지난 3월 개발팀과의 대화 시간에서 피드백을 보내주신 모든 분들께 진심으로 감사드립니다. 커뮤니티 여러분의 피드백은 저희에게 매우 큰 도움이 됩니다. 스타크래프트는 수많은 분들께 매우 특별한 의미로 다가오는 게임이기에, 클래식 게임 팀에서는 커뮤니티 여러분의 의견을 듣고 스타크래프트 플레이 경험을 지속적으로 향상시킬 수 있도록 최선을 다하겠습니다. 지난 개발팀과의 대화 시간에서 보내주신 주요 피드백에 대한 개발팀의 답변을 아래에서 확인하실 수 있습니다.
제보된 문제:
렉(지연 현상) 먼저, 최근 렉 현상을 경험하신 분들께 죄송하다는 말씀을 드립니다. 최근 프록시 서버에 병목 현상을 유발하여 이로 인해 게임 내 렉 현상을 야기한 문제를 파악하였고, 지난 주말 서버 차원의 패치를 통해 프록시 서버의 부담을 크게 줄일 수 있었습니다. 해당 패치 이후 현재까지는 게임 내 렉 현상에 대한 제보 수가 크게 줄었음을 확인할 수 있었지만, 앞으로도 지속적으로 이 문제를 살펴보며 향상시켜 나갈 예정입니다. 아울러, 지난 1월 STUN 지원을 통해 플레이어간 네트워크 충돌로 인한 대기실 및 게임 내 렉 현상 (일명 ‘겹핑’)의 발생 빈도가 감소하기도 했습니다. 저희는 계속해서 네트워크 경험을 향상시켜 나갈 예정이며, 네트워크 관련 문제의 원인을 빠르게 파악하고 수정하기 위해 노력하고 있습니다. 스타크래프트에서 렉 현상이나 네트워크 관련 문제를 겪고 계시다면, 번거로우시더라도 최근 기술 지원 게시판에 게시된 정보 요청 게시물에 방문하셔서 현재 사용 중인 환경에 대한 정보를 덧글로 남겨 주시기를 부탁드립니다. 네트워크 관련 문제의 원인을 파악하고 구체적인 해결 방법을 찾는 과정에는 여러분의 제보가 큰 도움이 됩니다.
사용자 인터페이스 성능 지난 몇 달간 사용자 인터페이스, 특히 게임이 끝난 후의 화면, 프로필 화면, 순위표 화면, 계정 패널 등에 대한 성능이 크게 향상되었습니다. 그 중에서도 가장 최근에 적용된 사항으로는 1.21.5 패치를 통해 Battle.net 플레이어 프로필 성능 최적화가 진행되기도 했습니다. 꽤 오랜 시간 동안 사용자 인터페이스 성능을 개선하기 위해 많은 노력을 기울였으며, 이를 통해 플레이어 여러분의 경험이 작년에 비해 크게 향상되었기를 바랍니다.
게임 내 지연 시간 (레이턴시) 스타크래프트: 리마스터 출시 이후 네트워크 코드를 향상시키기 위해 노력하고 있습니다. 더 이상 6112 포트 개방 (포트 포워딩)이 필요하지 않도록 STUN을 지원하고, 그리고 턴레이트 20 및 24를 지원하기 위한 최적화 작업을 진행한 것이 이러한 향상 작업의 일환입니다. 턴레이트 24는 LAN 플레이 환경과 동일한 턴레이트이며, Battle.net에서도 LAN 환경과 동일한 경험을 할 수 있게 된 것에 만족하고 있습니다.
대전 상대 찾기 게임 내 지연 시간 (레이턴시) 한국에서는 대전 상대 찾기 게임 중 75%가 턴레이트 24로 플레이되고 있으며, 97% 가량이 턴레이트 16 또는 그 이상으로 플레이되고 있습니다. 글로벌 대전 상대 찾기 관련 난관 중 하나는, 스타크래프트: 리마스터의 플레이 인구 대다수가 한국 내에 있어 간헐적으로 한국 내 플레이어들이 한국 외 플레이어들과 대전하게 되는 상황이 발생하며, 이 경우 물리적인 거리로 인해 지연 시간이 증가할 수 있다는 것입니다. 최근 몇 달간 대전 상대 찾기의 알고리즘이 지리적으로 가까운 플레이어들간의 대전을 선호하도록 변경하여 지연 시간을 감소시킬 수 있었으나, 균형을 맞추는 작업은 여전히 진행 중입니다. 저희는 최적의 균형을 찾기 위해 노력하고 있으며, 이를 달성하기 위해서는 커뮤니티 여러분의 지속적인 피드백이 매우 큰 도움이 됩니다.
사용자 지정 게임 내 지연 시간 (레이턴시) 프록시 서버와 STUN 서버가 추가되어, 이전 그 어느 때보다도 더 많은 분들께서 6112 포트에 대해 신경 쓸 필요없이 스타크래프트를 플레이할 수 있게 되었습니다. 스타크래프트: 리마스터의 네트워크 시스템이 P2P 방식(개인 대 개인 연결 방식)을 사용하고 있기에, 게임 내에 더 많은 플레이어들이 있을 경우 체감되는 지연 시간이 증가하게 됩니다. 사용자 게임 내 최적의 지연 시간을 얻기 위해서는 사용자 지정 게임 생성 시에 동적 반응 속도 지원 설정을 사용하시기를 추천해드립니다.
사용자 지정 게임 “네트워크 충돌” (일명 “겹핑”) 사용자 지정 게임 내에서 네트워크 충돌, 일명 “겹핑” 현상은 게임에 참여한 플레이어 간 연결 상태가 좋지 않거나 아예 연결되지 않는 문제를 의미하는 것으로 알고있습니다. 현재 버전의 지연 시간 표시 막대는 로컬 플레이어와 다른 플레이어 간 연결 상태를 보여주기는 하지만, 모든 플레이어 간 연결 상태를 보여주지는 않습니다. 따라서 모든 플레이어 간 연결을 지연 시간 표시 막대를 통해 확인할 수 있는 사용자 인터페이스를 살펴보고 있습니다. 아울러, STUN 지원이 추가되며 이러한 ‘겹핑’ 현상이 발생하는 빈도가 크게 감소했습니다.
게임 참가 버튼을 클릭한 후 게임 대기실 목록이 늦게 표시되는 문제 이 문제에 대해 더 자세히 조사하도록 하겠습니다.
귓속말이 지연되는 현상 (귓말렉) 이 문제에 대해 더 자세히 조사하도록 하겠습니다.
리마스터 이후 SD 그래픽이 이전보다 좋지 않게 느껴지는 문제 스타크래프트: 브루드 워 당시에는 게임이 640x480 해상도로 실행되었습니다. CRT 모니터 (추억의 시절이죠!) 또는 LCD 모니터로 게임을 플레이하던 시기에는 이 작은 이미지를 모니터 화면에 표시하는 방법이 모니터에 따라 결정되었습니다. 거의 대부분의 경우, 화면을 채우기 위해 이미지가 확대되는 방식을 사용했죠. 하드웨어가 이미지를 확대하기 위해 사용하는 알고리즘에는 여러가지가 있으며, 브루드 워 당시에는 모니터 브랜드와 모델에 따라 사용하는 알고리즘 방식이 결정되었습니다. 또한, 사용하는 실행기 또는 런처의 종류에 따라서도 알고리즘이 상이하기도 했습니다. 다시 말하면, 이는 플레이어에 따라 경험한 사항이 다를 수 있으며, 모든 이들이 이전 SD 그래픽을 동일하게 기억하는 것이 아니라는 것을 의미합니다. 이를 해소하기 위해 저희는 가장 인기있던 알고리즘 몇 가지를 적용하여 옵션 메뉴에서 필터 형태로 선택할 수 있게끔 하였고, 대부분의 플레이어께서는 이에 만족하고 계신 것으로 보입니다. 하지만, 여전히 다른 가능성이 열려 있으며, 이전 모습과 현재 모습을 비교하는 형태의 스크린샷을 통해 저희에게 말씀해주시면 옵션 메뉴에 더 많은 알고리즘을 추가하는 방안을 고려할 수 있을 것입니다.
특정 시작 위치에서 일꾼이 광물을 더 빠르게 채취할 수 있는 버그 스타크래프트를 리마스터하는 과정에서, 저희는 스타크래프트의 게임플레이 측면을 변경하지 않기로 결정했습니다. 이러한 점은 스타크래프트: 리마스터에서 1.16.1 버전의 리플레이를 여전히 실행할 수 있으며 게임플레이 또한 이전과 정확히 그대로 유지되어 있다는 것에서 잘 드러나죠. 저희는 스타크래프트: 리마스터의 게임플레이에 어떠한 형태로든 변화를 주는 것은 매우 신중하게 접근해야 한다고 생각합니다. 하지만, 플레이어 대다수분들께서 게임플레이에 변화를 주어야 한다고 생각한다면, 당연히 이에 귀를 기울일 것입니다. 저희는 최근 공개 테스트 서버(PTR) 환경을 만들었고, 플레이어들이 접속하여 플레이한 후 피드백을 제공하실 수 있도록 이 환경에 실험적인 빌드를 적용하는 과정을 시작할 계획입니다. 질문해주신 형태의 게임플레이 변경 사항은 이러한 공개 테스트 서버 환경을 통해 테스트해볼 수 있을 사안이라 생각합니다.
발키리가 때때로 공격을 멈추는 버그 역사적으로, 스타크래프트에는 스프라이트, 유닛, 탄환 등에 항상 특정 수치의 제한이 존재했습니다. 발키리 (그리고 포톤 캐논)은 탄환 제한이 초과된 경우 공격을 멈추게 되죠. 저희는 스타크래프트: 리마스터와 함께 탄환 제한을 2500에서 5000으로 증가시킨 바 있는데요. 저희는 1대1 경기에서 탄환 수가 이러한 제한 수치에 도달할 확률이 낮기 때문에 (물론, 유닛이 다수 등장하는 4대4 사용자 지정 게임에서는 여전히 발생할 수 있겠지만요.) 현재 수치가 충분한 수치라 판단하고 있습니다. 하지만, 저희의 판단이 실제 여러분의 경기에서의 결과와 다르다면, 저희가 조사할 수 있도록 리플레이와 함께 저희에게 말씀해주시기를 부탁드립니다.
프로필 통계가 올바르지 않게 표시되는 문제 출시 이후 통계 관련 몇 가지 문제가 있어왔으나, 최근 통계 관련 다양한 문제를 수정했습니다. 이후에도 통계 관련 문제를 겪으실 경우, 저희가 확인할 수 있도록 BattleTag와 증상을 알려주시면 감사하겠습니다.
창 모드에서 마우스 감도가 일관적이지 않은 문제 이 문제에 대해 더 자세히 조사하도록 하겠습니다. 사용하고 계신 운영 체제 등등의 조금 더 자세한 정보를 알려주시기를 부탁드립니다.
리플레이가 실행되지 않는 현상 EUD와 슈퍼 스피드 (2배, 3배 등등) 리플레이는 정상적으로 작동하지 않습니다. EUD 또는 배속이 적용된 환경이 아님에도 문제가 발생할 경우 저희에게 리플레이를 보내주세요.
무작위로 연결이 끊어지는 현상 BattleTag를 알려주시면 더 자세히 조사하도록 하겠습니다.
기능 요청:
공식 래더 (리그 단계) 시스템 프론티어 리그를 종료하고 리그 단계 (티어) 시스템과 함께 공식 새 시즌을 시작하는 것이 개발팀의 최우선 목표 중 하나입니다. 이를 위한 작업이 한창 진행 중이며, 가까운 시일 내에 적용할 수 있을 것으로 기대하고 있습니다.
새 래더 시스템 배치 경기 새 래더 시스템에는 해당 시스템이 추가되어 배치 경기를 완료해야 할 것입니다.
새 래더 시스템 전적/통계 초기화 새 시즌에서는 전적/통계 초기화가 진행되며, 이전 시즌 (프론티어 리그)의 기록은 보관될 예정입니다.
래더에 초상화 등의 보상을 추가해 주세요. 새로운 래더의 일환으로 보상 시스템이 추가될 예정입니다.
래더에 이주의 지도(Map of the Week) 시스템을 추가해 주세요. 좋은 아이디어이며, 향후에 추가를 고려할 수 있는 기능이라 생각합니다. 이에 앞서, 지도를 매우 짧은 주기로 변경하는 것이 래더의 각 시즌이 갖는 온전성에 어떤 영향을 줄 것인지 살펴보아야 할 것 같습니다.
무작위 플레이어가 무작위 플레이어를 상대로만 대전하게 하는 기능 이는 저희가 살펴볼 수 있는 기능이라 생각됩니다.
대화 채널에 있는 플레이어와 등급전을 플레이할 수 있는 옵션 이 기능의 경우 특정 플레이어에게 승리를 몰아주는 등의 용도로 사용될 수 있으므로 대전 상대 찾기의 온전성을 해할 수 있습니다.
래더 지도 목록이 더 자주 업데이트되었으면 좋겠습니다. 지도 목록은 정기적으로 업데이트될 예정입니다. 매년 세 번의 시즌을 진행하는 방안을 계획하고 있으며, 매 시즌 시작 시마다 지도 목록이 갱신될 예정입니다.
래더 지도 목록에 ASL 지도를 추가해주세요. 이미 진행 중인 사항이며, 앞으로도 커뮤니티에서 제작한 대전 지도들을 래더에 추가하는 것을 고려할 것입니다.
클랜 시스템과 클랜 토너먼트 시스템을 추가해 주세요. 클랜 시스템을 게임에 추가할 계획이지만, 로드맵 상 가까운 시일 내로 예정되어 있지는 않습니다.
지도 목록 제안: 투혼과 서킷 브레이커를 고정 래더 지도로 활용하는 방안 저희 또한 투혼과 서킷 브레이커를 고정 래더 지도로 활용하는 방안에 동의합니다.
다른 플레이어가 연결이 끊겼을 때의 (디스커넥트) 대기 시간 개선 현재 스타크래프트에서는 연결이 좋지 않을 때 45초간의 응답 대기 시간을 허용하고 있습니다. 하지만, 지금 시대에는 이러한 대기 시간을 크게 줄이는 것이 가능하다고 생각합니다.
인공지능 개선 현재 계획된 BWAPI 통합을 통해 인공지능을 상대할 때 더 많은 선택지가 가능해질 것이라 생각합니다. 그 외에는 인공지능을 개선하기 위한 근시일 내의 계획은 없는 상황입니다.
