| Forum Index > BW General |
|
10dla
127 Posts
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/11xxUCB.jpg) The Picture is always in front. Is it still necessary to cover the entire map in FoW? There are 20 years of mapmaking. Not sure if its to be expected to know all those maps. Pretty sure all it does/did is limit the amount of maps that are played (FS). And its just another barrier. Using NexusImage and TurboTop | ||
|
[AS]Rattus
427 Posts
i still like the complete black minimap though. They show the map before the game starts, thats enough imo. And i don't limit myself to playing only FS either. Thats the only map i vetoed in ranked. | ||
|
Alpha-NP-
United States1242 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19201 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
Gorgonoth
United States468 Posts
| ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
It's beginner friendly, but hardcore players still don't lose a facet of skill. | ||
|
Starecat
934 Posts
There is also a mechanic aspect to that you need to see a buildable terrain to create a building right? Meaning you need more attention to a worker in order to build, right? | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
As far as i understand you need the full black fog because you otherwise could always mineralwalk and get a scout? Though there might be another solution for this. | ||
|
M.R. McThundercrotch
United States265 Posts
As for building and mineral-walking, you would still have two different types of fog: one darker and one lighter, with the darker one functioning just like the black does now. You just make the black slightly transparent. If you are really looking for changes to make the game more friendly to new players without effecting the real competition, this is the first and best option. However, is making the game more friendly to new players really a big concern? I feel like that ship has sailed. At this point, you are either in even with the pain or you are playing something else, haha. (Full disclosure: I have two monitors and on my second monitor, I have build orders and pictures of the ladder maps. So...) | ||
|
JungleTerrain
Chile799 Posts
Anyways, it’s probably a nice quality of life thing that should be implemented, but people have to realize that Starcraft was not made with an intent of the game being played competitively. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
It would be pretty easy to add it as a feature for standard melee/ladder play and a proper implementation could fix some of the issues, such as the need to keep mains blacked out to prevent initial enemy buildings and creep from being automatically revealed and giving away one's opponent's starting position, that preplaced buildings and resources can still be rightclicked, or the fact that already scouted areas cannot be distinguished from unscouted ones (by adding a darker FOW, like in SC2). Just make the feature optional and require both players to agree on using it, and every one should be happy. Tourney hosts can then decide on their own whether they want to allow it for their games or not. | ||
|
Espers
United Kingdom606 Posts
| ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
On May 21 2018 06:30 The_Red_Viper wrote: This is by far the most annoying thing about bw for me because it doesn't really add any worthwhile skill. I don't think there is one player in the whole world who was excited he got better at clicking his unit through the fog of war. As far as i understand you need the full black fog because you otherwise could always mineralwalk and get a scout? Though there might be another solution for this. Nope, you need real vision for mineral walk. | ||
|
ninazerg
United States7291 Posts
On May 21 2018 07:05 Freakling wrote: FOW free map versions are one of the main features requested by players whenever new (foreign) maps are used in a tourney. So there is definitely a demand, and on any level of play it is definitely good if players have a way to familiarize themselves with a map by just playing it and not having to worry about getting their scouts lost and not knowing where to expand. It would be pretty easy to add it as a feature for standard melee/ladder play and a proper implementation could fix some of the issues, such as the need to keep mains blacked out to prevent initial enemy buildings and creep from being automatically revealed and giving away one's opponent's starting position, that preplaced buildings and resources can still be rightclicked, or the fact that already scouted areas cannot be distinguished from unscouted ones (by adding a darker FOW, like in SC2). Just make the feature optional and require both players to agree on using it, and every one should be happy. Tourney hosts can then decide on their own whether they want to allow it for their games or not. You know those maps with the checkboard-style fog-of-war? That seems like a good compromise because you can see the map, but can't place buildings in spots you haven't explored. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
2. You frequently revisit your scout while you're scouting in order to know what's up with your scout 3. Why is it such an issue anyway? Both players have incomplete knowledge, it's not a one way street. I really don't understand why this is an issue anyway. What does it actually gain you when knowing the exact terrain set? Are you going to cheese the first (few) time(s) you're playing the game without scouting? As a previous poster said: lost game because he didn't know exactly where the minerals were (but don't you check up on your unit you want to harass with?). Sure, certain stuff of the game will be demanding (like harassing at a semi-safe part of the map and guiding the harasser there + fending off an attack + macro), but that's the brutal nature of the game: you need to fully rely on yourself in order to win. | ||
|
Gorgonoth
United States468 Posts
I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot. Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal. I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW. | ||
|
Connor56201
25 Posts
and plus with sc:r you get a few of the map before the game starts both in ranked and in melee. its not a lot of time but you should be able to pick out something by looking at it for a few seconds especially if it lags for a few more seconds | ||
|
Twinkle Toes
United States3605 Posts
| ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote: How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous. I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot. Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal. I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW. What exactly is your plan against the third party minimap? And what kind of 100% accuracy pinpoint clicks are you talking about? Cant you adjust commands? Pretty sure high level player have that kind of apm On May 21 2018 08:29 Twinkle Toes wrote: FOW is part of the strategic element of the game No its not, you can easily circumvent it On May 21 2018 08:28 Connor56201 wrote: people want everything handed to them on a silver platter these days people want everything so damn easy all the time and plus with sc:r you get a few of the map before the game starts both in ranked and in melee. its not a lot of time but you should be able to pick out something by looking at it for a few seconds especially if it lags for a few more seconds What do people get on a silver plate? What do you got from being so incredible oldschool? | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote: How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous. I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot. Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal. I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW. Ofc it is a skill, i know someone else implied it it not. But honestly that's not even the question which is important here, the real question is: Is it a skill/task which adds somethign positive to the game? I really don't think it does. All it does is place an obstacle between a new player and the game. It's a burden of knowledge. There are lots and lots of these cases in any "strategy game", things people have to memorize to play the game in a more effective way. Usually these add actual decisionmaking to the game though. An example would be knowing different builds and being able to adapt during a game depending on the scouting information. The black fog of war doesn't really add anything outside of having to learn the map though. Any player playing the map often enough will simply memorize the important parts and that's it. The only real positive value this would have is if learning the map in itself would be fun. Think of adventure games where not everything is shown on the map, simply because discovering it is part of the fun. That's hardly the case here though. About your statement that you don't wanna remove skills. Imagine a bw version where you would have to answer a quiz question every 2 minutes for some benefit. That surely would be another skill which isn't in the current version of bw, but i doubt you would argue we should "keep" it right? Does it add anything positive to the gaming experience is the important part after all. | ||
|
TwiggyWan
France328 Posts
On May 21 2018 04:37 Gorgonoth wrote: I actually think the SC2 FoW detracts. In BW its another skill facet of having intimate map knowledge. It is tough on new players, but I like the challenge, and the upper hand you can have when you have that lazer like precision clikcing into the black, and knowing the expansion pattern. It works exactly as the question mark in mario kart 64 illiteracyhasdownsides talked about : it fucks up newbies who don't know the mechanic, and once they know it, they deal with it just fine 100% of the time. No strategic play comes from expecting your opponent to not now where to click his scout. I support SC2 FoW. | ||
|
orvinreyes
577 Posts
| ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
| ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 21 2018 09:18 Golgotha wrote: I actually like the black fog since you have to study the maps but I agree that not everyone wants this,especially newer players or casuals. I would remove it from ladder but just let the tournaments turn it on in created games. Simple. Why would you want it in tournaments, in which player usually know the maps anyway? This mixed up rules is usually a bad idea. Ladder is as official as it gets and those rules should be carried over | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
On May 21 2018 09:27 10dla wrote: Why would you want it in tournaments, in which player usually know the maps anyway? Because if that's how the pros want it and the pros get what they want. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 21 2018 09:29 Golgotha wrote: Because if that's how the pros want it and the pros get what they want. Can you post that pro survey? Pretty sure the pros arent allin on that wrist destroying playstyle and would prefer a smoother experience | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote: How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous. I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot. Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal. I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW. Introducing custom hotkeys also removed a skill facet. Some players had better hand coordination, and spent hours practicing macroing patterns. I don't see anyone complaining about it now. Of course there's skill to both. But we could introduce a bunch of other, retarded, skill facets that wouldn't at all make BW a better game. So there's no point in assuming that BW is as good of a game due to ALL of it's current characteristics. There's room for improvement to the current system of FOW. On the other hand, placing buildings on unexplored territory is a solid candidate for an argument against making it completely SC2 like. | ||
