|
On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that
No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea.
|
On August 06 2019 01:01 QOGQOG wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea.
actually they are doing it for w3, not sure if the patches are actually good though cause i dont play it (apparently many things also got broken), but w/e i dont expect anything for starcraft nor trust blizzard to do well at it. Rather looking out for new RTS.
|
On August 06 2019 01:05 ProMeTheus112 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2019 01:01 QOGQOG wrote:On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea. actually they are doing it for w3, not sure if the patches are actually good though cause i dont play it, but w/e i dont expect anything for starcraft nor trust blizzard to do well at it. Rather looking out for new RTS.
Many chinese wc3 pros want to revert back to 1.28 (or something like that) to state before new patches... They have stated that game is worse now and Blizzard has no idea what they are doing. So Broodwar is better of without Blizzards balance.
|
On August 06 2019 01:01 QOGQOG wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea. I think your the only one who suggested arbitrary changes in order to fix a matchup. Given blizzard hasnt patched broodwar, I think it is safe to say they wont, unless the community overwhelmingly backed it. And if the community overwhelmingly backed it, it would be due to insight from top players and intelligent, not arbitrary changes.
I dont know how this community reached the point where suggesting a matchup that only has 3 units could be improved, results in hysterical reactions like this.
|
On August 06 2019 01:15 Dazed. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2019 01:01 QOGQOG wrote:On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea. I think your the only one who suggested arbitrary changes in order to fix a matchup. Given blizzard hasnt patched broodwar, I think it is safe to say they wont, unless the community overwhelmingly backed it. And if the community overwhelming backed it, it would be due to insight from top players and intelligent, not arbitrary changes. I dont know how this community reached the point where suggesting a matchup that only has 3 units could be improved, results in hysterical reactions like this.
Well, I'll try to respond though you might not listen to me since I'm "hysterical." The reason that people respond negatively to balance change suggestions is that the game has somehow remained pretty well balanced without them and a shift to
try to change something like ZvZ could potentially screw that up.
Also, ZvZ isn't a bad matchup. This is subjective, I guess, but I like the fast-paced tactics and decision making. It's a nice contrast to, say, TvT. And sometimes we do see Devourers or Queens mixed in.
Just as a note, there won't be "insight from the top players" in a patch either, because they don't want the game patched. When I said a patch would be arbitrary, I didn't mean that the changes wouldn't be thoughtful or smart, I meant that there's little reason to do one to begin with and a lot of reasons to not do one, so deciding to do one would be pretty arbitrary.
|
On August 06 2019 01:15 Dazed. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2019 01:01 QOGQOG wrote:On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea. I think your the only one who suggested arbitrary changes in order to fix a matchup. Given blizzard hasnt patched broodwar, I think it is safe to say they wont, unless the community overwhelmingly backed it. And if the community overwhelmingly backed it, it would be due to insight from top players and intelligent, not arbitrary changes. I dont know how this community reached the point where suggesting a matchup that only has 3 units could be improved, results in hysterical reactions like this.
I thought you were joking, but if you're serious the main point people are bringing up is that your method is risky. My idea, while not spectacular, is very low risk and could be tried for one tournament without upsetting things very much. A midground idea would be to have UMS maps with triggers that could make the game more varied, and possibly make demands on players to adapt in different ways including in ZvZ, or maps which are specialized for matchups and don't get used in other matchups, such that a map could be made where muta ZvZ is not the most effective strategy (if that was really what we disliked, but I don't think it is. I think people dislike the coinflipping taking out strong zergs in early rounds, not the simplicity of the matchup).
But neither UMS nor matchup specific maps are realistic, because they don't integrate with the existing matchmaking and someone would need to sit down and update the code to handle those ideas. Even before match making, ideas like this were never tried because, misguided or not, people have an idea about the purity of the game and want to celebrate that, basically, it is playable in all 9 matchups on each official map, which is an impressive achievement we sometimes forget.
But yeah, everyone complained constantly that SC2 were patch fixed anytime a strategy saw success, and people see it as a virtue of StarCraft that balance adjustment was always done delicately through maps, that you never lost context for older games. Obviously there were lots of balance patches in the first 2 years, and it did affect players and tournaments of the time, but then BW got really really stable and was never touched again.
Anyway my idea was just about the volatility of the matchup, not it's entertainment value. I think you should have been able to anticipate the kind of response balance changes would bring, and it's just my opinion but I think it's a dead horse.
|
Why are all these fanatical, hysterical people still falling for the dazed patented "stale" trap???
|
I say patch the UMS scene back to its former acid-induced glory.
