EPTRe-thinking Starcraft's Ladder - Page 3
| Blogs > qxc |
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12236 Posts
On May 29 2015 02:37 NonY wrote: edit: NM I'm not gonna keep posting about this stuff. LotV isn't gonna be amazing but it's gonna be good enough and the chance of anything changing based on some blog comments is just about zero. You're wrong about that Tyler. =) I don't think qxc is 100% right because a lot of stuff needs to be reviewed within the existing framework. Changing stuff like Grandmaster is difficult because you have to first look at how the division structure is communicated, then you have to think of what to do when someone hops into GM then out then back in, what does that new system look like, and so on. It's one thing to say it needs to change or it doesn't work, but proposing the solutions/replacements is the really challenging part. I do think that GM needs to change but I'm still drafting possibilities as to how that would work. It's easy to see how GM came about in its current iteration: you don't have to introduce any new variables or elements, everyone is already familiar with how the bonus pool operates by the time they reach GM, keeping a fairly static top 200 provides a solid balance between prestige and recognition, and so on. | ||
|
billynasty
United States260 Posts
| ||
|
Roxas_
United States51 Posts
Greater casual playerbase -> greater spectators for the professional scene -> more money into the pro scene -> more incentive for professional viability -> higher level of play at the top level due to increased competition. That also means you have more sponsors, more exposure, etc. But at the end of the day, Blizzard doesn't give a shit, which is why I stopped playing Starcraft after playing since 1998. Consider me a statistic. | ||
|
weikor
Austria580 Posts
Ive watched my cousin play, and while he actually wanted to try this game - he was forced to give up, simply because the mechanics were too demanding. Its great for pro players, or players that have huge tendencies to push themselves - but for the avarage casual - its just too difficult. This is where I think Archon mode will really shine. And huge props to blizzard for implementing it. Its an AMAZING mode for newer players, and allows you to play with your friends in a competetive setting (compared to 2v2, where its not balanced) Its a place where i can play with a newish friend, and use my GM skills to still have a huge advantage over my opponent - We can decide how much I will let my friend take over, If hes very new he can just control the base defence, if hes better you split up the tasks more evenly. Compare that to 2v2 where a new player will make it impossible to win. Archon mode is the one thing that has a chance at making sc2 accessible to new players, tweaking the ladder wont change much. | ||
|
revalence123
United States102 Posts
On May 28 2015 03:15 RenSC2 wrote: However, I'd go a more radical route from your suggestions. I think you should belong to multiple divisions based on geography. You'd have a local division, which for Americans could be based on zip code. Then you have a regional division which would break the country up into a few different regions (for many countries, the region could be the whole country). And finally you'd have your worldwide (or server-wide) rank. Divisions would no longer be made of 100 people. Instead, they'd be built naturally based on the number of people in your area. While this would be pretty cool you would have to scale this way up to even really do this. Starcraft just isn't large enough to justify breaking down ladder rankings to that small of an area. Not to mention, could you image how much it would cost to implement this and how big of a pain in the ass to make sure this thing is a 100% accurate all the time. Its a cool idea, but why would you do that. | ||
|
revalence123
United States102 Posts
| ||
|
Roxas_
United States51 Posts
On May 29 2015 11:03 weikor wrote: I think the main reason for starcraft 2 losing popularity amongst casuals is plain and simple that its way too difficult to learn for new players, and while i agree that the league systam can be improved - its pretty O.K In Dota 2 the first "elementary" guide is over 40 pages long. https://purgegamers.true.io/g/dota-2-guide/ Counter-Strike and League of Legends also have immense learning curves. They all have a lot of variety in mechanics, game modes, champions/guns, locations, etc. You know the reason people put up with learning it all? Because it's FUN to learn! You also get things in between every time you learn something because of cosmetics and other things, which are purely additional to the benefit of learning about the game. Instead of saying that you can't learn StarCraft 2 because it's too much to learn, Blizzard needs to just make the stuff more fun to learn (like Valve and Riot have). I hate people using that excuse. "Oh, don't worry. People don't like our game because it's so hard, deep, and complex! There's so much to learn! That's why people play easy games like LoL! :D" Nah go fuck yourselves and face reality. StarCraft isn't harder or more demanding to learn than any other popular competitive game right now. | ||
|
gyrus
United States53 Posts