|
B-royal
Belgium1330 Posts
On May 21 2018 09:32 niteReloaded wrote: Introducing custom hotkeys also removed a skill facet. Some players had better hand coordination, and spent hours practicing macroing patterns. I don't see anyone complaining about it now. Of course there's skill to both. But we could introduce a bunch of other, retarded, skill facets that wouldn't at all make BW a better game. So there's no point in assuming that BW is as good of a game due to ALL of it's current characteristics. There's room for improvement to the current system of FOW. On the other hand, placing buildings on unexplored territory is a solid candidate for an argument against making it completely SC2 like. Rofl. You expect people to keep complaining for years about something they can't change any more? Most likely the people that hate the custom hotkeys, like myself, refuse to use them, and possibly refuse to play with people that use them. I personally would like to be part of the second group as well, but that would mean I would never be able to play ladder. Not that I'm playing the game much anyway, maybe 5 games every 5 months. I've got Blizzard to thank for that! | ||
|
lemmata
468 Posts
Fog of war = graying out areas where your units/buildings do not have vision Unexplored = blacking out areas where your units/buildings have not visited Fog of war is definitely needed. No one disputes that. Making maps fully explored at the beginning of a match is an interesting idea. We should not reject it outright. For example, pros have enjoyed pre-explored versions of foreign maps previously. That said, I would not want pro matches to be on pre-explored versions because the unexplored areas are nice visual cues for viewers on what is going on in the game. Also, for middle-level players, the black areas also serve as memory devices about where their units have been. Maybe if Blizzard ever introduced a "map of the week" system where a new foreign map is featured, it might be nice to play it pre-explored. | ||
|
Gorgonoth
United States468 Posts
On May 21 2018 09:09 TwiggyWan wrote: It works exactly as the question mark in mario kart 64 illiteracyhasdownsides talked about : it fucks up newbies who don't know the mechanic, and once they know it, they deal with it just fine 100% of the time. No strategic play comes from expecting your opponent to not now where to click his scout. I support SC2 FoW. Not even slightly true. The SC2 FOW allows someone to place buildings across the map instantaneously. I assume you mean that because you say you support SC2 FOW. . But as it is now, it adds a layer of mechanical complexity. It isn't a mechanic to ""know"" its something that require a bit of APM and attention. That said, the idea of a revealed grey but still unbuildable FOW isn't as bad, but I still prefer the way things are. | ||
|
Gorgonoth
United States468 Posts
That aside, This is my reasons why the skill of black maps(for lack of a better phrase) is one that should stay. 1.Revealed bases in SC2 keep the players mind thinking about possible hidden bases, or just opponets bases for that matter. IE it does the thinking for you. BW dosen't hold your hand. All the awareness you need to have about your opponent is 100% in your brain. 2.Non build able FOW is extra APM and attention that you have to juggle when you are placing buildings faraway. 3.If you are planning attacks or future engagements, in SC2 one could scan the area and form a mental picture. In BW this could be done in revealed areas, but if it wasn't you'd be in the dark which makes it challenging. The Black forces people to think more about the map and what things are in the way. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 21 2018 11:16 Gorgonoth wrote: And many people suggested how that oh we could add dumb surveys just to make it harder, and more skill. I dont think anyone is seriously thinking that we should just add as many weird skills to make it as hard as possible for new players. That aside, This is my reasons why the skill of black maps(for lack of a better phrase) is one that should stay. 1.Revealed bases in SC2 keep the players mind thinking about possible hidden bases, or just opponets bases for that matter. IE it does the thinking for you. BW dosen't hold your hand. All the awareness you need to have about your opponent is 100% in your brain. 2.Non build able FOW is extra APM and attention that you have to juggle when you are placing buildings faraway. 3.If you are planning attacks or future engagements, in SC2 one could scan the area and form a mental picture. In BW this could be done in revealed areas, but if it wasn't you'd be in the dark which makes it challenging. The Black forces people to think more about the map and what things are in the way. You do realize that a pitch black area could also trigger a: "Hey, i havent been there yet....maybe i should do something!"? And since when is it a good idea to start a building sequence with a worker across the map? Especially when you have to stay above X minerals. "The Black forces people to think more about the map and what things are in the way.". Once again: You can simply have a map layout picture on a second screen | ||
|
Djabanete
United States2786 Posts
(*) Good for new players (won't lose workers in weird corners of the map, will more easily see strategic options) (*) Bad for spectators (shape of revealed area reflects the course of the game so far) (*) Irrelevant for pros Therefore, I'd support it as an option for the game host, which should likely be set to "no" in tournament games. I'd use it in casual games. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 21 2018 12:28 Djabanete wrote: Pre-explored map is... (*) Good for new players (won't lose workers in weird corners of the map, will more easily see strategic options) (*) Bad for spectators (shape of revealed area reflects the course of the game so far) (*) Irrelevant for pros Therefore, I'd support it as an option for the game host, which should likely be set to "no" in tournament games. I'd use it in casual games. ASL uses Starcraft 2 minimap settings for months. It cant be that bad, otherwise they or Blizzard would have changed it by now. Or have you seen negative feedback on that one in here? | ||
|
abuse
Latvia1927 Posts
I would support a pre-explored map with unbuildable FoW. When I was back to the game, It also stopped me from playing maps on non-FS or maps I don't generally know because it's annoying to not know where to expand or some intricaties like where are entrances or ramps to bases before you actually expand. I don't think unexplored maps require any more skill than explored ones, they just require more grind. Explored maps would have definitely helped in having people play more maps, but honestly it's kind of too late already. | ||
|
lestye
United States4148 Posts
On May 21 2018 12:43 10dla wrote: ASL uses Starcraft 2 minimap settings for months. It cant be that bad, otherwise they or Blizzard would have changed it by now. Or have you seen negative feedback on that one in here? Oh wow, I hadn't realized that at all. Is that only for spectators though? | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 21 2018 08:06 ninazerg wrote: You know those maps with the checkboard-style fog-of-war? That seems like a good compromise because you can see the map, but can't place buildings in spots you haven't explored. Yes, that's one thing I thought about and why I think a proper implementation is needed. First of, checkerboard style actually appear as a chackerboard on the minimap, so appearance is not optimal, secondly, it is incredibly laborious to actually make a checkerboard style map version (for a normal 128² map you have to set ~128² / 2 = 8192 tiles in the FOW layer by hand – ideally you do it once and then just reuse the template map by copying in Terrain and units from the desired map, changing map description and triggers accordingly etc. That's a lot less work). On May 21 2018 08:20 Uldridge wrote: 1. Maps are symmetrical (broadly speaking), so you should know the general vicinity of where to click to scout You need to know the specific kind of symmetry beforehand, though. And on odd-spawn (3/5/7-player) maps people still tend to click at the wrong spots and get lost while scouting. And while symmetry can hep you guess the ṕotential spawns of your opponent, you'd still have to do a lot of extra scouting just to find out where to get a good third (especially in ZvP you want to know that before scouting). 2. You frequently revisit your scout while you're scouting in order to know what's up with your scout But knowing in time that you fucked up your scouting does not really solve the issue…3. Why is it such an issue anyway? Both players have incomplete knowledge, it's not a one way street. Your point?I really don't understand why this is an issue anyway. What does it actually gain you when knowing the exact terrain set? Are you going to cheese the first (few) time(s) you're playing the game without scouting? Is this what bothers you? Then you probably aren't aware of the effect that many players tend to cheese on maps unknown to them precisely because they don't know anything about the map and thus want to avoid more complex strategies. Having full disclosure of terrain and expansion locations from the start makes it easy to do an ad-hoc adaption of any standard build (unless the map is very nonstandard in some way – and even then actually seeing the map can help you determine what might work and what not, shifting the problem from screwing up players from the get-go, thus making them hate, fear and avoid an experimental map without ever really having explored its potential, to having to make up a creative strategy on the go, which is actually a worthwhile skill for a player to have).As a previous poster said: lost game because he didn't know exactly where the minerals were (but don't you check up on your unit you want to harass with?). Sure, certain stuff of the game will be demanding (like harassing at a semi-safe part of the map and guiding the harasser there + fending off an attack + macro), but that's the brutal nature of the game: you need to fully rely on yourself in order to win. As you said, it's pretty demanding to play BW, dozens of things demand your attention and management, so having to form a mental model of the map on top of that can be pretty hard. You only get glimpses of certain spots at a time, can't really process all the details. Even knowing "minor" details like whether the main has a ramp or where the natural is located and how its choke looks before you send out a scout can make a lot of difference (for example when determining the build order and when to send out the first scout).On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote: How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous. I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot. Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal. I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW. And how do people develop that "skill", i.e. forming a detailed mental image of the map? By going into single player and using "black sheep wall" and/or building a few buildings, by staring at a map picture, by going into ScmDraft and using its fabulous analyzer tools and ability to place buildings quick and easy, or by having very quick and dirty cheese games full of trivial errors and disorientation. Non-black fog of war allows you to learn a map just by playing it and, by providing a lot of important info in-game, to develop more mature strategies quickly, which is a lot more fun than the alternatives. You should not just look at the problem from the perspective of a high level player, playing competitive games on a relatively small map pool.