사용자 지정 게임에서 최대 인구수를 증가시키는 옵션 사용자 지정 게임 옵션으로 추가하는 방안은 가능할 것으로 보이나, 가까운 시일 내의 로드맵에는 포함되어 있지 않습니다.
참여 가능한 최대 플레이어 수를 10, 12 등으로 증가시켜 주세요. 현재 저희가 개선하기 위해 노력 중인 렉 현상들과 스타크래프트가 사용 중인 P2P 네트워크 프레임워크를 함께 고려했을 때, 전체 네트워크 프레임워크를 새롭게 구성하지 않는 한 참여 가능한 최대 플레이어 수를 늘리는 것은 어려울 것 같습니다. 최대 플레이어 수가 증가하면 렉 현상 또한 증가할 것입니다.
팀 대전 상대 찾기 (2대2, 3대3, 4대4)를 추가해 주세요. 네! 2018 년 내에 이 기능을 추가할 계획입니다.
대전 상대 찾기에 재경기(리매치) 옵션을 추가해 주세요. 이 옵션이 추가될 경우 다른 플레이어에게 승리를 몰아주기 위해 반복적으로 패배하는 등 대전 상대 찾기의 온전성을 해할 수 있지만, 충분히 고려할 수 있는 옵션이라 생각합니다.
20주년 콘솔 스킨을 업데이트해주세요. 현재 20주년 콘솔 스킨에 만족하고 있지만, 구체적인 피드백이 있으시다면 언제든지 환영입니다.
SD 그래픽에 16 해상도를 추가해 주세요. 저희는 SD 그래픽이 리마스터와 호환되면서도 오리지널 브루드 워의 경험을 최대한 유지하기를 바랐고, SD 그래픽에 16 해상도를 추가하는 것은 이러한 순수 경험에 부정적인 영향을 줄 수도 있습니다. 물론 “절대”라는 것은 없지만, 현재로서는 저희의 로드맵에 포함되어 있지는 않습니다.
창 모드 내 해상도를 조절하는 옵션을 추가해 주세요. 의견주신 ‘해상도’는 창 모드의 크기를 말씀하시는 것으로 보이는데요, 충분히 살펴볼 수 있는 옵션이라 생각합니다.
동족전(미러전)이 발생했을 경우 종족을 변경할 수 있게 해주세요. 동족전이 발생했을 경우 어떤 플레이어가 종족을 바꾸어야 할까요? 두 플레이어 모두에게 변경할 수 있는 권한이 주어졌을 때 두 플레이어 모두 동일한 종족으로 바꾸면 어떻게 해야 할까요? 또 다시 종족을 변경하게 해야 할까요? 두 플레이어가 계속 동일한 종족으로 변경하는 것으로 인해 게임이 시작하지 못하는 상황이 발생할 수도 있겠습니다. 따라서 저희가 이 기능을 추가하기에 앞서 어떤 방식이 가장 적합할 것인지에 대해 신중하게 살펴봐야 할 것입니다.
프로필 내 종족별 승률 이 기능은 현재 새로운 래더 (리그 단계) 시스템과 함께 사용자 인터페이스에 추가될 계획입니다.
사용자 지정 게임 내 사용자 인터페이스에서 게임 분류(필터)가 더 쉽도록 만들어 주세요. 이에 대해 살펴보도록 하겠습니다.
대기실 이름을 자동 저장할 수 있는 옵션을 추가해 주세요. 네, 1.21.5 패치와 함께 이 기능이 추가되었습니다!
다른 지도를 제외하고 선택한 래더 지도 1개에서만 플레이할 수 있는 기능 이 기능의 경우 래더 게임에서 플레이어들이 상호작용하는 방식을 변경하므로 적용하기 어려울 것으로 보입니다.
블리자드 제작 지도를 만들어주세요. 저희 또한 블리자드 제작 지도를 추가하고 싶지만, 현재 다른 기능 요청 사항들에 비해서는 우선 순위가 낮은 상황입니다.
게임 내 대화를 무시할 수 있는 기능 현재 /dnd <플레이어이름> 명령어를 통해 가능합니다.
팀플레이 게임에 관심있는 사람들을 위한 전용 채널을 만들어주세요. 현재 채널 목록을 개편하는 방안을 살펴보고 있으며, 말씀하신 기능이 이 개편의 일부가 될 수도 있습니다.
MMR 자동 하락 기능이 필요합니다. 일종의 MMR 자동 하락 시스템을 추가하는 것이 현재 로드맵에 포함되어 있습니다.
큰 지도 (128*128 사이즈 이상)에 대한 미니맵 배율 조절 기능 흥미로운 의견이며, 이에 대해 더 자세히 살펴보도록 하겠습니다. 이 기능에 대한 다른 분들의 의견 또한 듣고 싶습니다.
래더에 집정관 모드(일명 ‘생컨’)를 추가해주세요 장기적인 관점에서 고려해볼 수 있겠으나, 근시일 내의 로드맵에는 포함되어 있지 않습니다.
그 외:
밸런스에 변화를 주지 않았으면 좋겠습니다. 저희 또한 동의합니다!
높은 MMR을 가진 플레이어가 새로운 아이디를 만들어 낮은 실력 단계에서 플레이하는 문제 이 문제를 해소할 수 있는 방안이 있을지 살펴보고 있으며, 남겨주신 덧글 중에서도 좋은 아이디어가 다수 있었습니다.
욕설 등 부적절한 언어 사용에 대한 처벌이 부족합니다. 이에 대한 더 나은 인터페이스 및 시스템이 필요하다는 것에 동의합니다.
래더 지도 목록의 지도 수가 너무 많습니다. 현재로서는 7개의 래더 지도 및 3개의 지도 제외 선택 횟수에 변화를 줄 예정은 없지만, 전반적인 커뮤니티 피드백을 계속해서 확인한 뒤 필요할 경우 조정할 수 있습니다.
대전 상대 찾기에서 같은 상대를 너무 많이 만납니다. 현재로서는 같은 상대를 다시 만나는 것을 제지하는 별도의 시스템은 없습니다. 이러한 기능을 추가하는 방안을 고려할 수는 있겠지만, 반대로 뛰어난 실력을 가진 상대와 다시 맞붙는 것을 좋아하는 일부 플레이어 분들께서는 이러한 기능을 반기지 않을 수도 있습니다. 따라서 이러한 점들을 감안하여 더 생각해봐야 할 문제라 생각합니다.
시작 MMR (1500점)이 너무 높습니다. 시작 MMR은 등급 시스템의 중앙 지점에 불과합니다. 시작 MMR을 낮춘다면 이는 단순히 모든 플레이어의 MMR을 낮추는 것에 불과할 것입니다.
모든 EUD 지도를 플레이하게 해주세요. 안타깝게도, 스타크래프트: 리마스터에서 모든 EUD를 적용하는 것은 불가능합니다. 특히, 그래픽을 변경하는 EUD 지도는 현재로서는 에뮬레이터에서 지원하기 어렵습니다.
핵 프로그램을 사용하는 플레이어가 있습니다. 현재 스타크래프트는 블리자드 게임 중에서도 최고에 속하는 (그리고 게임 산업 내에서도 최고에 속하는) 핵 방지 소프트웨어를 사용하고 있습니다. 핵 프로그램을 사용 중인 것으로 의심되는 플레이어를 목격할 경우 저희에게 리플레이와 함께 제보해주시면 상응하는 조치를 취할 예정입니다. 스타크래프트: 리마스터 출시 이후 실제 핵 프로그램을 사용한 것으로 확인된 제보는 없었습니다. 하지만, 일부 플레이어들이 불공평할 수 있는 게임플레이 관련 버그를 악용한 상황은 있었기에 향후 이러한 행위를 방지하는 것에 집중할 예정입니다.
불법 웹사이트 스팸 메시지 불법 웹사이트 스팸 메시지를 방지하는 작업에서 어느 정도 진전이 있었으며, 앞으로도 이러한 행위를 막기 위해 노력할 예정입니다.
렉 현상이 사라졌습니다. 다행입니다! 지원해주신 모든 분들께 감사드립니다!
스타크래프트에 지속적인 성원과 지원을 보내주신 모든 한국 플레이어 분들께 감사의 말씀을 전합니다. 앞으로도 커뮤니티 여러분과 함께하며 스타크래프트를 더욱 개선해 나가기 위해 최선을 다하도록 하겠습니다!
I sincerely thank all those who gave feedback during the talk with the development team last March. Community Your feedback is very helpful to us. Since StarCraft is a very special game for a lot of people, the classic game team will do their best to get feedback from the community and to continuously improve the StarCraft play experience. Below you will find answers from the development team on the key feedback you've received from your previous development team.
Reported issue:
Lek (delayed phenomenon) First, I apologize for those who have recently experienced the Rake phenomenon. We have recently identified bottlenecks in proxy servers, which have caused problems with in-game leaks, and we were able to significantly reduce the burden on proxy servers through server-wide patches over the weekend. We have been able to confirm that the number of reports on game in-rack phenomenon has greatly decreased since the patch, but we will continue to look at this issue and improve it. In addition, in January, support for STUN decreased the incidence of waiting room and game in-rack phenomenon (aka "overlapping") due to network conflicts between players. We will continue to improve our network experience, and we strive to quickly identify and correct the cause of network related issues. If you are experiencing network problems with StarCraft, please feel free to leave a comment on the current status of your environment by visiting the information request post posted on the latest tech support bulletin. Your feedback is a great help in identifying the root cause of network-related problems and finding specific solutions.
User Interface Performance The performance of the user interface over the last few months has been greatly improved, especially after the game is over, the profile screen, the leaderboard screen, and the account panel. Most recently, Battle.net player profile performance optimization was done through patch 1.21.5. I've put a lot of effort into improving user interface performance for quite some time, and I hope that your experience has improved significantly over the last year.
Game Latency (Latency) StarCraft: Since the release of Remaster, we are working to improve the network code. This improvement is part of the optimization work to support STUN no longer requiring 6112 port opening (port forwarding), and to support turnaround 20 and 24. Turn-around 24 is the same turn-around rate as the LAN play environment, and we are pleased to be able to experience the same experience with LAN on Battle.net.
Finding opponents Latency in games (latency) In Korea, 75% of the opponent match games are played with a turnaround of 24, and 97% are played with a turnaround of 16 or more. One of the difficulties in finding a global battlefield is the fact that the majority of Starcraft: Remaster's playable population is in Korea, and there are occasions when players in Korea play against players other than Korea occasionally. In this case, This can be increased. In recent months, the algorithm for finding opponents has been able to reduce latency by changing to favor opponents between geographically close players, but balancing is still ongoing. We strive to find the right balance, and constant feedback from our community is very helpful to achieve this.
Custom game latency (latency) Proxy servers and STUN servers have been added to make Starcraft more playable than ever before, without worrying about 6112 ports. StarCraft: Because Remaster's network system uses P2P (personal-to-personal), there will be more latency if there are more players in the game. We recommend that you use the Dynamic Reaction Rate Support setting when creating a custom game to get the best latency in your game.
Custom game "network conflict" (aka "overlapping") Within a customized game, network conflicts, or "overlaps," are understood to mean that players in the game are either not connected well or not connected at all. The current version of the delay bar shows the connection status between the local player and another player, but it does not show the connection status between all players. Therefore, we are looking at a user interface that allows you to see all player-to-player connections via the delay bar. In addition, STUN support has been added and the frequency of this "overlapping" phenomenon has dropped significantly.
After clicking on the Join Game button, the game waiting list will be displayed late . We will investigate this issue further.
The delay of whispering (Iamarag) Let me investigate this issue in more detail.
SD graphics after remaster are not as bad as before StarCraft: At the time of Brood War, the game ran at 640x480 resolution. When you were playing a game with a CRT monitor (or a memorable time!) Or LCD monitor, the way to display this small image on the monitor screen was determined by the monitor. Most of the time, I used the way the images were enlarged to fill the screen. There are a number of algorithms that hardware uses to enlarge images, and at the time of Brood War, the algorithm used depends on the monitor brand and model. In addition, the algorithms differ depending on the type of launcher or launcher you use. In other words, this means that players may have different experiences and that not everyone will remember the same old SD graphics. To alleviate this, we've applied some of the most popular algorithms to let you choose from the options menu in the form of filters, and most players seem to be satisfied with this. However, there are still other possibilities open and you can consider adding more algorithms to the options menu if you tell us in the form of a screenshot that compares the previous and current views.
Bug where workers can pick minerals faster at a specific starting location During the remake of StarCraft, we decided not to change the gameplay aspect of StarCraft. This is evident in the fact that StarCraft: Remaster can still run the 1.16.1 version of the replay and that the gameplay remains exactly the same as before. We think it is very necessary to approach the StarCraft: Remaster's game play in any form of change very carefully. However, if you think that the majority of players should make a difference in gameplay, they will listen. We have recently created a public test server (PTR) environment and will begin the process of applying experimental builds to this environment so that players can connect and play and then provide feedback. I think the gameplay changes you have asked are things you can test through this open test server environment.
Valkyrie sometimes stops attacking Historically, StarCraft has always had certain limits on sprites, units, and bullets. Valkyrie (and Photon Cannon) will stop the attack if the bullet limit is exceeded. We have increased the bullet limit from 2500 to 5000 with StarCraft: Remaster. We believe that the current figures are sufficient because we are unlikely to reach these limit values in one-on-one matches (though, of course, this may still occur in 4-to-4 customized games with many units) . However, if our judgment differs from the actual result of your game, please ask us to let us know with a replay so we can investigate.
Profile statistics are incorrectly displayed There have been some statistics issues since launch, but we've recently fixed various statistics issues. If you are still experiencing statistics issues, please let us know about the BattleTag and its symptoms so that we can verify it.
Mouse sensitivity is inconsistent in windowed mode We will investigate this issue further. Please let me know a little bit more information about your operating system and so on.
Replay is not running The EUD and Super Speed (2x, 3x etc) replay will not work properly. If you are having trouble with an EUD or non-EU environment, please send us a replay.
Random disconnects Please let us know BattleTag and we will investigate further.
Feature Requests:
Formal ladder (league level) One of the top goals of the development team is to end the system frontier league and start an official new season with the league tier system. We are working on this in full swing and we expect to be able to apply it soon.
New ladder system placement game The new ladder system will have to be added to the system to complete the placement game.