-You're saying that the majority of people who aren't GM/progamers which includes a good part of masters, all of diamond and everyone below are not terrible compared to them? lol. For the same reasons why we don't need people doing experiments on why bee stings hurt...it's obvious. -Ladder anxiety is definitely widespread and it's completely natural for people to feel nervous in a competitive game. Everyone feels it, has felt it, will never stop feeling, or will feel it again one day. Very few of us are in the psychological category of someone like Flash or Jaedong for example that have a well developed professional mindset to completely override natural nerves. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On May 29 2015 16:02 gyrus wrote: -You're saying that the majority of people who aren't GM/progamers which includes a good part of masters, all of diamond and everyone below are not terrible compared to them? lol. For the same reasons why we don't need people doing experiments on why bee stings hurt...it's obvious. -Ladder anxiety is definitely widespread and it's completely natural for people to feel nervous in a competitive game. Everyone feels it, has felt it, will never stop feeling, or will feel it again one day. Very few of us are in the psychological category of someone like Flash or Jaedong for example that have a well developed professional mindset to completely override natural nerves. As I understood it, he commented on Nony first complaining about the "wanna-be Freuds" that claim to know what people like/don't like while playing games, only to do it himself in the same post. Oh, and since it seems to be mandatory in this conversation: lol. | ||
|
LoneYoShi
France1348 Posts
On May 29 2015 15:16 Roxas_ wrote: In Dota 2 the first "elementary" guide is over 40 pages long. https://purgegamers.true.io/g/dota-2-guide/ Counter-Strike and League of Legends also have immense learning curves. They all have a lot of variety in mechanics, game modes, champions/guns, locations, etc. You know the reason people put up with learning it all? Because it's FUN to learn! You also get things in between every time you learn something because of cosmetics and other things, which are purely additional to the benefit of learning about the game. Instead of saying that you can't learn StarCraft 2 because it's too much to learn, Blizzard needs to just make the stuff more fun to learn (like Valve and Riot have). I hate people using that excuse. "Oh, don't worry. People don't like our game because it's so hard, deep, and complex! There's so much to learn! That's why people play easy games like LoL! :D" Nah go fuck yourselves and face reality. StarCraft isn't harder or more demanding to learn than any other popular competitive game right now. After trying to play a MOBA for the very first time a few weeks back, I definitely agree with you. The entry barrier felt as high (maybe even higher) to start playing DOTA2 than SC2. Just the sheer amount of stuff you have to know, the complexity of the game (how the XP works, how the money works, how the different Heroes work, etc, so many things to know !) However - and this has been said a few times already - I think that what really drives casuals away is a combination of several things: the fact that 1v1 ranking is made so freaking important, the fact that you can't hide it, and the fact that SC2 is a 1v1 game. I have loads of casuals friends who play CS:GO, LoL or Dota2 and who are terrible at it. You know what they say when I ask them why their rank is so low ? "My teammates are always shitty/retarded." I get that answer like 95% of the time. In sc2 you don't have that easy way out. You have to face the fact that you're terrible. And not only does the game tell you that you suck, you have no excuses about it and the game also tells it to all your friends. No wonder no one (except the tryhards) wants to stick around ! So yeah, SC2 might not be the hardest game or the more complex one, but I believe it puts more social or psychological pressure on the players since it's 1v1 rather than a teamgame. And the casuals don't want pressure, quite the opposite: they just want to chill with their friends ! | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On May 29 2015 18:02 LoneYoShi wrote: After trying to play a MOBA for the very first time a few weeks back, I definitely agree with you. The entry barrier felt as high (maybe even higher) to start playing DOTA2 than SC2. Just the sheer amount of stuff you have to know, the complexity of the game (how the XP works, how the money works, how the different Heroes work, etc, so many things to know !) However - and this has been said a few times already - I think that what really drives casuals away is a combination of several things: the fact that 1v1 ranking is made so freaking important, the fact that you can't hide it, and the fact that SC2 is a 1v1 game. I have loads of casuals friends who play CS:GO, LoL or Dota2 and who are terrible at it. You know what they say when I ask them why their rank is so low ? "My teammates are always shitty/retarded." I get that answer like 95% of the time. In sc2 you don't have that easy way out. You have to face the fact that you're terrible. And not only does the game tell you that you suck, you have no excuses about it and the game also tells it to all your friends. No wonder no one (except the tryhards) wants to stick around ! So yeah, SC2 might not be the hardest game or the more complex one, but I believe it puts more social or psychological pressure on the players since it's 1v1 rather than a teamgame. And the casuals don't want pressure, quite the opposite: they just want to chill with their friends ! Agree. It also explains why casual people more often prefer to play 2on2, 3on3 or 4on4 in sc2. | ||