Now what really matters is proper implementation, to find the best compromise to meet every one's demands:
| ||
|
_Animus_
Bulgaria1064 Posts
About FoW map being part of skill or strategy. Its simply not true, thats just obstacle. Let me explaing why. Having map visible is actually way more beneficial to strategy and skill, because you can plan your strategy, tactic and expand pattern ingame by seeing the map all the time, you will play more precise and better games will be delivered on less known maps, how is that hurting the game? Its also is great for new players and saves you time which is a HUGE benefit. We are in 2018, i think time for praising some primitive standarts and obstacles that just hinders the players from experiencing the game in its full potential had already passed. | ||
|
Node
United States2159 Posts
On May 21 2018 10:01 B-royal wrote: Rofl. You expect people to keep complaining for years about something they can't change any more? Have you read this forum? | ||
|
[Fin]Vittu
Canada507 Posts
| ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
On May 21 2018 10:01 B-royal wrote: All black is good. It gives a clear distinction between parts of the map you've scouted, and parts you haven't. This makes it easier for people to realize the possibility of a hidden expansion, or the location of a cheese. Rofl. You expect people to keep complaining for years about something they can't change any more? Most likely the people that hate the custom hotkeys, like myself, refuse to use them, and possibly refuse to play with people that use them. I personally would like to be part of the second group as well, but that would mean I would never be able to play ladder. Not that I'm playing the game much anyway, maybe 5 games every 5 months. I've got Blizzard to thank for that! Ok, I admit poor argument by me. When you say you got Blizzard to thank for not playing, you can't mean the custom hotkeys? :/ | ||
|
ajmbek
Italy460 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4328 Posts
| ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 21 2018 16:14 lestye wrote: Oh wow, I hadn't realized that at all. Is that only for spectators though? I would take a wild guess and say its observer only | ||
|
ortseam
996 Posts
On May 21 2018 20:19 ajmbek wrote: as i know there is no way to hide zerg creep if you just shade the map This is wrong, you can only see creep if you explore that part of the map | ||
|
CHEONSOYUN
514 Posts
for anyone who wants to play the game even a little bit seriously, the black minimap is a very minor obstacle | ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
| ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 22 2018 04:07 ArvickHero wrote: I feel like the most compelling argument for keeping the unexplored black minimap is the idea that hidden expansions and proxies are more effective as a result. Whether or not that is actually the case, I have no idea, but I think it'd be a real shame if proxies and hidden expansions lost their effectiveness as a result of a pre-explored minimap. Why exactly are they more likely to be found? Its so much more obvious where you havent scouted yet with pitch black spots on the minimap. Or because your opponent doesnt know that there could be minerals? Once again, thats simply circumvented with a sidescreen map layout picture | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On May 22 2018 04:07 ArvickHero wrote: Yeah, I have a feeling an all black minimap subtly allows for people to forget about certain bases, or proxy locations etc. I feel like the most compelling argument for keeping the unexplored black minimap is the idea that hidden expansions and proxies are more effective as a result. Whether or not that is actually the case, I have no idea, but I think it'd be a real shame if proxies and hidden expansions lost their effectiveness as a result of a pre-explored minimap. In any case the change seems pointless. If someone is pussy enough not to play a map they dont know because they cant examine it, greyed out, constantly as they play, I doubt that person is playing a new map altogether. That kind of mindset is...extreme, and not undone by mere convenience; its a pathology. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On May 22 2018 04:38 Dazed. wrote: Yeah, I have a feeling an all black minimap subtly allows for people to forget about certain bases, or proxy locations etc. In any case the change seems pointless. If someone is pussy enough not to play a map they dont know because they cant examine it, greyed out, constantly as they play, I doubt that person is playing a new map altogether. That kind of mindset is...extreme, and not undone by mere convenience; its a pathology. It's not pointless at all, it removes a burden of knowledge which doesn't add anything positive to the game. I totally get that one wouldn't wanna make the terrain buildable if you don't have real vision, that's something i can see as reasoning, but i don't think you would need blacked out fog of war for that. Anything else brought up so far in this thread isn't convincing in the slightest. I would really wanna see the actual reasoning of the developers on why they implemented the fow like that. I would honestly say it's just bad design, which is ok ofc, it's an old game but there is no point in not changing it really. edit: To address the "people might forget easier about proxies", i can tell you that proxies still happen in sc2. Why do people forget about proxies? Because the game gives you a lot to do already, being on top of scouting everything simply is quite the task. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
On May 21 2018 18:43 Freakling wrote: You need to know the specific kind of symmetry beforehand, though. And on odd-spawn (3/5/7-player) maps people still tend to click at the wrong spots and get lost while scouting. And while symmetry can hep you guess the ṕotential spawns of your opponent, you'd still have to do a lot of extra scouting just to find out where to get a good third (especially in ZvP you want to know that before scouting). How is that bad per se? Again, this only matters if your opponent is a master of the map. Again, how do you get lost with your scout in the early stages of the game, for real? Deducing potential spawning locations and checking up on your scout in the early game is not difficult. But knowing in time that you fucked up your scouting does not really solve the issue… Let's be honest here. What is a few seconds going to make a difference in a low level game? You're making it seem like your scouts are getting stuck or are like WAY off the base you need to check. It's not going to matter in the long run when you have to readjust losing a few moments. Also you won't have the star sense anyway to see anything's off if the guy is going for an early type of rush (unless it's like a 4 pool or a proxies or something). Your point? My point is that you'd have to be extremely unlucky to face off every single time against someone who has intricate map knowledge of the map you're playing. This means that most of the time you'll be mostly at a slight disadvantage if you haven't played the map 3+ times. Also, what keeps you from looking at the map before or between games to look at what's possible? Is this what bothers you? + Show Spoiler + Then you probably aren't aware of the effect that many players tend to cheese on maps unknown to them precisely because they don't know anything about the map and thus want to avoid more complex strategies. Having full disclosure of terrain and expansion locations from the start makes it easy to do an ad-hoc adaption of any standard build (unless the map is very nonstandard in some way – and even then actually seeing the map can help you determine what might work and what not, shifting the problem from screwing up players from the get-go, thus making them hate, fear and avoid an experimental map without ever really having explored its potential, to having to make up a creative strategy on the go, which is actually a worthwhile skill for a player to have). I feel like you're blowing this way out of proportion. How many times will players improvise/adapt their strategies at lower levels? This is because of the FoW? Or are there other factors at play? People tend to go in the game of doing x and potentially modifying it in reaction to what the other player is doing. Is it actually that hard to prep on a certain, study it a little bit before you go into a game on it? Do you actually think you're going to be able to pull off crazy stuff the first (few) time(s) you play on a map with soft FoW? As you said, it's pretty demanding to play BW, dozens of things demand your attention and management, so having to form a mental model of the map on top of that can be pretty hard. You only get glimpses of certain spots at a time, can't really process all the details. Even knowing "minor" details like whether the main has a ramp or where the natural is located and how its choke looks before you send out a scout can make a lot of difference (for example when determining the build order and when to send out the first scout). But the vision doesn't stay black dude. I don't get it. I guess I just don't understand your plea for soft FOW. For me personally, it doesn't matter. I don't want to intricately look at their base while I'm macro'ing to suddenly understand that "HA, I can put a Vulture on the high ground to kill his economy with!" Like I said. It's blown up way too much and it probably wouldn't matter that much anyway if it was acquired, so why would you want it? The appeal of true FoW is that your map is what you've explored and keep using, not the entire map. The only argument you really have, imo, is exactly the one I have: preference. You prefer to play on non-true FoW, while I don't (care). This isn't merit for any changes to occur. Edit: in response to proxies: progamers, with intricate knowledge of the map stull proxy from time to time and their opponents still don't always find it/sniff it out. So I doubt that a random player deciding to proxy you will suddenly be sniffed out much faster if you don't have true FoW. Edit2: @Red_Viper: burden of knowlegde? Give me a break. You won't intensely study a map while you're playing or it'll suddenly click when you're playing the game. You don't have the time for that. You start understanding a map by playing the map, not by seeing where you can or can't go.. | ||
