nerf hammer or the buff wand. Overall, I think a mute distant Blizzard is the best Blizzard.
It happens to riot as well, as in all sort of crazy talks if they did anything BIG.
especially when they release new champions and then nerf them. They call Riot the milking company, release new champion which is overpowered so people buy it, then nerf it, then you are playing with almost completely different champion.
but look at how many red posts there are (means it is a riot employee post):
http://www.surrenderat20.net/search/label/Red Posts/
Almost one per day. Even if some are putting more emphasis on skins and visual updates, there are almost some notes about what's happening to the champions they are looking at.
there are certainly some things that we find problematic, such as mech disappearance in all matchup. Is that even being looked at? Or bio mine being the only style in TvZ, is that what blizzard wants to see? Is tank going to be the situational unit now?
I will be honest here, I was away from SC2 scene for almost 3 months and there is almost no change to most of the metagame, especially TvZ which I find completely disappointed.
At the beginning I was still unsure about my opinion since I am only a diamond player, there were players like dimaga playing a roach hydra style and seemed to be working.
Then I saw some koreans tried it in PL or GSL, failed horribly and just know that the game is just going to be muta ling baneling in all ZvT
The game needs diversity than "perfect" balance. And players usually create strategy only after the patch is out. Innovation for example talked about this I think.
Just look at how excited the scene was when the infestors were changed (until the broodlord infestor deathball was invented)
the 2 base double ups ling infestor style was amazing, a lot of pros devoted the time to analysis the strategy. it broke the zerg must stay one base ahead of opponent rule. the icefisher build etc.
both muta style and infestor style were still used to success.
|
On August 14 2013 14:11 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2013 06:25 aZealot wrote:
I disagree with your last suggestion. I think the less patches and less reports from Blizzard the better. These are for two reasons. One, because Blizzard can hardly open its mouth without being snowed under by all sorts of inane comment and whine (see any recent interview by DK and the resulting threads). I think the SC2 world can do with less of this nonsense not more. Two, the urge to have constant balance patches is just a stimulus for people who need constant doses of something new to keep them in the game (either playing or, more likely, forever talking about it). If Blizzard actually implemented this, it will lead to a constant surface churn. Superficially interesting but lacking depth and resulting, in the end, in irritation on the part of the community and the players. Moreover, Blizzard even issuing frequent reports and talking about balance patches will affect players' use of units and creation of strategies as they will not be sure if the time expended will be worth the while if Blizzard were to wield the nerf hammer or the buff wand. Overall, I think a mute distant Blizzard is the best Blizzard. It happens to riot as well, as in all sort of crazy talks if they did anything BIG. especially when they release new champions and then nerf them. They call Riot the milking company, release new champion which is overpowered so people buy it, then nerf it, then you are playing with almost completely different champion. but look at how many red posts there are (means it is a riot employee post): http://www.surrenderat20.net/search/label/Red Posts/Almost one per day. Even if some are putting more emphasis on skins and visual updates, there are almost some notes about what's happening to the champions they are looking at. there are certainly some things that we find problematic, such as mech disappearance in all matchup. Is that even being looked at? Or bio mine being the only style in TvZ, is that what blizzard wants to see? Is tank going to be the situational unit now? I will be honest here, I was away from SC2 scene for almost 3 months and there is almost no change to most of the metagame, especially TvZ which I find completely disappointed. At the beginning I was still unsure about my opinion since I am only a diamond player, there were players like dimaga playing a roach hydra style and seemed to be working. Then I saw some koreans tried it in PL or GSL, failed horribly and just know that the game is just going to be muta ling baneling in all ZvT The game needs diversity than "perfect" balance. And players usually create strategy only after the patch is out. Innovation for example talked about this I think. Just look at how excited the scene was when the infestors were changed (until the broodlord infestor deathball was invented) the 2 base double ups ling infestor style was amazing, a lot of pros devoted the time to analysis the strategy. it broke the zerg must stay one base ahead of opponent rule. the icefisher build etc. both muta style and infestor style were still used to success.
I agree. The game is very stagnant and always was unless they made a big patch. At the beginning i liked that they wait and see if the players balance it, but that's a good concept for racial balance, not for keeping the game interesting.
Dota 2 has big patches every ~4-6 months, which keeps the game a lot more interesting than it otherwise would. Ofc that's a concept that is easier to do in a f2p-model, but the fact that people make a living from it doesnt change, i think it would work for sc2 too. I really see no problem with trying to slightly buff or slightly nerf units that see no play/to much play every now and then, it's not like they cant take it back if the result is displeasing and they did this quite a few times (see bunker changes). And i am pretty sure that i'm not the only one who finds the phase of a shifting meta exciting and finding the game exciting will surely promote their esport.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