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On August 06 2019 01:01 QOGQOG wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2019 20:18 ProMeTheus112 wrote:On August 05 2019 00:25 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 04 2019 23:39 Dazed. wrote:On August 04 2019 22:17 Chef wrote:It occurred to me today + Show Spoiler +with the kind of short ASL bo5 that it doesn't make sense we have the same number of games for ZvZs as for TvTs and other matchups. TvT's can be exhausting for viewers and hard on players even at bo5. A bo5 ZvZ is still quite short and swingy. I think in my ideal setup as a viewer, I would want bo5 TvT for a finals, bo9 ZvZ, bo7 maybe for other matchups... And for earlier rounds, bo3 TvT for a bo5 ZvZ. Something like that. That would help more consistent Zergs and Protoss who get knocked out too early from their volatile mirrors, while saving the hands of TvT players a bit from their hour long tough but fair matches. Just a weird thought on something related to the meta-balance of StarCraft. Everyone knows a ZvZ finals is typically very bad, because it can be over in 20 minutes if it's a 3-0. I think more ZvZs would be more chances for at least one of them to go into something not pure muta ling, or at least have a chance at deciding games where players rolled equal builds. better solution; patch broodwar and fix zvz. this is literally the worst solution possible rofl, patch can be good, patch can be bad, patching to make the game better and fix broken matchups is the worst solution possible to the problem of bad matchups xD well it won't happen there's nobody at blizzard who is willing and skilled to do that No one at blizzard is going to do it because making arbitrary changes to a twenty year old game (with the goal of completely changing a matchup because some people on the internet don't like it) would be a terrible idea.
That is literally what game design is, you make initial design decisions or subsequent changes that you think will maximise people liking your game.
As a spectator I like that ZvZ is different than other matchups, TvT is too but in the other direction in terms of game length. They test different skills and have a different feel than other matchups. I liked the variable series length suggestion tbh, but as part of a more holistic approach to balancing games across various areas I guess.
Balance and dynamic interesting gameplay aren’t the same thing anyway, ideally your game is in the middle of that Venn diagram.
Of Blizzard’s main RTS games SC2 probably has the best stock balance, but they also patch it a ton to reset it a lot, BW is pretty damn good but it’s balanced more with map architecture, WC3 is the worst balanced but it has more matchups.
Extending the series length of a ZvZ matchup, or shortening TvTs might ‘balance’ the experience in inherently balanced matchups, fit schedules better and relatively equalise series length. Bit unorthodox but doesn’t change the actual game, and there’s at least a rationale behind doing such a thing. Or you can keep the variance as it is because it emphasises the different matchups better, I think both have their pros and cons there.
WC3 could (potentially) do with some matchup specific balance tweaks, which I understand there are also many good arguments against, but equally trying to balance 4 distinct races across all their matchups is a very difficult task indeed if you’re balancing globally.
|
i think its safe to say dazed posts contain a high% of trollish opinions
in response to that i wonder what TL should do with that is it crazy to think it would be best to just clear the acc/posts?
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On August 06 2019 05:37 onlystar wrote:
i think its safe to say dazed posts contain a high% of trollish opinions
in response to that i wonder what TL should do with that is it crazy to think it would be best to just clear the acc/posts?
the sad thing is he isnt trolling. hes dead serious
|
maybe you shouldn't be so afraid that people have different opinions than yours lol : /
|
Action vs Sharp tonight. I think Sharp will win 3-2 and face Snow in the semis. Hopefully, it's not a 3-0 romp either way.
|
On August 06 2019 12:57 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
maybe you shouldn't be so afraid that people have different opinions than yours lol : / Well, this is a cult. Can you see why I say this now? lol. This forum...
|
On August 07 2019 07:36 Dazed. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2019 12:57 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
maybe you shouldn't be so afraid that people have different opinions than yours lol : / Well, this is a cult. Can you see why I say this now? lol. This forum...
you shit out stale meta post everyday and chobo even proved majority of your 3k+posts are just spamming stale meta.
Meta changed plenty... even past few weeks. Ladder is full of flash optimized mech now and flash is busting out new 1/1/1 into bio/mech transition builds
people are calling out on your shit because they are tired of you spamming it all the time
|
On August 07 2019 08:27 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2019 07:36 Dazed. wrote:On August 06 2019 12:57 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
maybe you shouldn't be so afraid that people have different opinions than yours lol : / Well, this is a cult. Can you see why I say this now? lol. This forum... you shit out stale meta post everyday and chobo even proved majority of your 3k+posts are just spamming stale meta. It was proved that all i do is spam, because some guy trolled through years of posts to find a single instance where I shared a similar sentiment in the past? During an era where the vast majority of the community left-- and never returned-- due to a similar sentiment? Please.
On August 07 2019 08:27 jinjin5000 wrote:
Meta changed plenty... even past few weeks. Ladder is full of flash optimized mech now and flash is busting out new 1/1/1 into bio/mech transition builds
people are calling out on your shit because they are tired of you spamming it all the time These meta changes are small. The game is figured out; we just rebuild and change efficencies, but its simple repackaging. Same maps. Same crystal amounts. Same basic meta. Wow flash got to mech in a slightly different way, zoinky! Its still going to play all of the same beats, all of the top players are still going to be snapping their wrists in order to win the game, zvz will still be the same crap its always been. Real creative learning in starcraft stopped loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong ago.