|
Ketch
Netherlands7285 Posts
Edit: though avoiding GM rank playing vs rank 20 at the start of a season would have to been done better  | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On May 29 2015 23:48 Barrin wrote: Not really sure who you guys are talking about; I didn't say anything but "lol". But I was mostly referring to the hypocrisy (projection imo, lol) of him doing it himself (without any proof too). Shrug. Perhaps proof is not necessary. That's what I said you referred to. | ||
|
Cazimirbzh
334 Posts
On May 29 2015 18:02 LoneYoShi wrote: After trying to play a MOBA for the very first time a few weeks back, I definitely agree with you. The entry barrier felt as high (maybe even higher) to start playing DOTA2 than SC2. Just the sheer amount of stuff you have to know, the complexity of the game (how the XP works, how the money works, how the different Heroes work, etc, so many things to know !) However - and this has been said a few times already - I think that what really drives casuals away is a combination of several things: the fact that 1v1 ranking is made so freaking important, the fact that you can't hide it, and the fact that SC2 is a 1v1 game. I have loads of casuals friends who play CS:GO, LoL or Dota2 and who are terrible at it. You know what they say when I ask them why their rank is so low ? "My teammates are always shitty/retarded." I get that answer like 95% of the time. In sc2 you don't have that easy way out. You have to face the fact that you're terrible. And not only does the game tell you that you suck, you have no excuses about it and the game also tells it to all your friends. No wonder no one (except the tryhards) wants to stick around ! So yeah, SC2 might not be the hardest game or the more complex one, but I believe it puts more social or psychological pressure on the players since it's 1v1 rather than a teamgame. And the casuals don't want pressure, quite the opposite: they just want to chill with their friends ! A good RTS by definition is hard to really understand, tricks and tips must be an important part. However i dont understand what you mean by social pressure(if some pple have troubles to be diamond because they consider it too low, that's more for a psy to intervene^^). I think you have more pressure in teamgames, if you play bad, you're killing 4 others players (cf. current Heroes gameplay). The 1v1 vs team argument depends completely on how much you will take the game "seriously". I dont give damn if i lose Dont forget that to be a average sc2 player you need 200 epm, a game can last for 3h30^^ and u can ragequit in 3m45. CS, dota, lol dont have this mechanic which put a CONSTANT pressure on the player. Sometimes i have fun with protoss and after executing 20 dt into blink i feel exhausted. The 2 major issues that can bother casual players are the lack of any kind of social tool on B.NET(hard to learn) and the gui design too oriented around blizzard bad ladder which cannot atm provide an extertaining experience. | ||
|
imgbaby
158 Posts
Then besides learning the "crux" you must know stuff about how the match ups work like how zerg needs more bases than Terran,No one is teaching this essential stuff so players who learn wrongly get stuck. Practice mode should include AI's that develop these essential thought patterns and stuff like timing windows. The essential way to make decisions must be more accessible for newer players to want to stick around and learn. Also learning the armour vs light and DPS is important too. It really proves to be a game for niche psychographical groups. Starcraft is just a waste of time though. | ||
|
Textual
Saudi Arabia57 Posts
Only wizards can know this stuff without actually studying it. Empirically. qxc tried to analyze decisions about the ladder based on studies about player retention. That's the right idea, in my mind (though obviously would be better if those studies were cited), and I think decisions about the ladder's future should be made not by sorcery and pontifications, but by studying what makes system best suits the target audience. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On May 30 2015 04:13 Textual wrote: qxc tried to analyze decisions about the ladder based on studies about player retention. You do realise he just made that part up? "It is likely that studies have shown that" = "I believe that". There is nothing empirical about that. I'll give qxc the benefit of the doubt and think that he wrote it as a joke, not because he actually thought it was a valid argument leaning more strength, or worse, consciously trying to mislead people. But any way that may be, a lot of people seem to believe that it must be true because "it is likely that studies have shown"... I should mention that I do share his belief. But he shouldn't be selling his belief as if it is the result of an actual experiment. | ||
|
cYaN
Norway3322 Posts
Basically, give me my raw mmr number and get rid of that "fix" that makes me play against people nowhere close to my skill (above and below) actually fairly often. Oh, and an actual antihack system^^ | ||
| ||