New Ladder System Statistics / Statistics Initialization In the new season, statistics / statistics initialization will be done, and the records of the previous season (Frontier League) will be kept.
Please add rewards such as portraits to the ladder. A compensation system will be added as part of the new ladder.
Add a Map of the Week system to the ladder. It's a good idea, and I think it's a feature you can consider adding in the future. Prior to this, it would seem that changing the map to a very short cycle would have an impact on the overall performance of each ladder season. I think this is
a feature that we can look at as a feature that allows a random player to only play against a random player .
Options for playing the player and rating on the chat channel This function can be used to give victory to a certain player, etc., so that the competence of finding opponent can be deteriorated.
I hope the ladder map list is updated more frequently. The list of maps will be updated regularly. We plan to have three seasons each year, and the map list will be updated every season.
Add ASL map to ladder map list. It is already underway, and we will consider adding community-generated match maps to the ladder in the future.
Please add clan system and clan tournament system. We plan to add the clan system to the game, but it is not scheduled for the nearest roadmap.
Suggested list of maps: How to use Touhon and Circuit Breaker as fixed ladder maps We also agree to use Touhon and Circuit Breaker as fixed ladder maps.
Improved wait time when disconnected (disconnected) from other players At present, StarCraft allows 45 seconds of response time when connection is bad. However, I think it is possible to greatly reduce the waiting time in this age.
Improving Artificial Intelligence Now that we are dealing with artificial intelligence through the planned BWAPI integration, we believe more options will be available. Other than that, there is no plan for near-term work to improve artificial intelligence.
Options that increase the maximum number of people in a custom game You might be able to add it as a custom game option, but it is not included in the roadmap in the near future.
Please increase the maximum number of players available to 10, 12, etc. Taking into account the current phenomena we are trying to improve and the P2P network framework StarCraft is using, it will be difficult to increase the maximum number of players that can be involved unless we are reorganizing the entire network framework. As the maximum number of players increases, the lag phenomenon will also increase.
Please add Team Match Match (2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4). Yeah! We plan to add this feature in 2018.
Please add a re-match option to match opponents. If this option is added, it may be possible to eliminate the integrity of the opponent's opponent by repeatedly defeating the opponent in order to win the victory, but this is an option that can be considered sufficiently.
Please update your 20th anniversary console skin. I am happy with the 20th anniversary console skins, but if you have any specific feedback, you are welcome. Please add
16 resolutions to SD graphics . We wanted SD graphics to be as compatible with the remaster as possible and to keep the original Brodwar experience as good as possible,Adding a resolution can have a negative impact on this pure experience. There is no "absolute" of course, but it is not included in our roadmap at this time.
Please add an option to adjust the resolution in the window mode. I think the 'resolution' that you gave me is the size of the window mode.
Please allow the race to change when a match (before the mirror) occurs. What player should change their tribe if a match-up occurs? When both players are given the right to change, what if they change to the same race? Should we change the race again? It may happen that the two players continue to change to the same race and the game does not start. So, before we add this feature, we'll have to look carefully at what is going to be the best way.
Race by Race in Profile This feature is currently being added to the user interface along with a new ladder (league level) system.
Customize Make your game classification (filter) easier in the user interface of the game. Let's take a look at this.
Please add an option to auto-save the waiting room name. Yes, this feature has been added with the 1.21.5 patch!
Ability to play on only one selected ladder map except for other maps This feature will be difficult to apply because it changes the way players interact in ladder games.
Please make a blizzard production map. We also want to add a Blizzard production map, but this is a lower priority than other feature requests.
Ability to ignore in-game conversations is now available via the / dnd <player name> command.
Make a dedicated channel for people who are interested in team-play games. We are currently looking at ways to reorganize your channel list, and the features you mentioned may be part of this reorganization.
MMR auto drop function is required. The current roadmap includes adding some sort of MMR auto-drop system.
Minimap scaling for large maps (over 128 * 128 sizes) is an interesting comment and we'll take a closer look. I would also like to hear from others about this feature.
Add a magistrate mode to the ladder (aka "saint") You can consider it from a long-term perspective, but it is not included in the roadmap in near-term days.
Others:
I do not want to change the balance. We also agree!
I have been looking at ways in which a player with a high MMR can create a new identity and play at a lower skill level to solve the problem, and there were many good ideas out of the comments you left.
There is a lack of punishment for inappropriate language use such as profanity. I agree that I need a better interface and system for this.
There are too many maps in the ladder map list. At this time, we will not change the number of 7 ladder maps and 3 map exclusions, but you can continue to check the overall community feedback and adjust if necessary.
Match your opponent too much in finding opponents. At this time, there is no separate system that prevents you from meeting the same person again. You might consider adding these features, but some players who like to re-engage with their talented counterparts may not welcome these features. Therefore, I think that this is a problem to think about.
Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players.
Please let us play all EUD maps. Unfortunately, it is not possible to apply all EUDs in StarCraft: Remaster. In particular, EUD maps that change graphics are currently not available in the emulator.
There are players who use nuclear programs. At present, StarCraft is using the best anti-nuclear software (even the best in the game industry) among the Blizzard games. If you witness a player suspected of using a nuclear program, please inform us with the replay and we will take corresponding action. StarCraft: There have been no reports of actual use of the nuclear program since the release of the remaster. However, some players have exploited gameplay-related bugs that could be unfair, so we will focus on preventing this behavior in the future.
Illegal Websites Spam Messages Illegal Websites Some progress has been made in the prevention of spam messages, and we will continue to do so in the future.
The rak phenomenon has disappeared. Fortunately, the! Thank you all for your support!
We would like to thank all the Korean players who have provided support and support to StarCraft. We will continue to do our best to further improve StarCraft with the community.
pretty explicitly stating they have no intent or plan for balance changes, while keeping the same "but we will consider anything the players demand" line they've been stating since pre-release
-new ladder season coming up -thinking about implementing asl maps into ladder -3 ladder seasons a year -ladder resets coming soon -working on bw ai -tr 20-24 here to stay. -almost perfected lag issue -kinda thinking of allowing players to racepick -random players will match up with random -fs/cb here to stay every ladder season due to many kor requests -disc wait time 45 sec to be reduced
There are other good future fixes but these are big fixes i listed
Hmm.. If you enable race picking for ladder, does that mean i could get to the top of the ladder by playing one matchup only? Will ladder then be a fair representation of skill if you're only good at 1 matchup? Ladder can't mean much if that would happen, there would be little prestige to ladder. I don't know how they plan to do it but i still thing racepicking does more harm than good.
The best option would be to create a non ladder matchmaker where race picking is allowed. You would still match within your own MMR range.
On May 05 2018 03:35 KameZerg wrote: Hmm.. If you enable race picking for ladder, does that mean i could get to the top of the ladder by playing one matchup only? Will ladder then be a fair representation of skill if you're only good at 1 matchup? Ladder can't mean much if that would happen, there would be little prestige to ladder. I don't know how they plan to do it but i still thing racepicking does more harm than good.
The best option would be to create a non ladder matchmaker where race picking is allowed. You would still match within your own MMR range.
No. Presumably you would select a race to play against each race. PvT ZvP TvZ etc. You would still need to master three match ups to reach the top of the ladder.
On May 05 2018 03:35 KameZerg wrote: Hmm.. If you enable race picking for ladder, does that mean i could get to the top of the ladder by playing one matchup only? Will ladder then be a fair representation of skill if you're only good at 1 matchup? Ladder can't mean much if that would happen, there would be little prestige to ladder. I don't know how they plan to do it but i still thing racepicking does more harm than good.
The best option would be to create a non ladder matchmaker where race picking is allowed. You would still match within your own MMR range.
No. You'd still have to play three matchups.... but instead of playing PvZ, PvP, PvT you could play PvZ, TvP, ZvP
Really they should only make an option for race picking in mirror match's. You chose another race if facing mirror. If opponent does the same, then its a 50/50 on which person plays there main. That would be easy to implement
"I am happy with the 20th anniversary console skins, but if you have any specific feedback, you are welcome. Please add"
omg
"The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players"
They could implement a chat commant to let better players to jump to (let's say) 2000 MMR in order to make the lower ladder less savage and more new-players-friendly.
"Please add a re-match option to match opponents. If this option is added, it may be possible to eliminate the integrity of the opponent's opponent by repeatedly defeating the opponent in order to win the victory, but this is an option that can be considered sufficiently."
Maybe a single use per day
"Please allow the race to change when a match (before the mirror) occurs. What player should change their tribe if a match-up occurs? When both players are given the right to change, what if they change to the same race? Should we change the race again? It may happen that the two players continue to change to the same race and the game does not start. So, before we add this feature, we'll have to look carefully at what is going to be the best way."
I dislike racepicking in general but they could implement it in a way that in case of mirror I have a single use turn based race switch and the opponent can see my race change so he can act accordingly in order to avoid the mirror match if he care about it. EDIT: The first guy have 10 seconds to change his race then the same for the second one. EDIT 2: Only if the player have "avoid mirror matches* option enabled somewhere in the options.
The Google translate does a pretty decent job. I don't think there was anything confusing in that translation.
- PTR for changes to mining where certain start locations were previously disadvantaged (wonder which one it was? probably either minerals above or below the CC/Nexus/Hatch?) - STUN support has eliminated the need for port forwarding as well as allowed TR20-24 in most matches (in Korea anyway) - SD resolution filters to mimic the effects of old CRTs to make it look more natural/nostalgic - Projectile ("sprite limit") increased from 2500 to 5000. May increase further with enough demand, but this should suit all but the most frenetic 4v4 games. - New ladder system will be deployed soon, and it will require placement matches (probably integrating more modern skill-based matchmaking like SC2). There will be seasonal rewards as well. - Will investigate a Map of the Week system (personally I hate MotW for various reasons), but nothing in the near term. - ASL maps are in for the new season, and the map pool will contain new maps each season (3 seasons per year). - The last used lobby name is remembered when joining/creating games. - Ranked games cannot be manually created, they can only use the automatic matchmaker (avoids wintrading). - No rematch option (avoids wintrading). - Team matchmaking is coming this year. - Clan systems coming eventually, not anytime soon. - Unsure about how to support racepicking because it's possible to get into a situation where you're constantly counterpicking the counterpick (we already figured out a solution to this on ShieldBattery, and it's not that complicated! ???) - The matchmaker will support skill rating decay (if I'm interpreting "MMR auto drop" correctly)
There were also some funny things like "a starting value of 1500 MMR is too high" which... huh?? It makes absolutely no difference...
Wouldn't this mining bug affect a certain race more so than others? Like Zerg for example generally doesn't have as many workers, are they absolutely sure this isn't going to affect the gameplay as in like Zerg or another race being able to collect minerals faster or I guess it wouldn't matter since it would affect all races, it would basically stay the same? I'm really curious to know what exactly would change...
I think about player vs player contain: race, pick race, random,... Don't change anything so It's very good already. If you don't like your match, you can quit game quickly. Ladder for all, it can't service specific favorite. That's it.
My opinion, let's try to reduce time wait a ladder game, special with people have mmr too low or too high by increase amplitude player's mmr that can versus each other. As long as point receive fit each other (person has low mmr who will receive high point if he wins, so on...).
Player don't scare strong opponent, player scare to wait a long time. In the Starcraft, different mmr but not different level much.
balancing mining? i wonder if this means we won't be restricted to putting gas geysers directly on top or to the left of the town hall location for optimal mining anymore.
there better not be any balance changes or I'll riot! lol.
An interesting list of stuff. I'm still not satisfied with the SD graphics. I hope they can add resolution options because that will help fix the problem.
Hahahaha I kinda knew this would happen. go blizzard!
Damn, this is amazing. BW is in good hands. This is gonna take brood war to new great heights. So good to hear that they are listening and constantly improving. I'm looking forward to placement matches. Sick.
I sincerely thank all those who gave feedback during the talk with the development team last March. Community Your feedback is very helpful to us. Since StarCraft is a very special game for a lot of people, the classic game team will do their best to get feedback from the community and to continuously improve the StarCraft play experience. Below you will find answers from the development team on the key feedback you've received from your previous development team.
Reported issue:
Lek (delayed phenomenon) First, I apologize for those who have recently experienced the Rake phenomenon. We have recently identified bottlenecks in proxy servers, which have caused problems with in-game leaks, and we were able to significantly reduce the burden on proxy servers through server-wide patches over the weekend. We have been able to confirm that the number of reports on game in-rack phenomenon has greatly decreased since the patch, but we will continue to look at this issue and improve it. In addition, in January, support for STUN decreased the incidence of waiting room and game in-rack phenomenon (aka "overlapping") due to network conflicts between players. We will continue to improve our network experience, and we strive to quickly identify and correct the cause of network related issues. If you are experiencing network problems with StarCraft, please feel free to leave a comment on the current status of your environment by visiting the information request post posted on the latest tech support bulletin. Your feedback is a great help in identifying the root cause of network-related problems and finding specific solutions.
User Interface Performance The performance of the user interface over the last few months has been greatly improved, especially after the game is over, the profile screen, the leaderboard screen, and the account panel. Most recently, Battle.net player profile performance optimization was done through patch 1.21.5. I've put a lot of effort into improving user interface performance for quite some time, and I hope that your experience has improved significantly over the last year.
Game Latency (Latency) StarCraft: Since the release of Remaster, we are working to improve the network code. This improvement is part of the optimization work to support STUN no longer requiring 6112 port opening (port forwarding), and to support turnaround 20 and 24. Turn-around 24 is the same turn-around rate as the LAN play environment, and we are pleased to be able to experience the same experience with LAN on Battle.net.
Finding opponents Latency in games (latency) In Korea, 75% of the opponent match games are played with a turnaround of 24, and 97% are played with a turnaround of 16 or more. One of the difficulties in finding a global battlefield is the fact that the majority of Starcraft: Remaster's playable population is in Korea, and there are occasions when players in Korea play against players other than Korea occasionally. In this case, This can be increased. In recent months, the algorithm for finding opponents has been able to reduce latency by changing to favor opponents between geographically close players, but balancing is still ongoing. We strive to find the right balance, and constant feedback from our community is very helpful to achieve this.
Custom game latency (latency) Proxy servers and STUN servers have been added to make Starcraft more playable than ever before, without worrying about 6112 ports. StarCraft: Because Remaster's network system uses P2P (personal-to-personal), there will be more latency if there are more players in the game. We recommend that you use the Dynamic Reaction Rate Support setting when creating a custom game to get the best latency in your game.