Theres a reason the average starcraft player is over thirty and the community ossified around only a few maps.
Next im going to hear about how i just dont appreciate the super subtleties of the game, broodwar is like chess!
User was banned for this post.
|
for a guy who hates how "stale" bw has become as much as he does, i dont understand why he stuck around to play and discuss the game this much lol
|
|
|
On August 07 2019 21:16 Dazed. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2019 08:27 jinjin5000 wrote:On August 07 2019 07:36 Dazed. wrote:On August 06 2019 12:57 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
maybe you shouldn't be so afraid that people have different opinions than yours lol : / Well, this is a cult. Can you see why I say this now? lol. This forum... you shit out stale meta post everyday and chobo even proved majority of your 3k+posts are just spamming stale meta. It was proved that all i do is spam, because some guy trolled through years of posts to find a single instance where I shared a similar sentiment in the past? During an era where the vast majority of the community left-- and never returned-- due to a similar sentiment? Please. Show nested quote +On August 07 2019 08:27 jinjin5000 wrote:
Meta changed plenty... even past few weeks. Ladder is full of flash optimized mech now and flash is busting out new 1/1/1 into bio/mech transition builds
people are calling out on your shit because they are tired of you spamming it all the time These meta changes are small. The game is figured out; we just rebuild and change efficencies, but its simple repackaging. Same maps. Same crystal amounts. Same basic meta.Wow flash got to mech in a slightly different way, zoinky! Its still going to play all of the same beats, all of the top players are still going to be snapping their wrists in order to win the game, zvz will still be the same crap its always been. Real creative learning in starcraft stopped loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong ago. Theres a reason the average starcraft player is over thirty and the community ossified around only a few maps. Next im going to hear about how i just dont appreciate the super subtleties of the game, broodwar is like chess! User was banned for this post.
I have to interject here, even though he is no longer here to discuss.
The bolded portion is completely ignorant of what is currently happening in Brood War. The map makers seem to have boundless ingenuity and creativity for taking each matchup to new places. Or at least places that were only explored a little bit 10+ years ago and never fully fleshed out.
The map pool deciders are excellent at letting the map pool evolve. They keep a few "standard" or "solved" maps (circuit breaker, bloody ridge) while introducing "new" or "unsolved" maps. Inevitably, with more games, these newer maps will become more solved and deemed balanced or imbalanced. The clearly imbas get phased out or complemented by maps that favor the other races.
The strategies and tactics discovered, or further developed, on the new maps ultimately influence the play on the older maps, adding new layers to the meta there as well.
So yeah, stale? Far from it. Brood War has found an incredibly elegant solution to meta game development and allowing for player creativity through map making and map pool evolution. This is why the most hardcore fans are 30+, because they have seen how BW simultaneously evolves, yet remains solidly balanced, year after year after decade.
|
On August 07 2019 21:16 Dazed. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2019 08:27 jinjin5000 wrote:On August 07 2019 07:36 Dazed. wrote:On August 06 2019 12:57 ProMeTheus112 wrote:
maybe you shouldn't be so afraid that people have different opinions than yours lol : / Well, this is a cult. Can you see why I say this now? lol. This forum... you shit out stale meta post everyday and chobo even proved majority of your 3k+posts are just spamming stale meta. It was proved that all i do is spam, because some guy trolled through years of posts to find a single instance where I shared a similar sentiment in the past? During an era where the vast majority of the community left-- and never returned-- due to a similar sentiment? Please. Show nested quote +On August 07 2019 08:27 jinjin5000 wrote:
Meta changed plenty... even past few weeks. Ladder is full of flash optimized mech now and flash is busting out new 1/1/1 into bio/mech transition builds
people are calling out on your shit because they are tired of you spamming it all the time These meta changes are small. The game is figured out; we just rebuild and change efficencies, but its simple repackaging. Same maps. Same crystal amounts. Same basic meta. Wow flash got to mech in a slightly different way, zoinky! Its still going to play all of the same beats, all of the top players are still going to be snapping their wrists in order to win the game, zvz will still be the same crap its always been. Real creative learning in starcraft stopped loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong ago. Theres a reason the average starcraft player is over thirty and the community ossified around only a few maps. Next im going to hear about how i just dont appreciate the super subtleties of the game, broodwar is like chess! User was banned for this post.
May I just ask: do you think the same about chess?
It's fair we disagree, but with your understanding any sport, any game that is in the world has been solved.. and only efficences are improved. Unless a game changes dramaticly, which doesn't really happen with any sport (ok, maybe with Lol/Dota and SC2..)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/871322-3x2-340x227.jpg)