|
Ethelis
United States2396 Posts
On May 22 2018 04:07 ArvickHero wrote: I feel like the most compelling argument for keeping the unexplored black minimap is the idea that hidden expansions and proxies are more effective as a result. Whether or not that is actually the case, I have no idea, but I think it'd be a real shame if proxies and hidden expansions lost their effectiveness as a result of a pre-explored minimap. I'm inclined to believe this is a real factor but it's hard to prove. I wouldn't like a change and risk affecting that part of the game. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
Knowing the map is always a burden of knowledge, but the current implementation makes it just more time consuming to learn it and gives a bigger advantage to people who already know it vs people who play a map the first time. There really isn't anything interesting about making it harder for people to learn a map. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
I'm not convinced at all you'll be able to pick up a lot more of the map that's not covered in true FoW, because you don't have the time -except for maybe in the early game- to look at map features. I'm not at all convinced you'll suddenly be able to comprehend maps a lot more when you have soft FoW from the start. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 22 2018 04:38 Dazed. wrote: Yeah, I have a feeling an all black minimap subtly allows for people to forget about certain bases, or proxy locations etc. In any case the change seems pointless. If someone is pussy enough not to play a map they dont know because they cant examine it, greyed out, constantly as they play, I doubt that person is playing a new map altogether. That kind of mindset is...extreme, and not undone by mere convenience; its a pathology. Can you believe these pussies on ICCup? This is how pussy they are: https://iccup.com/en/starcraft/gamingprofile/patrashu.html 99% Fighting Spirit. Occasionally Python when you feel crazy. And its like that on every player. How much more hardcore than ICCup can you be? Where do people play on X different maps on rotation? Now try searching for a custom game on Battle.net. Take a wild guess what map they are playing. I always wonder: In what world are you playing in which people are just as HARDCORE as you? Planet Kespa? | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
I certainly know that i learned sc2 maps way faster because of this compared to bw ones. There is a reason this implementation of fow is basically standard in any game now. It reduces the burden of knowledge for a feature which otherwise would have no positive effect on the game. As i said before, there is nothing interesting about simply learning the map, you just have to do it. Helping people to learn it faster and more easily is just reasonable. | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
Mountain out of a mole hill. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On May 22 2018 06:50 Dazed. wrote: I've played sc2 and broodwar, both at low and kinda decent levels, and at least from my own experience any concern about the mini map one way or the other is crazy/inexperienced. It just doesnt have an impact one way or the other, in terms of pre planning, figuring out the map, etc...I mean unless your an actual retard, it only takes maybe a ten minute game to figure out a map, and its usually symmetrical, the amount of players are told before the game starts...i donno. I dont see how anyone could load up longinus and remain confused and unable to adjust as the game developed organically, let alone going forward in repeats of that map. Mountain out of a mole hill. Then pls tell me why it's the new standard to have it transparent? Apparently developers agree in general that it's "better" that way. Also if you don't think there is a difference one way or another surely nothing speaks against changing it  | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
For UMS maps, black fog of war is definitely important. So the feature requires a little more work than you may think. And in some ways, the very roots of SC1 are about this more casual sort of play, where you don't even know the map before you play. Thinking of FFAs and such. It's possible you would need to make the feature optional, which makes it more annoying to implement. I didn't cry when they added right-click to rally or other QoL features, so I don't think SC is as fragile as some people think (in fact I think 1.12 patch was a resurgence for BW that brought a lot of people back from Diablo II). I do think black fog of war has it's place in BW though, so I wouldn't want it to be completely removed. | ||
|
Levque
88 Posts
| ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 22 2018 06:58 Levque wrote: Stop trying to make BW easier. Why do people make it as easy as it gets by playing simply 1 map only? | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
| ||
|
Highgamer
1388 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/SbQ3H05.jpg) User was warned for this post | ||
|
ortseam
996 Posts
| ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On May 22 2018 06:57 The_Red_Viper wrote: The threshold for complaining in modern games is zero? In any case, who cares? This standard your referring to, universally, are rts games that failed where broodwar did not. Why should we want the mediocrity of a failed standard?Then pls tell me why it's the new standard to have it transparent? Apparently developers agree in general that it's "better" that way. Also if you don't think there is a difference one way or another surely nothing speaks against changing it True, and the reality is, the mini map wont actually change, i think we both know this. i like to argue. | ||
|
A.Alm
Sweden508 Posts
| ||
|
[AS]Rattus
427 Posts
| ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On May 22 2018 08:06 Dazed. wrote: The threshold for complaining in modern games is zero? In any case, who cares? This standard your referring to, universally, are rts games that failed where broodwar did not. Why should we want the mediocrity of a failed standard? True, and the reality is, the mini map wont actually change, i think we both know this. i like to argue. OR one form to show a minimap is considered "better design". That's really all there is to this question. Will a blacked out minimap have any positive value to the game compared to a transparent one. The answer is no, it doesn't really. You find the same in mobas as well, hardly a fail (not that your argument was any good, you cannot say that every single feature of a "failed product" is automatically bad) It probably won't change, but you never know. There are custom hotkeys, there is a higher resolution which adds more information on the screen, there are changes which didn't impact the game in a bad way, just quality of life and "better design". Blizzard thankfully finds the balance here so far. | ||
|
neatpete
48 Posts
| ||
|
Lazare1969
United States318 Posts
What do you guys think? | ||
|
lestye
United States4148 Posts
On May 22 2018 08:14 [AS]Rattus wrote: im not sayin its the only reason but greyed out minimap instead of a complete dark one pretty much killed the rts genre nowadays. :> Damn Warcraft III! | ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
| ||
|
Luddite
United States2315 Posts
a) yet another hurdle for newcomers to overcome b) encourages every non-pro to keep playing FS instead of literally any other map c) unfair advantage to anyone with a second monitor on the map | ||
|
Alpha-NP-
United States1242 Posts
| ||
|
Ty2
United States1434 Posts
Edit: The biggest change i can think of that acts as a precedent, and most definitely surpasses a QoL feature is custom hotkeys. People were loathing they'd bring harm to competitive BW, but we're a year in and, surprise, nothing has happened. | ||
|
Dantak
Czech Republic648 Posts
But by all means, keep it pure. And dead. | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
On May 22 2018 15:20 Ty2 wrote: I really like having no black fog of war because I like to location hotkey my expos. Normally I'd have to memorize spatially the map to get that natural base location hotkey just right. I know some people are going to make the appeal to tradition argument, but really it's just an arbitrary constraint that has little bearing on what makes bw bw. Edit: The biggest change i can think of that acts as a precedent, and most definitely surpasses a QoL feature is custom hotkeys. People were loathing they'd bring harm to competitive BW, but we're a year in and, surprise, nothing has happened. Are ASL pros allowed to change their hotkeys? Cuz that's awesome if they can. One thing is for sure, removing black fog of war would make bring in many more newcomers and casuals. Couple this with better chat channels and 2v2 matchmaking, it would be one sick patch for the future of BW. But like I said, if the pros in ASL want to keep the black fog for tournaments, let them have the option to do so when creating games. it's a win-win for both sides then. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 22 2018 05:03 Uldridge wrote: I get it, you never watched any foreign competitive games on new maps, or you'd know exactly how easily a scout can and up sent to the wrong spot on the map. Why is it so hard to understand that players are called players because they just want to play, not do in-depth studies of maps beforehand?How is that bad per se? Again, this only matters if your opponent is a master of the map. Again, how do you get lost with your scout in the early stages of the game, for real? Deducing potential spawning locations and checking up on your scout in the early game is not difficult. Let's be honest here. What is a few seconds going to make a difference in a low level game? You're making it seem like your scouts are getting stuck or are like WAY off the base you need to check. It's not going to matter in the long run when you have to readjust losing a few moments. Also you won't have the star sense anyway to see anything's off if the guy is going for an early type of rush (unless it's like a 4 pool or a proxies or something). My point is that you'd have to be extremely unlucky to face off every single time against someone who has intricate map knowledge of the map you're playing. This means that most of the time you'll be mostly at a slight disadvantage if you haven't played the map 3+ times. Also, what keeps you from looking at the map before or between games to look at what's possible? I feel like you're blowing this way out of proportion. How many times will players improvise/adapt their strategies at lower levels? This is because of the FoW? Or are there other factors at play? People tend to go in the game of doing x and potentially modifying it in reaction to what the other player is doing. Is it actually that hard to prep on a certain, study it a little bit before you go into a game on it? Do you actually think you're going to be able to pull off crazy stuff the first (few) time(s) you play on a map with soft FoW? But the vision doesn't stay black dude. I don't get it. I guess I just don't understand your plea for soft FOW. For me personally, it doesn't matter. I don't want to intricately look at their base while I'm macro'ing to suddenly understand that "HA, I can put a Vulture on the high ground to kill his economy with!" Like I said. It's blown up way too much and it probably wouldn't matter that much anyway if it was acquired, so why would you want it? The appeal of true FoW is that your map is what you've explored and keep using, not the entire map. Why do you think I personally care? I am a map maker, detailed map knowledge is definitely not a point where my game falls apart. I also clearly stated it should be an option, because many players demand it, not mandatory. Again you say it probably wouldn't matter much, but you are the one who seems adamantly opposed to it anyway. And as has already been pointed out, in part the change already has occurred (see ASL observer mode).The only argument you really have, imo, is exactly the one I have: preference. You prefer to play on non-true FoW, while I don't (care). This isn't merit for any changes to occur. | ||
|
Navane
Netherlands2743 Posts
Second, this is not a major QoL thing that will make the game significantly easier for anyone, or draw in anyone who is now appaled by the harsness of broodwar. It is such a small nuicanse I can't even think of any feature that would compare to it in futility. Third, it's not just about remembering the map layout. When you play on a new map you should actually go in there and try out building placements too. Do you want an imprint on the map where you should build your rax/supplys for walls on each spawning point? (I have one for hunters, its great!) The same for pylon/forge/gateway walls? Do you want a blueprint of the simcity of your race? So all you have to do is fill in the coloring picture? Maybe put in small numbers to correspond with the supply or order you have to build them in? Do you want a couple of arrows that show what locations are in range of siegetanks or psionic storm? Maybe a pulsating purple pedestal to tell you where you should perform your drops? All this is knowledge you should build up for each new map. Adding your petty fog of war idea simply moves the wall one step further away. So new people bash there heads against it one step later. The fact that you have to send your scvs to the minerals, that's the thing that's hard for new people. True story. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 22 2018 17:23 Navane wrote: Every opinion disagreeing with yours is just pointless whining. Never heard that argument anywhere before.First, OP is a whiner. Second, this is not a major QoL thing that will make the game significantly easier for anyone, or draw in anyone who is now appaled by the harsness of broodwar. It is such a small nuicanse I can't even think of any feature that would compare to it in futility. Tell me: Why then, for every new foreign map that was always used for a tourney, were there always players demanding a FOW free version of the map? Obviously it makes a notable difference to quite a few people. Learn to see perspectives but you own!Third, it's not just about remembering the map layout. When you play on a new map you should actually go in there and try out building placements too. Do you want an imprint on the map where you should build your rax/supplys for walls on each spawning point? (I have one for hunters, its great!) The same for pylon/forge/gateway walls? Do you want a blueprint of the simcity of your race? So all you have to do is fill in the coloring picture? Maybe put in small numbers to correspond with the supply or order you have to build them in? Do you want a couple of arrows that show what locations are in range of siegetanks or psionic storm? Maybe a pulsating purple pedestal to tell you where you should perform your drops? Yeah, one it totally like the other @_@.If you just want to play a map and simply know where the expansions and what the rough terrain features are, non-black unexplored FOW can actually go a long way. If you want all the fine details, such as wall-ins and other building placement, you probably think you'd have to play the map for hours and develop some "skills". That's because you are doing it wrong. Just get SCMDraft and use its fabulous analyzer and debugging features to learn everything you ever need to know in 10 minutes or so. All this is knowledge you should build up for each new map. Adding your petty fog of war idea simply moves the wall one step further away. So new people bash there heads against it one step later. The fact that you have to send your scvs to the minerals, that's the thing that's hard for new people. True story. That you'd have to learn anew for every new map how to right-click workers on minerals is a true revelation to me. I seriously did not know that before. I think you should complain to Blizzard about it – sounds like a seriously bad design feature. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
Glioburd
France1911 Posts
(Also why Bisudagger has been warned for this post? xd) | ||
|
Navane
Netherlands2743 Posts
I always like your opinions on map making details and I especially liked your input in the "Total Recall" thread. Also, I did word poorly when I said "OP is a whiner." Without context, you are very right in your reply to that. However, I would like to add that op is a proven whiner: he has been banned before because of it. The thing is, part of me just doesnt want to partake in this particular discussion because it is such a petty one. I think everyone who doesn't want the fog of war changed, thinks its a petty discussion and therefore doesn't partake in it. But that results in the ever skewed internet representation, where the most vocal are seen as the majority. I remember beeing a young padwan and starting a thread about playing on normal speed instead of fastest, with the same apeal to noobism. "Who has time to learn to click that quick?" "This way everyone has time to do all their actions." It was foolish; the struggle is the game. Nobody plays broodwar for fun. There is no casual broodwar player. If you explain the game to a layman he'll think you're explaining a tedious job that should be automated, that you're some kind of chineese factory worker. And then you always get this argument of "you people don't like change." We don't change paintings, do we? We don't change songs, do we? We don't add gratituious cgi to movies, do we? edit: i forgot my favourite argument against: "people don't like change": use it in the climate change debate. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
And then you are comparing apples and oranges all the time (or rather apples and orange goo from outer space). If some one wants to play the game at a slower speed, guess what: They already have the option to just do it. Arguably, the people who do play broodwar are doing it for fun… It's just that people have very different ideas about what constitutes "fun". We don't change paintings. But many paintings have been recreated various times, often by the same artists, with minor and major changes on the original design. Songs don't change? Ever heard different versions of the same folk songs? Renditions by different interprets of the same art song? Any cover version ever? Big budges movies are flooded with gratuitous CGI these days. As for old movies, if it's a popular franchise (like Star Wars) and budged allows, remastered versions actually do come out (they even changed Darth Vader's ghost out for young Anakin's in RotJ, which does not even make any sense). And the issue with some people and global warning is not whether they like it or not but whether they know enough, want to know or even care. None of these examples have any bearing on the topic at hand, though. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