Custom game "network conflict" (aka "overlapping") Within a customized game, network conflicts, or "overlaps," are understood to mean that players in the game are either not connected well or not connected at all. The current version of the delay bar shows the connection status between the local player and another player, but it does not show the connection status between all players. Therefore, we are looking at a user interface that allows you to see all player-to-player connections via the delay bar. In addition, STUN support has been added and the frequency of this "overlapping" phenomenon has dropped significantly.
After clicking on the Join Game button, the game waiting list will be displayed late . We will investigate this issue further.
The delay of whispering (Iamarag) Let me investigate this issue in more detail.
SD graphics after remaster are not as bad as before StarCraft: At the time of Brood War, the game ran at 640x480 resolution. When you were playing a game with a CRT monitor (or a memorable time!) Or LCD monitor, the way to display this small image on the monitor screen was determined by the monitor. Most of the time, I used the way the images were enlarged to fill the screen. There are a number of algorithms that hardware uses to enlarge images, and at the time of Brood War, the algorithm used depends on the monitor brand and model. In addition, the algorithms differ depending on the type of launcher or launcher you use. In other words, this means that players may have different experiences and that not everyone will remember the same old SD graphics. To alleviate this, we've applied some of the most popular algorithms to let you choose from the options menu in the form of filters, and most players seem to be satisfied with this. However, there are still other possibilities open and you can consider adding more algorithms to the options menu if you tell us in the form of a screenshot that compares the previous and current views.
Bug where workers can pick minerals faster at a specific starting location During the remake of StarCraft, we decided not to change the gameplay aspect of StarCraft. This is evident in the fact that StarCraft: Remaster can still run the 1.16.1 version of the replay and that the gameplay remains exactly the same as before. We think it is very necessary to approach the StarCraft: Remaster's game play in any form of change very carefully. However, if you think that the majority of players should make a difference in gameplay, they will listen. We have recently created a public test server (PTR) environment and will begin the process of applying experimental builds to this environment so that players can connect and play and then provide feedback. I think the gameplay changes you have asked are things you can test through this open test server environment.
Valkyrie sometimes stops attacking Historically, StarCraft has always had certain limits on sprites, units, and bullets. Valkyrie (and Photon Cannon) will stop the attack if the bullet limit is exceeded. We have increased the bullet limit from 2500 to 5000 with StarCraft: Remaster. We believe that the current figures are sufficient because we are unlikely to reach these limit values in one-on-one matches (though, of course, this may still occur in 4-to-4 customized games with many units) . However, if our judgment differs from the actual result of your game, please ask us to let us know with a replay so we can investigate.
Profile statistics are incorrectly displayed There have been some statistics issues since launch, but we've recently fixed various statistics issues. If you are still experiencing statistics issues, please let us know about the BattleTag and its symptoms so that we can verify it.
Mouse sensitivity is inconsistent in windowed mode We will investigate this issue further. Please let me know a little bit more information about your operating system and so on.
Replay is not running The EUD and Super Speed (2x, 3x etc) replay will not work properly. If you are having trouble with an EUD or non-EU environment, please send us a replay.
Random disconnects Please let us know BattleTag and we will investigate further.
Feature Requests:
Formal ladder (league level) One of the top goals of the development team is to end the system frontier league and start an official new season with the league tier system. We are working on this in full swing and we expect to be able to apply it soon.
New ladder system placement game The new ladder system will have to be added to the system to complete the placement game.
New Ladder System Statistics / Statistics Initialization In the new season, statistics / statistics initialization will be done, and the records of the previous season (Frontier League) will be kept.
Please add rewards such as portraits to the ladder. A compensation system will be added as part of the new ladder.
Add a Map of the Week system to the ladder. It's a good idea, and I think it's a feature you can consider adding in the future. Prior to this, it would seem that changing the map to a very short cycle would have an impact on the overall performance of each ladder season. I think this is
a feature that we can look at as a feature that allows a random player to only play against a random player .
Options for playing the player and rating on the chat channel This function can be used to give victory to a certain player, etc., so that the competence of finding opponent can be deteriorated.
I hope the ladder map list is updated more frequently. The list of maps will be updated regularly. We plan to have three seasons each year, and the map list will be updated every season.
Add ASL map to ladder map list. It is already underway, and we will consider adding community-generated match maps to the ladder in the future.
Please add clan system and clan tournament system. We plan to add the clan system to the game, but it is not scheduled for the nearest roadmap.
Suggested list of maps: How to use Touhon and Circuit Breaker as fixed ladder maps We also agree to use Touhon and Circuit Breaker as fixed ladder maps.
Improved wait time when disconnected (disconnected) from other players At present, StarCraft allows 45 seconds of response time when connection is bad. However, I think it is possible to greatly reduce the waiting time in this age.
Improving Artificial Intelligence Now that we are dealing with artificial intelligence through the planned BWAPI integration, we believe more options will be available. Other than that, there is no plan for near-term work to improve artificial intelligence.
Options that increase the maximum number of people in a custom game You might be able to add it as a custom game option, but it is not included in the roadmap in the near future.
Please increase the maximum number of players available to 10, 12, etc. Taking into account the current phenomena we are trying to improve and the P2P network framework StarCraft is using, it will be difficult to increase the maximum number of players that can be involved unless we are reorganizing the entire network framework. As the maximum number of players increases, the lag phenomenon will also increase.
Please add Team Match Match (2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4). Yeah! We plan to add this feature in 2018.
Please add a re-match option to match opponents. If this option is added, it may be possible to eliminate the integrity of the opponent's opponent by repeatedly defeating the opponent in order to win the victory, but this is an option that can be considered sufficiently.
Please update your 20th anniversary console skin. I am happy with the 20th anniversary console skins, but if you have any specific feedback, you are welcome. Please add
16 resolutions to SD graphics . We wanted SD graphics to be as compatible with the remaster as possible and to keep the original Brodwar experience as good as possible,Adding a resolution can have a negative impact on this pure experience. There is no "absolute" of course, but it is not included in our roadmap at this time.
Please add an option to adjust the resolution in the window mode. I think the 'resolution' that you gave me is the size of the window mode.
Please allow the race to change when a match (before the mirror) occurs. What player should change their tribe if a match-up occurs? When both players are given the right to change, what if they change to the same race? Should we change the race again? It may happen that the two players continue to change to the same race and the game does not start. So, before we add this feature, we'll have to look carefully at what is going to be the best way.
Race by Race in Profile This feature is currently being added to the user interface along with a new ladder (league level) system.
Customize Make your game classification (filter) easier in the user interface of the game. Let's take a look at this.
Please add an option to auto-save the waiting room name. Yes, this feature has been added with the 1.21.5 patch!
Ability to play on only one selected ladder map except for other maps This feature will be difficult to apply because it changes the way players interact in ladder games.
Please make a blizzard production map. We also want to add a Blizzard production map, but this is a lower priority than other feature requests.
Ability to ignore in-game conversations is now available via the / dnd <player name> command.
Make a dedicated channel for people who are interested in team-play games. We are currently looking at ways to reorganize your channel list, and the features you mentioned may be part of this reorganization.
MMR auto drop function is required. The current roadmap includes adding some sort of MMR auto-drop system.
Minimap scaling for large maps (over 128 * 128 sizes) is an interesting comment and we'll take a closer look. I would also like to hear from others about this feature.
Add a magistrate mode to the ladder (aka "saint") You can consider it from a long-term perspective, but it is not included in the roadmap in near-term days.
Others:
I do not want to change the balance. We also agree!
I have been looking at ways in which a player with a high MMR can create a new identity and play at a lower skill level to solve the problem, and there were many good ideas out of the comments you left.
There is a lack of punishment for inappropriate language use such as profanity. I agree that I need a better interface and system for this.
There are too many maps in the ladder map list. At this time, we will not change the number of 7 ladder maps and 3 map exclusions, but you can continue to check the overall community feedback and adjust if necessary.
Match your opponent too much in finding opponents. At this time, there is no separate system that prevents you from meeting the same person again. You might consider adding these features, but some players who like to re-engage with their talented counterparts may not welcome these features. Therefore, I think that this is a problem to think about.
Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players.
Please let us play all EUD maps. Unfortunately, it is not possible to apply all EUDs in StarCraft: Remaster. In particular, EUD maps that change graphics are currently not available in the emulator.
There are players who use nuclear programs. At present, StarCraft is using the best anti-nuclear software (even the best in the game industry) among the Blizzard games. If you witness a player suspected of using a nuclear program, please inform us with the replay and we will take corresponding action. StarCraft: There have been no reports of actual use of the nuclear program since the release of the remaster. However, some players have exploited gameplay-related bugs that could be unfair, so we will focus on preventing this behavior in the future.
Illegal Websites Spam Messages Illegal Websites Some progress has been made in the prevention of spam messages, and we will continue to do so in the future.
The rak phenomenon has disappeared. Fortunately, the! Thank you all for your support!
We would like to thank all the Korean players who have provided support and support to StarCraft. We will continue to do our best to further improve StarCraft with the community.
I doubt engine-side mining bug fixes will ever be a a thing. The reason is just that they are just the tip of an iceberg which is the BW pathfinding algorithm. There is no quick, isolated fix for that. You'd have to rebuild a completely new pathfinding engine from scratch. This would obviously be a huge intervention into game mechanics that would have all kinds of hared to predict and balance changing implications. On the other hand, these issues are pretty much solved on the editor and map making side, it's just that the Korean map making scene and Afreeca still haven't fully caught up on some of the finer details, but that'll happen sooner or later. So what's left is players who do not really understand the underlying mechanics playing old maps without pathfinding optimizations and complaining about it to Bizzard. Just update the maps (current ladder maps at least). It's easier.
Sprite-limit related changes, on the other hand, are easy to implement and test (and then revert if deemed necessary). So they'd go on with that. I don't understand how Valk freeze bug is still a thing to be honest. It's litterally just a number. The 2500/5000 limit is not the weapon sprite limit, however, but the overall sprite limit (including everything from map sprites to units to spell effects to weapons).
I agree that players running their own nuclear programs might pose some potential problems
Guys, the mining thing they're talking about is, for instance, on FS; there are mining patches in certain positions that "mine faster" or have a "boost" -- The korean community has talked about this for a while now, since 1.16 days actually on Fish. I've seen it brought up in videos in the past before.
They're just fixing that. It's not going to change anything. I think, specifically, if you're at 11 or 7 on FS, the bottom most mineral patches allegedly "mine faster" or "boost." I'm not saying I agree or ever could notice this, but according to koreans these type of things are prevalent.
That's all the mining fix will do if I'm correct. Obviously no game play change. To us foreigners we wouldn't ever notice or abuse it (because we aren't good enough to use that minor advantage). And I think there's more maps than just FS that have this type of "glitch"
But at a top level, if 1 mineral patch does indeed mine faster, that's a big deal, even if it's marginally faster.
Adding on to what freakling said about mineral patches that mine faster: this isn't a bug, it's specifically related to the position of the worker on the patch and the angle of return to the worker building. Mapmakers are aware of this and able to compensate for it, pro players should be expected to learn which patches are the best to mine early and even how to place their workers for optimal mineral return speed, and a saturated mineral line shouldn't see significant differences for any spawn position on any well-balanced map. If there's a mining difference for any spawning position on any map then something went horribly wrong in testing, or it needs to be modernized.
On edit: to clarify, the mining animation is the same length for every single worker unit on every single mineral patch. However, certain return angles are simply much faster than others due to the way workers accelerate and decelerate. Test it with stacked minerals and adjust worker placement to certain angles and you can see how it's not even the patch to nexus placement that matters so much as the worker's placement when it begins mining the patch.
I'm just a casual/UMS player and we've known this about the stacked minerals on spawn defense since at least 2006, certain starting positions have to adjust a worker's placement on the patch in order to achieve optimal mining speed. I'd be shocked if pro players didn't know this stuff already with the number of times they practice their build orders. I can easily make a video on this if people need to see it.
On May 05 2018 07:17 GGzerG wrote: Wouldn't this mining bug affect a certain race more so than others? Like Zerg for example generally doesn't have as many workers, are they absolutely sure this isn't going to affect the gameplay as in like Zerg or another race being able to collect minerals faster or I guess it wouldn't matter since it would affect all races, it would basically stay the same? I'm really curious to know what exactly would change...
Well zergs [usually] try to at least get to minimum saturation [1 crystal = 1 drone] so they should get the full impact of the mining efficiency decrease, whereas races that get an excess amount of workers would see the efficiency dropoff, but in all cases, it would just be a universal [very slight] increase in the mining rate. I dont think there anyway for it to be discrepant, whatever the ratios of workers to mining rate there was before, will remain, but just with a better efficiency [for everyone, in the same ratios].
On May 05 2018 22:58 ProtossGG wrote: Guys, the mining thing they're talking about is, for instance, on FS; there are mining patches in certain positions that "mine faster" or have a "boost" -- The korean community has talked about this for a while now, since 1.16 days actually on Fish. I've seen it brought up in videos in the past before.
They're just fixing that. It's not going to change anything. I think, specifically, if you're at 11 or 7 on FS, the bottom most mineral patches allegedly "mine faster" or "boost." I'm not saying I agree or ever could notice this, but according to koreans these type of things are prevalent.
That's all the mining fix will do if I'm correct. Obviously no game play change. To us foreigners we wouldn't ever notice or abuse it (because we aren't good enough to use that minor advantage). And I think there's more maps than just FS that have this type of "glitch"
But at a top level, if 1 mineral patch does indeed mine faster, that's a big deal, even if it's marginally faster.
You are wrong to assume that this would change nothing else though. Pathfinding, collision detection and unit properties and movement iscripts all play into this. You could try to change either of these, but assuming that it would affect nothing else is just naïve.
On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to create mineral formations that have at lest 3 very fast mining patches (important for avoiding delay on the 6th worker) and average mining rate deviation of 2% or less for any game situation (depending on race and saturation mostly).
Gas mining is a lot more problematic, actually, as you can generally only balance 3 worker mining rates within 10% for different map positions, if you really know what you're doing. Still, clever geyser and doodad placement can go a long way.
Apart from that, the biggest source of slowed down mining is actually the Comsat Station getting in the way of workers on right-hand-side minerals. Would you want to change that as well? By doing what? And again, it is very easy to mitigate this almost completely just through map making by using the right kind of mineral formation (have been doing it for years on my maps).
On May 05 2018 07:17 GGzerG wrote: Wouldn't this mining bug affect a certain race more so than others? Like Zerg for example generally doesn't have as many workers, are they absolutely sure this isn't going to affect the gameplay as in like Zerg or another race being able to collect minerals faster or I guess it wouldn't matter since it would affect all races, it would basically stay the same? I'm really curious to know what exactly would change...
Well, you are still thinking in too simple terms as mining between races is not equal to begin with (because of the different collision sizes of their respective resource depots – which you cannot make equal just like that because if would completely screw up building placement and wall-ins players are used to). Zerg is probably the race that profits the most from idiosyncratic worker behaviours (metastable mining paths with minimized deceleration on return in most cases). However, good mineral layouts can again help. Pathfinding region layout will always remain a big joker, however, as good or bad regions can completely screw up, or in some cases improve, worker pathfinding. And no one is going to create a new pathfinding engine from scratch, as balance implications are too severe.
Differences in mining efficiency make it harder to balance a map, as if the fake-iso graphics didn't make it difficult enough already. If I recall correctly, gas is also affected by this, making you sometimes choose between making a geyser require 4 drones, or making the geyser more vulnerable than its mirror on the other side of the map. Since workers already rely on a dirty hack to work at all (no collision when mining), I don't think that adding some extra exceptions to mining movement towards nearby patches will affect much, maybe you'll have to do some adjustments to micro when harassing workers with zealots or lings, I could live with that. Unlike other BW quirks, this bug adds nothing of value to the game.
On May 05 2018 23:46 integral wrote: Adding on to what freakling said about mineral patches that mine faster: this isn't a bug, it's specifically related to the position of the worker on the patch and the angle of return to the worker building. Mapmakers are aware of this and able to compensate for it, pro players should be expected to learn which patches are the best to mine early and even how to place their workers for optimal mineral return speed, and a saturated mineral line shouldn't see significant differences for any spawn position on any well-balanced map. If there's a mining difference for any spawning position on any map then something went horribly wrong in testing, or it needs to be modernized.
On edit: to clarify, the mining animation is the same length for every single worker unit on every single mineral patch. However, certain return angles are simply much faster than others due to the way workers accelerate and decelerate. Test it with stacked minerals and adjust worker placement to certain angles and you can see how it's not even the patch to nexus placement that matters so much as the worker's placement when it begins mining the patch.
I'm just a casual/UMS player and we've known this about the stacked minerals on spawn defense since at least 2006, certain starting positions have to adjust a worker's placement on the patch in order to achieve optimal mining speed. I'd be shocked if pro players didn't know this stuff already with the number of times they practice their build orders. I can easily make a video on this if people need to see it.
Whether it's a bug or not is a matter of perspective. It's definitely a quirk (or rather a whole collection of little quirks), and one that players who understand it can derive advantage from through some worker micro and clever building placement.
However, a major problem is that during the whole of the Kespa era maps underwent no systematic testing at all for mining efficiency. Mains are usually reasonably balanced, in most cases, because players have nothing else to do than watching their workers during early game while doing regular playtesting, but nothing more.
On May 06 2018 00:43 zerglingling wrote: Differences in mining efficiency make it harder to balance a map, as if the fake-iso graphics didn't make it difficult enough already. If I recall correctly, gas is also affected by this, making you sometimes choose between making a geyser require 4 drones, or making the geyser more vulnerable than its mirror on the other side of the map. Since workers already rely on a dirty hack to work at all (no collision when mining), I don't think that adding some extra exceptions to mining movement towards nearby patches will affect much, maybe you'll have to do some adjustments to micro when harassing workers with zealots or lings, I could live with that. Unlike other BW quirks, this bug adds nothing of value to the game.
So what would be the solution? Giving mining workers air-pathfiding? That would have them always travel at direct angles, but also ignore unwalkable terrain, you could mine over cliffs (or get workers tuck on them when distance mining). Maybe (just maybe) workers could be made excempt from long-range pathfinding when mining and near enough a resource depot, but that would only fix issues caused by bad region layout, which is only a small percentage. Speaking about pathfinding regions: If you are looking for a major source of positional variety/imbalance, this is it. And you cannot really fix it, unless you consider a complete switch to FPM-style non-isometric maps an acceptable price.
Again, map making has advanced far enough by now that mineral mining imbalances should be a non-issue, and fixing it is hard only in the sense that it requires some in-depth knowledge on the part of the map maker. The main issue is that the knowledge has not really spread far yet. Gas mining is another pair of shoes, though. As I said, we can only balance that within about 10%, which is a deficit of ~30 gas/minute on three workers. Some of it (though not all, and the rest is mostly still a mystery, as far as I can tell) is related to worker respawn locations (clever building placement, or alternatively doodad/unwalkable terrain placement by the map maker) can fix some of that. But I guess rewriting the function that guides respawn positions (or writing a new one specifically for geysers, as, if I understand it correctly, the current one is also linked to units spawning from buildings or via triggers) could improve some of the issues without affecting anything else.
On May 05 2018 23:46 integral wrote: Adding on to what freakling said about mineral patches that mine faster: this isn't a bug, it's specifically related to the position of the worker on the patch and the angle of return to the worker building. Mapmakers are aware of this and able to compensate for it, pro players should be expected to learn which patches are the best to mine early and even how to place their workers for optimal mineral return speed, and a saturated mineral line shouldn't see significant differences for any spawn position on any well-balanced map. If there's a mining difference for any spawning position on any map then something went horribly wrong in testing, or it needs to be modernized.
On edit: to clarify, the mining animation is the same length for every single worker unit on every single mineral patch. However, certain return angles are simply much faster than others due to the way workers accelerate and decelerate. Test it with stacked minerals and adjust worker placement to certain angles and you can see how it's not even the patch to nexus placement that matters so much as the worker's placement when it begins mining the patch.
I'm just a casual/UMS player and we've known this about the stacked minerals on spawn defense since at least 2006, certain starting positions have to adjust a worker's placement on the patch in order to achieve optimal mining speed. I'd be shocked if pro players didn't know this stuff already with the number of times they practice their build orders. I can easily make a video on this if people need to see it.
Trying to clarify this even further: Not only can you increase mining speed by noticing which mineral patches mines the fastest and keeping your workers mining these in low worker count scenarios, you can also increase mining speed by optimizing the path taken by individual workers to individual mineral patches.
For example, the second (from the top) mineral patch at the 12 o clock starting position in python mines quite slowly if you just casually send your worker to it, but if you manually set up the worker to mine it from a more horizontal angle, it will mine it very fast.
This is just another fun part to study about Brood War and I hope Blizzard doesn't try to change it.
However, a major problem is that during the whole of the Kespa era maps underwent no systematic testing at all for mining efficiency. Mains are usually reasonably balanced, in most cases, because players have nothing else to do than watching their workers during early game while doing regular playtesting, but nothing more.
LOL are you serious? That's just so ridiculously bad that I almost don't believe you. How do you know? This seems like such a basic thing to test for maps... pathfinding, mineral balance, and so on. I was assuming (hoping?) that melee mapmakers would have had higher standards than my UMS mapmaker buddies, but apparently not?!
However, a major problem is that during the whole of the Kespa era maps underwent no systematic testing at all for mining efficiency. Mains are usually reasonably balanced, in most cases, because players have nothing else to do than watching their workers during early game while doing regular playtesting, but nothing more.
LOL are you serious? That's just so ridiculously bad that I almost don't believe you. How do you know? This seems like such a basic thing to test for maps... pathfinding, mineral balance, and so on. I was assuming (hoping?) that melee mapmakers would have had higher standards than my UMS mapmaker buddies, but apparently not?!
I know through hours of testing it myself on countless maps…
Oh no... Do you have that data in a presentable format? Seems like that would be very useful information to give them - which maps need to be updated and which are fine. I know that blizzard doesn't have the best history of listening to community members for things like this but you do have some clout in the mapmaker world at least.
on edit: even if you don't wanna show blizzard I'd love to see it personally, link me if you posted it before
However, a major problem is that during the whole of the Kespa era maps underwent no systematic testing at all for mining efficiency. Mains are usually reasonably balanced, in most cases, because players have nothing else to do than watching their workers during early game while doing regular playtesting, but nothing more.
LOL are you serious? That's just so ridiculously bad that I almost don't believe you. How do you know? This seems like such a basic thing to test for maps... pathfinding, mineral balance, and so on. I was assuming (hoping?) that melee mapmakers would have had higher standards than my UMS mapmaker buddies, but apparently not?!
I know who he is and I know he does that kinda testing for his own maps, I was just assuming that that same testing happened for other maps. I guess it's easy to test after the fact to see whether or not it was tested before the fact, oversight on my part. My incredulity wasn't directed at him anyway, no worries.
On May 06 2018 01:17 integral wrote: Oh no... Do you have that data in a presentable format? Seems like that would be very useful information to give them - which maps need to be updated and which are fine. I know that blizzard doesn't have the best history of listening to community members for things like this but you do have some clout in the mapmaker world at least.
on edit: even if you don't wanna show blizzard I'd love to see it personally, link me if you posted it before
Well, no. Because I mostly did that testing to further my own understanding, not to ever present some elaborate study to the public. Most of my rough data was just written on little notepads that I disposed of afterwards. I did publish some table concerning 3 worker gas mining rates on a selection of Koren and foreign maps at some point, but I am not even sure where that can be found right now (should be somewhere on BWMN, I think in some map thread)…
EDIT: Here it is. But as you can see, I only ever added the data for Zerg (as Zerg is most critical to balance mining rates for, as low saturation mining exacerbates most mining problems): + Show Spoiler [show image] +
Awesome data, freakling, those are significant enough differences that it's worth taking a closer look at. I wonder if anyone's tested each mineral patch's optimal worker placement positions. Do you test this yourself or is your methodology something like "straight from the worker building to the patch without rally points"?
On May 06 2018 19:45 integral wrote: Awesome data, freakling, those are significant enough differences that it's worth taking a closer look at. I wonder if anyone's tested each mineral patch's optimal worker placement positions. Do you test this yourself or is your methodology something like "straight from the worker building to the patch without rally points"?
This data is over a decade old for the most part…
There are different testing methods. You can have workers mine different bases for a certain amount of time at a certain saturation and check the relative differences, based on the remaining minerals in the patches. At least for single-saturation mining (where no worker migration happens) controlling the individual worker paths should also be done early in the mining process. Once you know the "baseline" – how each worker path should look like given a certain mineral position and pattern – it becomes much easier to accurately judge mining behaviour only based on observed worker behaviour. The rest is knowing pathfinding, building placement and how it affects mining, With the addition of a pathfinding regions overlay for ScmDraft, tracking down certain bugs and accurately predicting each individual mining path for a given mineral formation (and in most cases solve any issues pretty elegantly by manipulating the regions instead of rearranging the resources, which in many cases would lead to very unequal patterns for different map positions).
Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players.
Lol no. You should be placing new players x standard deviations below the mean. X should be determind based on how new players perform.
That doesn't just lower the MMR for all players. That guy is clueless.
Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players.
Lol no. You should be placing new players x standard deviations below the mean. X should be determind based on how new players perform.
That doesn't just lower the MMR for all players. That guy is clueless.
since new accounts start lower, that will really screw over older accounts at 1300, since now they will have to play against my new smurf
the bottom will drop out from the rating system and everyone will lose points eventually except for the top pros who only lose to each other
Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
I'm pretty sure this should have literally no effect on your gameplay experience, nor practice regimen, this is a placebo effect that is literally all in your head....You think if everyone had only 1 ID, that you would have an easier time on ladder or something? lol
On May 05 2018 00:35 bovienchien wrote: 2 days recently, I can't play Starcraft with my TR (turn rate) 8 L (Latency) 0 or 2. It's looks like I play game and pause game constantly.
I live in Viet Nam, I am so sad about this.
bovienchien I am also in VN. what's your nick? Do you want to play together? My nick is freelensiaasia on the Asian server.
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
Yeah! I'l admit ive terrorized newbies with smurf accounts many a time. I went 0-16 or something when I first moved to iccup, and like an abused child, I must pass the abuse onto others!
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
No its cool, the way you guys handle matchmaking is obviously the way to go. Just look at all the growth! The fact that you can simply play the game against someone on your level and enjoy the game seems to be completely foreign in here
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
No its cool, the way you guys handle matchmaking is obviously the way to go. Just look at all the growth!
I did say the state of the scene is bad, it s a 20yrs old game. SC2 had that one bnet account/one ladder account, and a region lock to boot at launch. (I couldnt play with my US friends anymore unless I bought a 2nd copy of the game during WOL). Numbers are dwindling there too, the ladder is pretty messy as well, there is no magical system. You can have several system in place though, which is why I talked about the automated tournament one, I am honestly trying to discuss possible solutions, but you are just whining. But fine one account each, how does it work then? is there a MMR decay? If there is let s say I m going on vacations and then when I come back I ll get a couple easy wins right, how is that different from a smurf? No MMR decay? Then if you dont have resets once in a while (which just recreate the problem really) the MMR will be so spread out the matchmaking system will need to go and look at huge span of MMR to match you with anyone, and we are back to the same issue. Any MMR based system needs several games to settle, so we could set a hard max limit of games played then so if you are MMR 1000 and played 300games it s more your "true"level as opposed to someone with like 5games that could be a smurf. But then what would stop people from becoming freelosers, thrashing lower ranked players and just leaving the game to get the loss nonetheless. So then what? A report system with replays? But we both know it s not worth it for Blizzard on such an old game. If you want to play with people that are exactly your skill on a fairly regular basis, the best is to either join a team or try to add/pm the people you play with on the ladder that are actually that level. Of course blizzard needs to make the UI easier for that but that would be good. That s how most of us started back in the old days before we had any ladder, this would also help the community stay alive. Having welcoming teams is good, regardless of skill and it s always better to play with people you know or just chat once in a while right? So then what we really need is blizzard to help develop the community aspect with a working friend list, may be a clan list, hey why not even some form of clan recruiting system?
I am interested in your opinion if you have something constructive to say. Also please do not imply I have any power over what blizzard does, if I did there wouldnt have been a SCR at all. But I do knwo a couple things about community sites and ladders.
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
No its cool, the way you guys handle matchmaking is obviously the way to go. Just look at all the growth!