A poll for the entire playerbase would be so appropriate here, and actual performance numbers before and after changes because you could see hard evidence for it, instead of biased speculative talk. If you're unable to find an opponent's base in reasonable amount of time, you're simply bad. I never had any issues or thought it was problematic and I played new maps every so often. Acting like absolving the blackened FoW will solve the badness all of the sudden, because now you magically can find the opponent's base in a reasonable amount of time and "adapt strategies because you understand the map" is delusional. I would like input from high level players, because lower than B level players have much more to work on than just their understanding of the map and how to play that map. So much so that I'd argue it's actually irrelevant for them. Or maybe I simply don't understand what's trying to be accomplished here. My argument is that changing it won't matter for the player experience (it's simply an illusion of it mattering while playing the game), so why change it? Your argument is: if it doesn't matter that much (or might potentially matter a lot for people) why not change it? If the FoW is changed and the evidence turns out that performance across to board (but especially for lower level players) becomes significantly better and more players are drawn to the game and map diversity is upped, then I gladly conceed my point. If not? People are pussies and fundamentally need to change their own mental state because it wouldn't matter if you played on a dark map or not (performance wise). But then you can come in again with the: why not just change it if it calms people down and gives them the illusion of helping them? + Show Spoiler + My answer is: stop spoonfeeding people illusions. It's bad for them for all sorts of reasons. I don't want to go further but it becomes a lot less BW related and much more societal at large related with this. | ||
|
Starecat
934 Posts
Then i would oppose to the change it would affect the game. | ||
|
kogeT
Poland2031 Posts
| ||
|
zimp
Hungary951 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 22 2018 18:25 Navane wrote: Nobody plays broodwar for fun. I play broodwar for fun. If you don't find playing broodwar fun, go and struggle at something you enjoy instead. | ||
|
Incomplete..ReV
Norway624 Posts
Everything has to be so easy nowadays and "on my terms". Why not just be exposed a bit to the brutality of BW? Life is brutal, therefore BW is life. Don't give up on life! (Totally logical argument, not emotionally invested at all  )I just don't see the point. I don't believe stuff like that will save BW. I rather think it would be for people to start convincing friends and family, to arrange tournaments, leagues, and overall just create life and excitement around it is the key to revitalize the game. Actually, I loathe the thought of removing the FOW as it is. But I'm not going to claim it'll ruin balance, that it won't help anything at all in making BW more accessible, or that I won't get used to it in the end. I just really hate the change, especially since it's because people can't be arsed to make the extra effort. BW rewards hard work and raw talent. For me, these changes goes against the very core of the game. Blerh, ramblings. Sorry. It's just very, very sad, even though it might rationally make sense. | ||
|
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19201 Posts
On May 22 2018 18:18 Glioburd wrote: The SC2 system is pretty good for new players and/or new maps. Meaning a "dark" fog of war on the entire map. The player would have to explore before building tho. It should be adjustable, maybe not by the player but in the map settings. If you play a campaign or some UMS, the classic black area should fits better. (Also why Bisudagger has been warned for this post? xd) The best part about that warning is that it was a real one through the TL system even though it was a joke lol. Any mod could have just edited my post. I'm not sure which solution was lazier. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 22 2018 19:37 Uldridge wrote: The only reason I feel I'm opposed to it is because I dont necessarily feel like it would make casual players that much more optimized. A poll for the entire playerbase would be so appropriate here, and actual performance numbers before and after changes because you could see hard evidence for it, instead of biased speculative talk. If you're unable to find an opponent's base in reasonable amount of time, you're simply bad. I never had any issues or thought it was problematic and I played new maps every so often. Acting like absolving the blackened FoW will solve the badness all of the sudden, because now you magically can find the opponent's base in a reasonable amount of time and "adapt strategies because you understand the map" is delusional. I would like input from high level players, because lower than B level players have much more to work on than just their understanding of the map and how to play that map. So much so that I'd argue it's actually irrelevant for them. Or maybe I simply don't understand what's trying to be accomplished here. My argument is that changing it won't matter for the player experience (it's simply an illusion of it mattering while playing the game), so why change it? Your argument is: if it doesn't matter that much (or might potentially matter a lot for people) why not change it? If the FoW is changed and the evidence turns out that performance across to board (but especially for lower level players) becomes significantly better and more players are drawn to the game and map diversity is upped, then I gladly conceed my point. If not? People are pussies and fundamentally need to change their own mental state because it wouldn't matter if you played on a dark map or not (performance wise). But then you can come in again with the: why not just change it if it calms people down and gives them the illusion of helping them? + Show Spoiler + My answer is: stop spoonfeeding people illusions. It's bad for them for all sorts of reasons. I don't want to go further but it becomes a lot less BW related and much more societal at large related with this. First of welcome to the planet Earth, where people generally don't change because you want them to. My argument is not that big magic is gonna happen for every one and their pet aliens, making the world a better place, but that it is a small and subtle addition that would matter and make some difference for at least some people. For that no big intake of new players or revolutionary diversification of the map pool would have to happen. If you compare it to (your notion of) paradise, every place looks like crap. On May 22 2018 19:53 Starecat wrote: The reason why a proper implementation from Blizzard's side would be welcome is exactly to prevent all these unwanted by-effects that doing the same thing via simple map making inevitably creates.So i wasn't incorrect? You have to see a buildable terrain in order to create a building? Then i would oppose to the change it would affect the game. TLDR: We already have pre-explored maps, but they are flawed. On May 22 2018 20:47 Incomplete..ReV wrote: No one has to change. An additional feature like this does not have to and should not be mandatory.The arguments for removing it kinda makes sense and I guess I'll get used to it if it happens. But emotionally it tears me up that it's necessary to remove in the first place. Sure, it's good to make it more accessible for newer layers, but it also really sucks that everything has to change to make things easier. Everything has to be so easy nowadays and "on my terms". Why not just be exposed a bit to the brutality of BW? Life is brutal, therefore BW is life. Don't give up on life! (Totally logical argument, not emotionally invested at all )I just don't see the point. I don't believe stuff like that will save BW. I rather think it would be for people to start convincing friends and family, to arrange tournaments, leagues, and overall just create life and excitement around it is the key to revitalize the game. Actually, I loathe the thought of removing the FOW as it is. But I'm not going to claim it'll ruin balance, that it won't help anything at all in making BW more accessible, or that I won't get used to it in the end. I just really hate the change, especially since it's because people can't be arsed to make the extra effort. BW rewards hard work and raw talent. For me, these changes goes against the very core of the game. 1. Complain about people wanting things to go their way. 2. Write a whole paragraphs of alleged arguments. Let all sentences begin with "I". I guess not all "I"s are equal… Anyway, no one's stopping you from inviting people in. Why does something have to "safe the game" to be worth considering anyway? It's an impossible standard. What exactly has map knowledge to do with hard work and raw talent? And why are those the primary aspects for you to define a game? | ||
|
Incomplete..ReV
Norway624 Posts