I did say the state of the scene is bad, it s a 20yrs old game. SC2 had that one bnet account/one ladder account, and a region lock to boot at launch. (I couldnt play with my US friends anymore unless I bought a 2nd copy of the game during WOL). Numbers are dwindling there too, the ladder is pretty messy as well, there is no magical system. You can have several system in place though, which is why I talked about the automated tournament one, I am honestly trying to discuss possible solutions, but you are just whining. But fine one account each, how does it work then? is there a MMR decay? If there is let s say I m going on vacations and then when I come back I ll get a couple easy wins right, how is that different from a smurf? No MMR decay? Then if you dont have resets once in a while (which just recreate the problem really) the MMR will be so spread out the matchmaking system will need to go and look at huge span of MMR to match you with anyone, and we are back to the same issue. Any MMR based system needs several games to settle, so we could set a hard max limit of games played then so if you are MMR 1000 and played 300games it s more your "true"level as opposed to someone with like 5games that could be a smurf. But then what would stop people from becoming freelosers, thrashing lower ranked players and just leaving the game to get the loss nonetheless. So then what? A report system with replays? But we both know it s not worth it for Blizzard on such an old game. If you want to play with people that are exactly your skill on a fairly regular basis, the best is to either join a team or try to add/pm the people you play with on the ladder that are actually that level. Of course blizzard needs to make the UI easier for that but that would be good. That s how most of us started back in the old days before we had any ladder, this would also help the community stay alive. Having welcoming teams is good, regardless of skill and it s always better to play with people you know or just chat once in a while right? So then what we really need is blizzard to help develop the community aspect with a working friend list, may be a clan list, hey why not even some form of clan recruiting system?
I am interested in your opinion if you have something constructive to say. Also please do not imply I have any power over what blizzard does, if I did there wouldnt have been a SCR at all. But I do knwo a couple things about community sites and ladders.
Numbers are dwindling? Starcraft 2 numbers are all going up. Ladder being messy? Cant you generalize it any more? In thousands of games i never had the feeling that someone is 200 apm above me and completely crushing me. Starcraft 2 ladder was never a problem in terms of fair matchmaking. Unless you get "Byun". What are the odds? And once in a while, matchmaking is going to have brainfart and put 3 leagues difference together. Shit happens. But there is no need for: "Hey i dont feel like playing people on my level....LETS GO NEW ACCOUNT!". And that shit happens especially in Brood War, since its very taxing to play. Paywall is just perfect to prevent that. It doesnt take much more. Keeps the majority of people honest
You guys have to stop with the: "Thats how we used to it!". No one cares
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
No its cool, the way you guys handle matchmaking is obviously the way to go. Just look at all the growth!
I did say the state of the scene is bad, it s a 20yrs old game. SC2 had that one bnet account/one ladder account, and a region lock to boot at launch. (I couldnt play with my US friends anymore unless I bought a 2nd copy of the game during WOL). Numbers are dwindling there too, the ladder is pretty messy as well, there is no magical system. You can have several system in place though, which is why I talked about the automated tournament one, I am honestly trying to discuss possible solutions, but you are just whining. But fine one account each, how does it work then? is there a MMR decay? If there is let s say I m going on vacations and then when I come back I ll get a couple easy wins right, how is that different from a smurf? No MMR decay? Then if you dont have resets once in a while (which just recreate the problem really) the MMR will be so spread out the matchmaking system will need to go and look at huge span of MMR to match you with anyone, and we are back to the same issue. Any MMR based system needs several games to settle, so we could set a hard max limit of games played then so if you are MMR 1000 and played 300games it s more your "true"level as opposed to someone with like 5games that could be a smurf. But then what would stop people from becoming freelosers, thrashing lower ranked players and just leaving the game to get the loss nonetheless. So then what? A report system with replays? But we both know it s not worth it for Blizzard on such an old game. If you want to play with people that are exactly your skill on a fairly regular basis, the best is to either join a team or try to add/pm the people you play with on the ladder that are actually that level. Of course blizzard needs to make the UI easier for that but that would be good. That s how most of us started back in the old days before we had any ladder, this would also help the community stay alive. Having welcoming teams is good, regardless of skill and it s always better to play with people you know or just chat once in a while right? So then what we really need is blizzard to help develop the community aspect with a working friend list, may be a clan list, hey why not even some form of clan recruiting system?
I am interested in your opinion if you have something constructive to say. Also please do not imply I have any power over what blizzard does, if I did there wouldnt have been a SCR at all. But I do knwo a couple things about community sites and ladders.
You guys have to stop with the: "Thats how we used to it!". No oneI don't care
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
No its cool, the way you guys handle matchmaking is obviously the way to go. Just look at all the growth!
I did say the state of the scene is bad, it s a 20yrs old game. SC2 had that one bnet account/one ladder account, and a region lock to boot at launch. (I couldnt play with my US friends anymore unless I bought a 2nd copy of the game during WOL). Numbers are dwindling there too, the ladder is pretty messy as well, there is no magical system. You can have several system in place though, which is why I talked about the automated tournament one, I am honestly trying to discuss possible solutions, but you are just whining. But fine one account each, how does it work then? is there a MMR decay? If there is let s say I m going on vacations and then when I come back I ll get a couple easy wins right, how is that different from a smurf? No MMR decay? Then if you dont have resets once in a while (which just recreate the problem really) the MMR will be so spread out the matchmaking system will need to go and look at huge span of MMR to match you with anyone, and we are back to the same issue. Any MMR based system needs several games to settle, so we could set a hard max limit of games played then so if you are MMR 1000 and played 300games it s more your "true"level as opposed to someone with like 5games that could be a smurf. But then what would stop people from becoming freelosers, thrashing lower ranked players and just leaving the game to get the loss nonetheless. So then what? A report system with replays? But we both know it s not worth it for Blizzard on such an old game. If you want to play with people that are exactly your skill on a fairly regular basis, the best is to either join a team or try to add/pm the people you play with on the ladder that are actually that level. Of course blizzard needs to make the UI easier for that but that would be good. That s how most of us started back in the old days before we had any ladder, this would also help the community stay alive. Having welcoming teams is good, regardless of skill and it s always better to play with people you know or just chat once in a while right? So then what we really need is blizzard to help develop the community aspect with a working friend list, may be a clan list, hey why not even some form of clan recruiting system?
I am interested in your opinion if you have something constructive to say. Also please do not imply I have any power over what blizzard does, if I did there wouldnt have been a SCR at all. But I do knwo a couple things about community sites and ladders.
You guys have to stop with the: "Thats how we used to it!". No oneI don't care
Sorry, just had to fix this for you.
Once again, thats cool. Just loot at the results. The way you guys do it = Best possible
Anyone who is complaining about Smurfing on BW Ladder right now is playing at such a low level that it is completely irrelevant to worry about whether or not you are being smurfed or not, why? Because every game at your level is to improve, not worry about who you are playing...
Focus on practice regimens and your overall improvement, if you play players that are levels above you and you lose, you take that as a learning experience, not bitch and complain about it, especially if you have the HONOR to play vs a top level Korean player one day...
A lot of you need to totally change your perspective on how you view this game, if you ever want to improve.
On May 09 2018 09:51 GGzerG wrote: Anyone who is complaining about Smurfing on BW Ladder right now is playing at such a low level that it is completely irrelevant to worry about whether or not you are being smurfed or not, why? Because every game at your level is to improve, not worry about who you are playing...
Focus on practice regimens and your overall improvement, if you play players that are levels above you and you lose, you take that as a learning experience, not bitch and complain about it, especially if you have the HONOR to play vs a top level Korean player one day...
A lot of you need to totally change your perspective on how you view this game, if you ever want to improve.
God bless you for telling me how to enjoy a game. You truely open the door for every newcomer. I was so missguided playing, enjoying and improving (in my own way) in Starcraft 2 by playing people on my skill level
On May 09 2018 09:51 GGzerG wrote: Anyone who is complaining about Smurfing on BW Ladder right now is playing at such a low level that it is completely irrelevant to worry about whether or not you are being smurfed or not, why? Because every game at your level is to improve, not worry about who you are playing...
Focus on practice regimens and your overall improvement, if you play players that are levels above you and you lose, you take that as a learning experience, not bitch and complain about it, especially if you have the HONOR to play vs a top level Korean player one day...
A lot of you need to totally change your perspective on how you view this game, if you ever want to improve.
God bless you for telling me how to enjoy a game. You truely open the door for every newcomer. I was so missguided playing, enjoying and improving (in my own way) in Starcraft 2 by playing people on my skill level
Well, I really don't see any reason why new comers can't enjoy Ranked because of smurfs, smurfing has happened since the beginning of time, BW is not SC2, so really people should stop using that as a comparison, it is a different game.
If you are a newcomer and learning to improve, watch streams, read guides, find practice partners, participate in these newcomer leagues, seek advice, practice, rinse and repeat, then try Ranked again.
It is a difficult game, and I think we can all agree SC2 is marginally as difficult as BW in terms of mechanics and some other aspects, so just keep practicing and try to just enjoy the game, it is fun remember.
You guys are really going heavy on the oldschoolers' elitism. New blood want to play the game without having to jump through the same hoops that we did, and that's absolutely a reasonable position. Modern matchmakers have the ability to create close matches from relatively little data. Things have come a long way in that regard.
Yesterday I read a post from the designer of the SC2 matchmaking system (and WoW, and now Halo 5). Halo 5 just deployed TrueSkill 2 to all of its game modes and has proven tremendously accurate. That game used to have 10 placement matches and it would get kind of close to determining a player's skill level, but still required several dozen matches before it had real confidence. TrueSkill 2 figures it out in about 5 games. It's capable of weighing what it knows about measurable individual performance elements against expected values found at that MMR. The result, if done properly and measuring the right things, is fast convergence on a player's actual skill level. If players throw a game and knowingly underperform, TrueSkill 2 identifies the anomalous behavior and ignores the outcome (and further, flags it as an exploit match for possible disciplinary action later).
There are some valid concerns about how sparse the active player population is, how far the search range should be, what the latency tolerance should be, and so forth. Those are the conversations we should be having, but they're more manual in nature for now because they have to be balanced against each other to produce the right "feel". As far as effectively gauging the skills of players, though, we've come a very long way. One solution that Halo uses for its low-population playlists is a skill cap -- if your MMR is above X, then you are matchmade as though it were X (the matchmaker is fully aware that you are beyond this skill level, but it can't do anything about it because there's nobody else who's that high) -- so that might be a possibility for SCR as well.
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Another thing to consider: The further you go back the less techniques have been discovered. So there was a learning(copy)- curve. The game must have been "simpler" to play back in the days
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
On May 08 2018 15:19 SchAmToo wrote: Nice beginning changes. Hopefully they lock one account = one ladder account. Tired of playing 30 smurfs a day
They wont do that. That was the Brood War experience. And they said they dont want to change the way brood war was played. When i was new on Shield Battery and looked for new player, i instantly got 15 year old TL accounts pretending they are "d-" as well in my games
I got a pretty old TL accound and I m like D+/C- may be in the old iccup system (not even that in PvZ). On sb you could ask for advice and all. I played faust, naugrim and TT1 sometimes because nobody else was on and needless to say I got reckt but I learnt a lot from those games and they were very helpful. You can also see me getting destroyed quite regularly in the STPL because my team is short a player and we dont like to give wo because it s sad. But there is always something to learn.
Granted if every single game is that way it s not fun, I agree, but one account = one ladder is dumb. At the very least there should be 3, one for each race. I m P, I like to play z for fun but i cant keep up at my P MMR obviously. Also what if I want an account to try new things? A ladder is a competition, the league system is not like in soccer where you play other teams in the same league and (mostly) same level, it is only an icon based on your MMR. Like Tennis if you will, you are rank 5000 and you play Federer? Well too bad, but if you dont aim for the top why do you play the ladder then? there are plenty of custom games around. I m sorry if this sounds harsh, it is not my intention, once again I understand your point but I disagree with it. And i dont think people intentionally tanking their MMR to trash "noobs" are a majority, especially given the state of the scene.
A good way around this is automated tournament like SC2 has (had?), and in that case search the whole bnet account for the highest rank of that person (which is easy to do for Blizzard) and then allow players based on that. I guess it would be fair. You wouldnt be able to play your offrace in those for practice but it s a necessary sacrifice in my opinion, wouldnt you agree?
EDIT: so after reading the OP I launched 1.16.1 on one screen and sc r on another and no, the SD graphics are not the same, scr SD graphics are inferior.
No its cool, the way you guys handle matchmaking is obviously the way to go. Just look at all the growth!
I did say the state of the scene is bad, it s a 20yrs old game. SC2 had that one bnet account/one ladder account, and a region lock to boot at launch. (I couldnt play with my US friends anymore unless I bought a 2nd copy of the game during WOL). Numbers are dwindling there too, the ladder is pretty messy as well, there is no magical system. You can have several system in place though, which is why I talked about the automated tournament one, I am honestly trying to discuss possible solutions, but you are just whining. But fine one account each, how does it work then? is there a MMR decay? If there is let s say I m going on vacations and then when I come back I ll get a couple easy wins right, how is that different from a smurf? No MMR decay? Then if you dont have resets once in a while (which just recreate the problem really) the MMR will be so spread out the matchmaking system will need to go and look at huge span of MMR to match you with anyone, and we are back to the same issue. Any MMR based system needs several games to settle, so we could set a hard max limit of games played then so if you are MMR 1000 and played 300games it s more your "true"level as opposed to someone with like 5games that could be a smurf. But then what would stop people from becoming freelosers, thrashing lower ranked players and just leaving the game to get the loss nonetheless. So then what? A report system with replays? But we both know it s not worth it for Blizzard on such an old game. If you want to play with people that are exactly your skill on a fairly regular basis, the best is to either join a team or try to add/pm the people you play with on the ladder that are actually that level. Of course blizzard needs to make the UI easier for that but that would be good. That s how most of us started back in the old days before we had any ladder, this would also help the community stay alive. Having welcoming teams is good, regardless of skill and it s always better to play with people you know or just chat once in a while right? So then what we really need is blizzard to help develop the community aspect with a working friend list, may be a clan list, hey why not even some form of clan recruiting system?
I am interested in your opinion if you have something constructive to say. Also please do not imply I have any power over what blizzard does, if I did there wouldnt have been a SCR at all. But I do knwo a couple things about community sites and ladders.
Numbers are dwindling? Starcraft 2 numbers are all going up. Ladder being messy? Cant you generalize it any more? In thousands of games i never had the feeling that someone is 200 apm above me and completely crushing me. Starcraft 2 ladder was never a problem in terms of fair matchmaking. Unless you get "Byun". What are the odds? And once in a while, matchmaking is going to have brainfart and put 3 leagues difference together. Shit happens. But there is no need for: "Hey i dont feel like playing people on my level....LETS GO NEW ACCOUNT!". And that shit happens especially in Brood War, since its very taxing to play. Paywall is just perfect to prevent that. It doesnt take much more. Keeps the majority of people honest
You guys have to stop with the: "Thats how we used to it!". No one cares
I have over 5k games in sc2. When i was diamond a while back in wol and hots I played people who were high masters and then low plat even high gold. Sure I had nearly a 50% WR but the reason I started playing less in sc2 is because of that. Now you can argue the end of Hots was not the best of time balance wise, and I fully agree, but a lot of my friends around low diam/high plat had the exact same experience.APM is a useless number, some ppl with 200 are so bad it s beyond me, and i got matched against 300+ on sc2 too, lsot some , won some. I hadnt touched lotv in over a year because I dont like it (that s beside the point). A friend wanted to play so I went to play a couple games on ladder to remember the new units (new to me that is, since i hadnt played LOTV much) I went 21-1. Played people below 70apm (while apm is not a good metric, there is a minimum). Bnet started me against bronze players then placed me silver 3. Took those 22 games to go to plat 2 and then i just gave up because it wasnt fun. What do you think those players felt like? "damn another smurf'' I didnt even pick my main race i just randomed. And the numbers I saw are dwindling, check the pc bang stats in Korea for a reliable metric if you do not believe me but i dont know about the foreign scene so I accept I can be wrong about that.
"Hey i dont feel like playing people on my level....LETS GO NEW ACCOUNT!" : I never said that, in fact I actually agreed with you that this sucks. And also I dont want the newcomers to SCR to have to go through all the pain old schoolers had to, like going 0-100. That s why I talked about the automated tournament, the MMR check on all accounts (it s still only one BNet account for all the SC R ones, since you do have to pay 15$), and generally trying to offer solutions. You are right that the game was more a mess back in the old days and as such easier to play. There were also more people so you would find more interesting game in the sense that you d see crazy weird strategies. And overall the social aspect was more present, though everysingle time i joined FRA-1 it was to be greeted with (fairly creative tbh) insults and slurs, so is that really a loss? I do not know.
And in general I find the SC community fairly nice and you can ask for help on the forum or even online. For once if I can I would gladly help you, though the odds are we d be evenly matched or you may very well pwm me easily, there is the strategy forum too, and Shield Battery had that family feeling to it as well. You can pm me if you want and I ll gladly give you my bnet account details. There is also the practice partner thread if you dont want to play with me for whatever reason and it s perfectly fine. We are all a big family after all and I am happy that new blood is coming in and wants to enjoy the game. But from there to arguing that everything sucks and all would be magical by having a single account is something I guess we ll have to disagree on, but that s ok, to each their own experiences and ideas.
EDIT: by the way I agree with the above post, it d be great if they fixed the mouse/keyboard issue...
lol. “The point of the game is to get better!” And yet all of the people telling me that are the better people. Ask around any newbs are tired of how many smurfs there are. MMR 1400-1700 is wild variant between people literally who never played to people who are Smurfs.
Don’t tell me how to enjoy my game and train, don’t feed me this frat hazing BS of how you also went through it. Ladder is draining because I never get an idea if I’m improving or not because my MMR goes 1700->1400->1600->1390->1750. The ladder is broken, Smurf’s are no fun, and it leaves us newer people frustrated af. People come in my stream all the time complaining they keep getting 400apm perfect BO smurfs at 1500 and they just quit laddering.
Losing 15 games as a newer player to finally be at 1200 is an AWFUL new player experience.
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
So the game has to be artificially harder to be compelling. How pathetic. And this has nothing to do with actual gameplay. You might as well slow the mouse down just to make the game harder
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
So the game has to be artificially harder to be compelling. How pathetic. And this has nothing to do with actual gameplay. You might as well slow the mouse down just to make the game harder
those things are not simply to make the game harder. the game would look completely different if you could select 100 supply of units. bw is very different from sc2 because of these things and that is why many of us enjoy it. It's not just an artificial difficulty. I do agree that the input canceling is annoying, and I wouldn't mind if they changed it, but I can see why they won't.
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
So the game has to be artificially harder to be compelling. How pathetic. And this has nothing to do with actual gameplay. You might as well slow the mouse down just to make the game harder
those things are not simply to make the game harder. the game would look completely different if you could select 100 supply of units. bw is very different from sc2 because of these things and that is why many of us enjoy it. It's not just an artificial difficulty. I do agree that the input canceling is annoying, and I wouldn't mind if they changed it, but I can see why they won't.
Stop mixing physical restriction with gameplay restriction together. You are using the m+k block as a balance tool. Which is just insane. Unit selection can be seen as a balance act
On May 09 2018 14:39 SchAmToo wrote: lol. “The point of the game is to get better!” And yet all of the people telling me that are the better people. Ask around any newbs are tired of how many smurfs there are. MMR 1400-1700 is wild variant between people literally who never played to people who are Smurfs.
Don’t tell me how to enjoy my game and train, don’t feed me this frat hazing BS of how you also went through it. Ladder is draining because I never get an idea if I’m improving or not because my MMR goes 1700->1400->1600->1390->1750. The ladder is broken, Smurf’s are no fun, and it leaves us newer people frustrated af. People come in my stream all the time complaining they keep getting 400apm perfect BO smurfs at 1500 and they just quit laddering.
Losing 15 games as a newer player to finally be at 1200 is an AWFUL new player experience.
Yes. I m around 1700 and i regularly get totally smashed that way, especially during the korean hours (late canadian evenings). Global matchmaking in that regard screws it up. But i m not smurfing, i just can't make it past 1800 for the life of me. Sometimes i get horrible losing streaks and get back to almost 1500, but with 100+ games in my account.
It is not fun for a true newcomer to face ppl like me at 1500 right off the bat I agree. But I dont see a lot of options. I dont think having a single account would change that. So what do you propose? May be some sort of selection the first time and you d get placed at, say, 1000MMR with a check across all your bnet account that you played less than X games (that number can be adjusted by blizzard). I would totally support that. Or do you have other options? Like I said earlier I agree the system is far from perfect but I raised valid (imho) questions about how it would work and some pitfalls of a sc2-style system. If you have some ideas to address that then by all means do express them. I will be the first to spam the battle.net forums for blizzard to change for a better system, it s good to have a discussion going on about it since there very clearly is an issue with the current system on top of a hard entry barrier, and it shouldn't be that way. But we need a well thought-out process to submit, not a pitchfork raising and finger pointing exercice. Have a good day
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
So the game has to be artificially harder to be compelling. How pathetic. And this has nothing to do with actual gameplay. You might as well slow the mouse down just to make the game harder
those things are not simply to make the game harder. the game would look completely different if you could select 100 supply of units. bw is very different from sc2 because of these things and that is why many of us enjoy it. It's not just an artificial difficulty. I do agree that the input canceling is annoying, and I wouldn't mind if they changed it, but I can see why they won't.
Stop mixing physical restriction with gameplay restriction together. You are using the m+k block as a balance tool. Which is just insane. Unit selection can be seen as a balance act
we got it, sc2 is the best,you are in the wrong forum
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
So the game has to be artificially harder to be compelling. How pathetic. And this has nothing to do with actual gameplay. You might as well slow the mouse down just to make the game harder
those things are not simply to make the game harder. the game would look completely different if you could select 100 supply of units. bw is very different from sc2 because of these things and that is why many of us enjoy it. It's not just an artificial difficulty. I do agree that the input canceling is annoying, and I wouldn't mind if they changed it, but I can see why they won't.
Stop mixing physical restriction with gameplay restriction together. You are using the m+k block as a balance tool. Which is just insane. Unit selection can be seen as a balance act
we got it, sc2 is the best,you are in the wrong forum
Now thats a pathetic move. You arent even trying to argue
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
Those things are completely different from the change I am talking about. Those things reduce the skill needed for the game. The issue here is the game simply can't keep up with the speed and decision making of the user. We want the game to reflect the true speed of the player, but instead a quicker user is punished, resulting in poor micro/macro.
I think there is definetly room to improve the ladder experience, BUT esp those regions with bad con to KR have difficulties to populate enough. EU has barely 24k Ladder Accounts (needless to say its NOT the unique number).
To the matter of input canceling. This was most certainly a limitation of the technology back in the day (or maybe just a bug initially). But it also increases the skill cap, because you have to execute your actions not just fast but also cleanly. When I started 1-2 months after Remaster release i practiced it and Im now totally used to it. Its not a super big deal imo.
I would rather see they fix the freezing units bug.
On May 08 2018 19:01 SCWes wrote: Why aren't they fixing the problem with the mouse clicking stopping the keyboard from working. It's so difficult to macro and micro at high APM speeds. In addition some people experience different levels of frustration with this depending on the keyboard/mouse they use sent they have different actuation times. It's difficult going back and forth between SC and SCII, since SCII doesn't have this problem. It should at least be an option for players they can turn on/off in their settings, so they can play with the feel that best suits them. This wasn't a problem when we could use MCA64 Launcher because it had the plugin for it that got rid of it. Without it, it makes the game so difficult to control in the late game when you are constantly microing, macroing, and bouncing around the map.
It does suck but you can get used to it. And bw and sc2 can't be changed to make it easy to go from one to the other. That would not make sense.
Really, you can get used to the mouse input and keyboard input thing. Hang in there
Why can't it be changed? Why does it not make sense? I have played over 1000 games on SC RM, and I am still not used to it; especially since I go back and forth between the games.This issue comes down to feel/comfort and equipment you use. They added custom hotkeys to BW (a change that does make it easier to go between the games) which makes it more comfortable. I can now have hotkeys that match my SCII hotkeys. If we want to promote SC RM, especially by getting new players from the SCII community this should at least be an option that can be toggled on/off.
Because sc2 and bw are two very different games. There are many things in sc2 that you can't do in BW. That's why things like selecting more than twelve units and multiple building select will never be in brood war, even though that would make it much easier for sc2 players to play brood war.
Those things are completely different from the change I am talking about. Those things reduce the skill needed for the game. The issue here is the game simply can't keep up with the speed and decision making of the user. We want the game to reflect the true speed of the player, but instead a quicker user is punished, resulting in poor micro/macro.
Yeah I hear you, the input canceling is annoying. but in the meantime, you can really overcome it quite easily with practice. it won't slow you down if you are a fast player. there are tons of other ways to outspeed your opponent. don't think that input-canceling each other out is holding you back or something. it really isn't. but i'm with you, i'd be happy if they fixed it.
I never toggled the input canceling option in mca64 even though I knew about it so I've personally gotten used to it lol. I do agree though, a fix wouldn't be a bad idea in this case.
The reality of the matter is, if new blood cant handle a losing streak, or the inevitable variance of a small population match maker, they wouldnt last long in a stressful, high skilled game like bw anyway. "I lost a few games!! " Wut?
On May 10 2018 03:20 Dazed. wrote: The reality of the matter is, if new blood cant handle a losing streak, or the inevitable variance of a small population match maker, they wouldnt last long in a stressful, high skilled game like bw anyway. "I lost a few games!! " Wut?
Great argument. Keep easy smurfing in the game. Do you want smurfing as a "gatekeeper" function? Or as a trial if you are worthy of playing brood war? And what does this have to do with M+K block?
On May 09 2018 14:39 SchAmToo wrote: lol. “The point of the game is to get better!” And yet all of the people telling me that are the better people. Ask around any newbs are tired of how many smurfs there are. MMR 1400-1700 is wild variant between people literally who never played to people who are Smurfs.
Don’t tell me how to enjoy my game and train, don’t feed me this frat hazing BS of how you also went through it. Ladder is draining because I never get an idea if I’m improving or not because my MMR goes 1700->1400->1600->1390->1750. The ladder is broken, Smurf’s are no fun, and it leaves us newer people frustrated af. People come in my stream all the time complaining they keep getting 400apm perfect BO smurfs at 1500 and they just quit laddering.
Losing 15 games as a newer player to finally be at 1200 is an AWFUL new player experience.
Losing to the 100th different cheese is awful as well. Broodwar is on an extreme in terms of competitive gaming so buckle up kid. There is always fortnite.
The point is, for people who care about their performance, they don't care about their MMR so much as how they feel they are improving. Yeah MMR is a nice yard stick occasionally but it's like weight in weightloss, you don't measure everyday. For those who just want to win (BILL WHERE R U) then it's the wrong game, OR they won't mind tanking until they can easily win. I simply don't understand where you are coming from tbh.
One idea I have is that if your MMR is 1500 or less, then your average APM should be added into the equation of how much your MMR drops or increases. While that won't eliminate smurfs, your "placement match" would put you in a more accurate rank. For example if you lose your first game and your APM is low (under 100) then your loss in MMR points should be greater.
On May 09 2018 14:39 SchAmToo wrote: lol. “The point of the game is to get better!” And yet all of the people telling me that are the better people. Ask around any newbs are tired of how many smurfs there are. MMR 1400-1700 is wild variant between people literally who never played to people who are Smurfs.
Don’t tell me how to enjoy my game and train, don’t feed me this frat hazing BS of how you also went through it. Ladder is draining because I never get an idea if I’m improving or not because my MMR goes 1700->1400->1600->1390->1750. The ladder is broken, Smurf’s are no fun, and it leaves us newer people frustrated af. People come in my stream all the time complaining they keep getting 400apm perfect BO smurfs at 1500 and they just quit laddering.
Losing 15 games as a newer player to finally be at 1200 is an AWFUL new player experience.
Losing to the 100th different cheese is awful as well. Broodwar is on an extreme in terms of competitive gaming so buckle up kid. There is always fortnite.
The point is, for people who care about their performance, they don't care about their MMR so much as how they feel they are improving. Yeah MMR is a nice yard stick occasionally but it's like weight in weightloss, you don't measure everyday. For those who just want to win (BILL WHERE R U) then it's the wrong game, OR they won't mind tanking until they can easily win. I simply don't understand where you are coming from tbh.
agreed, with ANY numerical rating system looking at rating day to day is pointless, there's way too much variance. It will just make you depressed seeing the +/- 300 swings.
Blizz still could do a much better job of improving the new player experience with placement matches (which I think they're adding soon to SCR).
On May 10 2018 04:32 Lazare1969 wrote: One idea I have is that if your MMR is 1500 or less, then your average APM should be added into the equation of how much your MMR drops or increases. While that won't eliminate smurfs, your "placement match" would put you in a more accurate rank. For example if you lose your first game and your APM is low (under 100) then your loss in MMR points should be greater.
Theres little relationship between ability and apm. Bad players spam hard sometimes, there are slow/efficient good players.
Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players.
Lol no. You should be placing new players x standard deviations below the mean. X should be determind based on how new players perform.
That doesn't just lower the MMR for all players. That guy is clueless.
since new accounts start lower, that will really screw over older accounts at 1300, since now they will have to play against my new smurf
the bottom will drop out from the rating system and everyone will lose points eventually except for the top pros who only lose to each other
the intention behind an optimal ranking system is that it maximizes the amount of close games.
Thus if it is true that new players are put against too good opponents too frequently, you can reduce their starting mmr so it is closer to the bottom. My point is that the comment from the blizzard korea guy was 100% false.
Smurfs is a different issue and good smurfs are going to win no matter where they start. Regardless if it is at 10% bottom or 2% bottom. What matters here is a system that quickly moves the MMR for players that win a lot early on.
On May 09 2018 14:39 SchAmToo wrote: lol. “The point of the game is to get better!” And yet all of the people telling me that are the better people. Ask around any newbs are tired of how many smurfs there are. MMR 1400-1700 is wild variant between people literally who never played to people who are Smurfs.
Don’t tell me how to enjoy my game and train, don’t feed me this frat hazing BS of how you also went through it. Ladder is draining because I never get an idea if I’m improving or not because my MMR goes 1700->1400->1600->1390->1750. The ladder is broken, Smurf’s are no fun, and it leaves us newer people frustrated af. People come in my stream all the time complaining they keep getting 400apm perfect BO smurfs at 1500 and they just quit laddering.
Losing 15 games as a newer player to finally be at 1200 is an AWFUL new player experience.
Losing to the 100th different cheese is awful as well. Broodwar is on an extreme in terms of competitive gaming so buckle up kid. There is always fortnite.
The point is, for people who care about their performance, they don't care about their MMR so much as how they feel they are improving. Yeah MMR is a nice yard stick occasionally but it's like weight in weightloss, you don't measure everyday. For those who just want to win (BILL WHERE R U) then it's the wrong game, OR they won't mind tanking until they can easily win. I simply don't understand where you are coming from tbh.
I care about performance, improving but I need a gauge to know whether or not I am. MMR and ranking is literally what people use to figure out where they are. Everyone here loves to say “MMR doesn’t matter” and then 5 seconds later be talking about their MMR, a pros MMR, or their friends MMR. If it doesn’t matter why do I see it everywhere?
And weight in weight loss is normally measured everyday... same with weight gaining like what I do.
You can’t know if you’re improving if you have 0 gauges and your MMR keeps going down after playing smurf #10s Protoss then Terran then Zerg.
And please, let’s not be condescending by telling me Brood war is a competitive game “kid”. I’ve been playing for a year plus, but you know, I guess I don’t know anything. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players.
Lol no. You should be placing new players x standard deviations below the mean. X should be determind based on how new players perform.
That doesn't just lower the MMR for all players. That guy is clueless.
since new accounts start lower, that will really screw over older accounts at 1300, since now they will have to play against my new smurf
the bottom will drop out from the rating system and everyone will lose points eventually except for the top pros who only lose to each other
the intention behind an optimal ranking system is that it maximizes the amount of close games.
Thus if it is true that new players are put against too good opponents too frequently, you can reduce their starting mmr so it is closer to the bottom. My point is that the comment from the blizzard korea guy was 100% false.
Smurfs is a different issue and good smurfs are going to win no matter where they start. Regardless if it is at 10% bottom or 2% bottom. What matters here is a system that quickly moves the MMR for players that win a lot early on.
Changing the starting mmr wouldn’t change anything. If you moved the starting mmr down 300 points then it would just move the bell curve 300 points.
The problem is fundamental to the player pool. If you have a population of people who have been playing for roughly 20 years and a population that is relatively new you will have a skill disparity. Unless the total number of players is big enough for this difference to normalize and ALL the more experienced players end up towards the top, you will end up with intermixing at the overlap.
It's a bi-modal distribution with a mix of skills churning around at the overlap. The only real solution is to increase the player pool.
Playing against smurfs is only bad for people who care a lot about winning ladder matches. If you are mostly interested in improving, then playing vs smurfs is a blessing. I wish I could play vs Flash and Larva all the time, my level of play would rocket to the sky in a pretty short time.
On May 10 2018 12:44 Kare wrote: Playing against smurfs is only bad for people who care a lot about winning ladder matches. If you are mostly interested in improving, then playing vs smurfs is a blessing. I wish I could play vs Flash and Larva all the time, my level of play would rocket to the sky in a pretty short time.
Thanks, but i dont need smurfs to improve. Whats with the sympathy with smurfing? Do you guys get anything out of it? Or are you guys like: "I have my generous day, time to lecture people!"
Yeah not sure why everyone is defending smurfs. They just make the experience less enjoyable. If I want to train to improve I have a ton of people I use to sit and grind games against.
It’s okay to want to win/lose on ladder to people my skill AND want to improve. It’s not one or the other.
But no, tell me more about how you are some paragon of improvement and I have the game figured out all wrong. /s
The random vs random thing is a bit of an odd thing to mention.
I assume Google Translate didn't fail me and that they aren't discussing "fixing" the odd current way Random vs Random races are generated to avoid mirror match-ups (iirc there's only 1/24 chances that you end up in a mirror if both players are Random).
On May 10 2018 12:44 Kare wrote: Playing against smurfs is only bad for people who care a lot about winning ladder matches. If you are mostly interested in improving, then playing vs smurfs is a blessing. I wish I could play vs Flash and Larva all the time, my level of play would rocket to the sky in a pretty short time.
Actually, it wouldn't. You need feedback. If you play against a player who's that much better than you, you'll just get smashed every time, even if you did EVERYTHING RIGHT. You will start to believe that what you're doing is wrong, when that's not true. You just didn't macro during a fight or something.
On May 10 2018 12:44 Kare wrote: Playing against smurfs is only bad for people who care a lot about winning ladder matches. If you are mostly interested in improving, then playing vs smurfs is a blessing. I wish I could play vs Flash and Larva all the time, my level of play would rocket to the sky in a pretty short time.
Actually, it wouldn't. You need feedback. If you play against a player who's that much better than you, you'll just get smashed every time, even if you did EVERYTHING RIGHT. You will start to believe that what you're doing is wrong, when that's not true. You just didn't macro during a fight or something.
The overall experience is going to tighten up your gameplay, unless your already at a point where you have no coherent mechanical ability/game plan, so everything is lost on you. Either way, the general experience of smurfing is like, what? 1% of games? 10% if were being generous to the whiners? It's basically an outlier in terms of stress, relative to the game itself. Most of your losses are simply going to be against people at your rank-- even if you get smashed, as skill sets are idiosyncratic and dont always align in your own favour. Saying smurfs are ruining your ladder experience is just scape goating, smurfs are a very small portion of the total ladder experience. The actual reality is that theres just variance, and a wide constellation of idiosyncratic abilities and build order knowledge. Either you can accept a defeat on ladder gracefully, if its a beat down or not, or you cant. Thats it. Smurfing has nothing to do with it.
In terms of non ladder practice its a great idea to play someone better than you, especially since they will give you pointers.
At low mmr evenly match opponents can produce very lopsided games. Maybe you forget a depot early and get supply blocked at 18. Your opponent has a good game and doesn’t get supply blocked. You might end up getting crushed and 6 speedlings really early, not because your opponent is way better but because early mistakes get punished really hard in Brood War.
On May 10 2018 12:44 Kare wrote: Playing against smurfs is only bad for people who care a lot about winning ladder matches. If you are mostly interested in improving, then playing vs smurfs is a blessing. I wish I could play vs Flash and Larva all the time, my level of play would rocket to the sky in a pretty short time.
Your statement is incorrect. Playing against smurfs is bad for people who want to have fun.
When I come home I want to play games for fun. I want to get matched with players close to my skill, which should be the point of a matchmaking system. I want to play a couple of games quickly and go off again. I don't care about losing or winning, as long as I had an entertaining time. Improvement for me is secondary to third goal, since I have other responsibilities, I cant spend my little time I have also analyzing replays and stuff. I just want to enjoy playing the game. Why should I log into the game and be stomped because I got matched against a smurfing veteran opponent that just laughs and bms at me? Its no fun for me and especially for newer players. I know not tryharding and instead trying to enjoy the game is hard concept for some to grasp in this community.
A ranked environment is inherently one in which players are trying their hardest to win. A player's rating is a product of a combination of their skill and their effort. When you queue for a ranked match, the matchmaker finds an opponent of similar rating. The matchmaker has no way of knowing whether you are intending to try your best or goof around. If you queue up expecting to just take it easy, you're setting yourself up to lose because your opponent probably won't be likeminded. The only way to obtain an accurate "chill" rating this way is to play that way in every single game until your rating reaches a level which accurately defines your actual level of effort (but then it won't suit you for the times you want to try really hard).
I tell you this for two reasons. One, so you get a rough idea of one element of the smurf mentality (the others being to intentionally derank in order to find games faster or dominate unsuspecting weaker players). Two, so you can set your own expectations for effort: perhaps you might want two separate accounts, one where you relax and one where you try your best (that is, smurfing yourself).
All that said, smurfing is something that is not handled well by the matchmaker. If you want to play relaxed games against other relaxed players, you're usually better off joining a lobby from the Join list. This is especially true for team games. The level of competition is lower and expectations are different. Trying to rely on the matchmaker to find close matches when your level of effort varies by game is not possible because your own mental state predetermines whether you will perform on the high end or the low end of your personal skill distribution.
On May 12 2018 09:09 Excalibur_Z wrote: A ranked environment is inherently one in which players are trying their hardest to win. A player's rating is a product of a combination of their skill and their effort. When you queue for a ranked match, the matchmaker finds an opponent of similar rating. The matchmaker has no way of knowing whether you are intending to try your best or goof around. If you queue up expecting to just take it easy, you're setting yourself up to lose because your opponent probably won't be likeminded. The only way to obtain an accurate "chill" rating this way is to play that way in every single game until your rating reaches a level which accurately defines your actual level of effort (but then it won't suit you for the times you want to try really hard).
I tell you this for two reasons. One, so you get a rough idea of one element of the smurf mentality (the others being to intentionally derank in order to find games faster or dominate unsuspecting weaker players). Two, so you can set your own expectations for effort: perhaps you might want two separate accounts, one where you relax and one where you try your best (that is, smurfing yourself).
All that said, smurfing is something that is not handled well by the matchmaker. If you want to play relaxed games against other relaxed players, you're usually better off joining a lobby from the Join list. This is especially true for team games. The level of competition is lower and expectations are different. Trying to rely on the matchmaker to find close matches when your level of effort varies by game is not possible because your own mental state predetermines whether you will perform on the high end or the low end of your personal skill distribution.
Smurfing is not handled well by the matchmaker because it allows endless acounts. That can easily be fixed. And play lobby games? You mean the wild west?
But that's not necessarily true either. Take SC2 for example. Players who want to smurf in that game will insta-leave dozens of games until they get to a rating where they're comfortable they can dominate the competition. When they invariably start rising back up toward their original rating, they'll tank it again and repeat the cycle. It's a player mentality thing. Requiring one account per player only makes it a little more difficult to accomplish the same goals of smurfing, it doesn't eliminate it.
On May 12 2018 09:27 Excalibur_Z wrote: But that's not necessarily true either. Take SC2 for example. Players who want to smurf in that game will insta-leave dozens of games until they get to a rating where they're comfortable they can dominate the competition. When they invariably start rising back up toward their original rating, they'll tank it again and repeat the cycle. It's a player mentality thing. Requiring one account per player only makes it a little more difficult to accomplish the same goals of smurfing, it doesn't eliminate it.
Leaving a bunch of games doesnt reset your entire history. And whats with this arguing? You can abuse every system in one way or another. You can always buy a new game. Does that mean its not even worth restricting?
Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
On May 13 2018 06:11 Dazed. wrote: Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
I have to do it: Why was LastScan banned from Brood War scene tournaments?
On May 13 2018 06:11 Dazed. wrote: Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
I have to do it: Why was LastScan banned from Brood War scene tournaments?
A competitive tournament for money at the top of the foreign scene relates to the ten minute experience, +/- 5 points in a ladder game, in no way.
On May 13 2018 06:11 Dazed. wrote: Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
I have to do it: Why was LastScan banned from Brood War scene tournaments?
A competitive tournament for money at the top of the foreign scene relates to the ten minute experience, +/- 5 points in a ladder game, in no way.
The competitive spirit in the brood war scene seems to be flexible. "Get good!" and "Ban best player!" hand in hand
On May 13 2018 06:11 Dazed. wrote: Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
I have to do it: Why was LastScan banned from Brood War scene tournaments?
A competitive tournament for money at the top of the foreign scene relates to the ten minute experience, +/- 5 points in a ladder game, in no way.
The competitive spirit in the brood war scene seems to be flexible.
Almost as if circumstance and opinions change?!?!?!
On May 13 2018 06:11 Dazed. wrote: Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
I have to do it: Why was LastScan banned from Brood War scene tournaments?
A competitive tournament for money at the top of the foreign scene relates to the ten minute experience, +/- 5 points in a ladder game, in no way.
The competitive spirit in the brood war scene seems to be flexible.
Almost as if circumstance and opinions change?!?!?!
You might think that a tournament is the place where the best of the best compete against each other. 1500 its actually where its at!
On May 13 2018 06:11 Dazed. wrote: Which, frankly, would be a retarded solution to a non issue in the broodwar scene. It would unnecessarily constrain freedom, all in the name of soothing the ego of bad players, who due to the fact that they are bad, probably cant even tell the difference between a real smurf and a lopsided game.
I have to do it: Why was LastScan banned from Brood War scene tournaments?
A competitive tournament for money at the top of the foreign scene relates to the ten minute experience, +/- 5 points in a ladder game, in no way.
The competitive spirit in the brood war scene seems to be flexible.
Almost as if circumstance and opinions change?!?!?!
You might think that a tournament is the place where the best of the best compete against each other.
Well, you would think that...if you were a child. Literally anything that i can think of that allows for tournament structure also restricts based on skill. Like, amateur bowling leagues? Amateur hockey? Where in the hell have you been living that gave you this impression?
EPT
해상도를 추가해 주세요.
go blizzard!
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/ESMu5xT.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/y2wxm29.jpg)