On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote: 1. Complain about people wanting things to go their way. 2. Write a whole paragraphs of alleged arguments. Let all sentences begin with "I". I guess not all "I"s are equal… Anyway, no one's stopping you from inviting people in. Why does something have to "safe the game" to be worth considering anyway? It's an impossible standard. What exactly has map knowledge to do with hard work and raw talent? And why are those the primary aspects for you to define a game? I'm being very clear that my opinion is based more on feelings than reason, and I acknowledge that the arguments for change quite likely has merit. I also feel I'm being very clear that despite my personal feelings, I shouldn't simply put my foot down and refuse the change if it's for the greater good. Hence, I find your comment of "I guess not all "I"s are equal" is incredibly unfair. No one is stopping me from inviting people to BW. No one is stopping me from doing anything. Not sure where you were going with this. [EDIT: ] After looking over your post again, I reckon the main point is that saving the game and improving it can/should be two different topics. One doesn't always have the regrowth of the game at heart to consider changes, more or less? Hence, if I want to save the game, I can invite people and such, and then let people discuss changes regardless of whether it's just to make the experience better, or if it's for the sake of "saving BW"? I do apologize for not taking this properly in before writing what I did, but I'll let it stand rather than trying to hide it. And hard work does have anything to do with it, as learning new maps and learning to click preicesly on the mini-map despite the map being all black, is part of the whole work load of learning BW. Not game changing, but it does apply. I was venting more than arguing against. I didn't want to simply be a silent part of the discussion, knowing that it could very well lead to something in the future. If the there is change, then so be it. But at least I will have voiced my opinion on the matter. I do not want it changed, I do not see the real need for it, but if there's so many people who struggle with it and if it can help revitalize the game, then sure - go ahead. I'll deal with it. It's not like I think my opinion is more important than others - we all have our say and then things go from there. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote: First of welcome to the planet Earth, where people generally don't change because you want them to. My argument is not that big magic is gonna happen for every one and their pet aliens, making the world a better place, but that it is a small and subtle addition that would matter and make some difference for at least some people. For that no big intake of new players or revolutionary diversification of the map pool would have to happen. If you compare it to (your notion of) paradise, every place looks like crap. You're arguing it would matter. I'm arguing it wouldn't matter other than the illusion of it mattering. There's a difference and I'm not willing to change things simply because they "feel" better. If it objectively is something that matters (people actually achieve better results), then I'll retract everything I said and completely endorse the proposed change. But before changes happen, testing needs to be done and results before and after need to be compared. + Show Spoiler + Also, people change all the time because people want them to lol. You think certain general opinions are formed just like that and aren't coaxed into becoming a general opinion? It might not be overnight or might not even be in a lifetime, but people do change because other people think those people aren't right, whether it's about facts or politics. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 22 2018 22:27 Uldridge wrote: You're arguing it would matter. I'm arguing it wouldn't matter other than the illusion of it mattering. There's a difference and I'm not willing to change things simply because they "feel" better. If it objectively is something that matters (people actually achieve better results), then I'll retract everything I said and completely endorse the proposed change. But before changes happen, testing needs to be done and results before and after need to be compared. + Show Spoiler + Also, people change all the time because people want them to lol. You think certain general opinions are formed just like that and aren't coaxed into becoming a general opinion? It might not be overnight or might not even be in a lifetime, but people do change because other people think those people aren't right, whether it's about facts or politics. Seeing the entire minimap layout is just a feeling? What the fuck? Yeah, it must have been just a feeling playing new maps on Warcraft 3 after ~10 years and knowing where i have to go. It must have been just a feeling playing on maps like Longinus, Tau Cross or Transistor and just wandering around looking for their spawnpoint | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
You feel like it's not doing you any favors and think you're being fucked by not being able to see it. You feel like you're not being fucked when you're able to see the layout. I'm arguing that your feeling of being/not being fucked is merely an artifact by being uncomfortable (to the point of making a thread about it) with exploring terrain you can't see beforehand. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 22 2018 22:23 Incomplete..ReV wrote: I'm being very clear that my opinion is based more on feelings than reason, and I acknowledge that the arguments for change quite likely has merit. I also feel I'm being very clear that despite my personal feelings, I shouldn't simply put my foot down and refuse the change if it's for the greater good. Hence, I find your comment of "I guess not all "I"s are equal" is incredibly unfair. No one is stopping me from inviting people to BW. No one is stopping me from doing anything. Not sure where you were going with this. [EDIT: ] After looking over your post again, I reckon the main point is that saving the game and improving it can/should be two different topics. One doesn't always have the regrowth of the game at heart to consider changes, more or less? Hence, if I want to save the game, I can invite people and such, and then let people discuss changes regardless of whether it's just to make the experience better, or if it's for the sake of "saving BW"? I do apologize for not taking this properly in before writing what I did, but I'll let it stand rather than trying to hide it. Sorry if I sounded a bit harsh. I just wanted to point out the irony of your valuing what you admit is just a very subjective opinion higher than any one else's "whining". And hard work does have anything to do with it, as learning new maps and learning to click preicesly on the mini-map despite the map being all black, is part of the whole work load of learning BW. Not game changing, but it does apply. But is it work well spent? Is it an efficient use of time? Does it improve a player's strategic understanding or execution to be (more or less) completely lost on a map? I don't think so.I was venting more than arguing against. I didn't want to simply be a silent part of the discussion, knowing that it could very well lead to something in the future. If the there is change, then so be it. But at least I will have voiced my opinion on the matter. I do not want it changed, I do not see the real need for it, but if there's so many people who struggle with it and if it can help revitalize the game, then sure - go ahead. I'll deal with it. It's not like I think my opinion is more important than others - we all have our say and then things go from there. Again, if it improves the game for only some of the people already playing it, that should be enough. You may not need it. The only reason I would ever need it so I will never have to manually create any kind of fog free map version again. But there definitely is demand, so why not meet it? No reason to be frustrated, just because some one else might play the game differently than you.On May 22 2018 22:27 Uldridge wrote: You're arguing it would matter. I'm arguing it wouldn't matter other than the illusion of it mattering. There's a difference and I'm not willing to change things simply because they "feel" better. If it objectively is something that matters (people actually achieve better results), then I'll retract everything I said and completely endorse the proposed change. But before changes happen, testing needs to be done and results before and after need to be compared. + Show Spoiler + Also, people change all the time because people want them to lol. You think certain general opinions are formed just like that and aren't coaxed into becoming a general opinion? It might not be overnight or might not even be in a lifetime, but people do change because other people think those people aren't right, whether it's about facts or politics. What is wrong about people just feeling better about something? And what would be better results? If both players profit from a new feature, no one should improve more than the other. And any "real effect" (whatever) on higher level gameplay would actually be a real potential problem and reason to reject the change, not the other way around. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
And by performance I meant the same player before and after the change. Not both players playing the same game lol, that's not representative. Again, if these changes actually turn out of be significant for player performance, by all means, change them. I'm just not convinced they will significantly change performance, but I'm up for experimentation nonetheless! | ||
|
lestye
United States4148 Posts
On May 22 2018 21:07 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about that warning is that it was a real one through the TL system even though it was a joke lol. Any mod could have just edited my post. I'm not sure which solution was lazier. Doesn't matter. That warning is now proof you are a CONVICT, and will be cited when someone disagrees with you in a different thread. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 23 2018 00:37 Uldridge wrote: If the feeling better is an illusion, the feeling is rooted in falsehood. It's a fairy tale. It can be dangerous. It's not necessary. I'm not saying it's bad for the game to make this change, per se. I'm saying that if it turns out the change doesn't change performance at all, people's "feelings" about the true FoW are unfounded and need to change. If you would learn to know something isn't true, even if you initially felt like it was true, would you still think it's true after you learnt it wasn't? Wouldn't it make you feel neutral if you learned to know that the changes didn't mean jack shit? It would mean your anxiety or "bad feeling" was all personal and it's something you need to actively combat instead of something external needing to change because you don't like it. And by performance I meant the same player before and after the change. Not both players playing the same game lol, that's not representative. Again, if these changes actually turn out of be significant for player performance, by all means, change them. I'm just not convinced they will significantly change performance, but I'm up for experimentation nonetheless! The problem about these kinds of purely philosophical arguments is that they do not take into account that there will always be lots of real people who either don't even ask those questions. And just because no "real effects" are going to be expected on the highest level of play, where players know the maps in and out anyway (well, the aspects they think that mater at least), that does not mean that most players won't feel more comfortable playing on a new map, that is all the effect you'd ever want. You can't just dismiss it because "feelings, man, ain't real". | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 23 2018 00:37 Uldridge wrote: If the feeling better is an illusion, the feeling is rooted in falsehood. It's a fairy tale. It can be dangerous. It's not necessary. I'm not saying it's bad for the game to make this change, per se. I'm saying that if it turns out the change doesn't change performance at all, people's "feelings" about the true FoW are unfounded and need to change. If you would learn to know something isn't true, even if you initially felt like it was true, would you still think it's true after you learnt it wasn't? Wouldn't it make you feel neutral if you learned to know that the changes didn't mean jack shit? It would mean your anxiety or "bad feeling" was all personal and it's something you need to actively combat instead of something external needing to change because you don't like it. And by performance I meant the same player before and after the change. Not both players playing the same game lol, that's not representative. Again, if these changes actually turn out of be significant for player performance, by all means, change them. I'm just not convinced they will significantly change performance, but I'm up for experimentation nonetheless! Yeah, this goes to nowhere. You are just telling me how i feel. I cant argue against that. You know whats not a feeling? People playing on the same 1-2 maps for X years. Damn shame i cant look into veto statistics | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
If your feeling is warranted, hey, you found out something that can be optimized and was accordingly. Again, I'm not advocating against the change per se, I'm advocating against the change before any experimentation has been done on which any conclusions can be drawn. You're making conclusions before you've actually tested stuff. Also: I guess that feeling more comfortable because of changes through an external agent (Blizzard changing an aspect of their game) is more important than becoming comfortable through changes you make yourself. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
It's not rocket science, it's really simple. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
I actually tabbed the minimap when playing because I couldn't discern the colors that clearly (even when the colors were put to red and yellow by default) so everything was black except for buildings, units and resources. So I guess it shows you different people have different things going for them. Wait... is this entire thread just about the minimap? Because if it is, that makes almost all of my posts irrelevant lol. Performance wouldn't really change if minimap isn't blacked out from the start so go ahead with the changes if they're so desperately needed, but lay off the actual map before actual experimenting with it! | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
You also say things like feelings don't really matter if it's not based on reality, the reality is that feelings are part of reality though. Meaning if people like something better that's already part of reality. One could argue that you don't have to object to this when there is a clear goal behind not changing it, but there doesn't seem to be any. (like for example more people would probably like bw if it had unlimited unit selection, but in this case we can qute easily find arguments against the implementation. The same isn't true for the black minimap/map) | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 23 2018 01:36 Uldridge wrote: If your feeling is unwarranted do some introspection. You might learn a thing or two about yourself. If your feeling is warranted, hey, you found out something that can be optimized and was accordingly. Again, I'm not advocating against the change per se, I'm advocating against the change before any experimentation has been done on which any conclusions can be drawn. You're making conclusions before you've actually tested stuff. Also: I guess that feeling more comfortable because of changes through an external agent (Blizzard changing an aspect of their game) is more important than becoming comfortable through changes you make yourself. You are confusing things: Those are your feelings, not my. You are telling me that i feel like having a hard time going through 7 different, rotating maps. Yes, rotating. New maps are introduced all the time You are also telling me that knowing where my random race opponent (could have) spawned is really not that important. Its probably just the hormons. Test what? That looking at a not black minimap gives you a better idea what the map looks like? Yeah, lets get the scientists on that one. Its gonna take them years for the results | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4676 Posts
Dude, I've already explained this. Feelings are a part of reality, but you being wrong and your feelings being wrong doesn't mean you get to say: change this so I feel better. I mean you could, and certain people would change this, but it's much healthier for you, if your feelings are wrong, to change yourself. My clear goal behind not changing it is this: don't change shit that don't need to be changed, the shit works fine, it's you not being comfortable with the shit and you should try to feel peace with the shit being that way instead of someone else changing the shit. Also, from a more personal point: I like the blackness, it's symbolic for unexplored terrain. So I feel it's more thematic to keep the blackness in and to keep it unaltered. But I don't really use that as an argument now, am I? On May 23 2018 02:22 10dla wrote: You are confusing things: Those are your feelings, not my. You are telling me that i feel like having a hard time going through 7 different, rotating maps. Yes, rotating. New maps are introduced all the time You are also telling me that knowing where my random race opponent (could have) spawned is really not that important. Its probably just the hormons. Test what? That looking at a not black minimap gives you a better idea what the map looks like? Yeah, lets get the scientists on that one. Its gonna take them years for the results You generally know where your opponent could spawn. You'd have to have mental impairment to not click in the general vicinity of possible spawning points and you should be able to correct the path while you're scouting. So I don't think it's a big deal at all. And I've already said the blackened minimap shouldn't necessarily been there. If that's what the point of this thread was, I apologize for all those posts because I clearly missed the point. | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
Is this really what the community has come to? Your bad, grow up. Be a man for fuck sakes. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 23 2018 02:36 Dazed. wrote: I cant figure out where spawns are in a symmetrical square map, heeeelpp!! Is this really what the community has come to? Your bad, grow up. Be a man for fuck sakes. Yeah go fuck yourself. You are truely living in the FS only area. Why arent you man enough to not add symmetrical? Why do you keep on implying that i talk about symmetrical maps? Just to be a piece of shit? "What has this community come to". The funniest part. You are talking about the community that decided to play 1 map for how many years? User was warned for this post. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On May 23 2018 02:26 Uldridge wrote: No, I'm saying the minimap being blacked out or not won't have any effect. I've been talking about the map itself the entire time. Dude, I've already explained this. Feelings are a part of reality, but you being wrong and your feelings being wrong doesn't mean you get to say: change this so I feel better. I mean you could, and certain people would change this, but it's much healthier for you, if your feelings are wrong, to change yourself. My clear goal behind not changing it is this: don't change shit that don't need to be changed, the shit works fine, it's you not being comfortable with the shit and you should try to feel peace with the shit being that way instead of someone else changing the shit. Also, from a more personal point: I like the blackness, it's symbolic for unexplored terrain. So I feel it's more thematic to keep the blackness in and to keep it unaltered. But I don't really use that as an argument now, am I? You generally know where your opponent could spawn. You'd have to have mental impairment to not click in the general vicinity of possible spawning points and you should be able to correct the path while you're scouting. So I don't think it's a big deal at all. And I've already said the blackened minimap shouldn't necessarily been there. If that's what the point of this thread was, I apologize for all those posts because I clearly missed the point. The map and minimap go hand in hand, i only used the example of the minimap because it more easily shows why it is "better" when talking about learning a map. Feelings here could mean something as simple as liking A over B, you cannot be wrong there. Funnily enough people arguing in favor of keeping the fow as it is are basically saying "i like it better", it's entirely based on emotions. I called you pedantic because you seem to suggest that it's very out there to suggest that looking at an image constantly would help with memorizing said image. We learn by repetition, in this case looking at the map (and in my example the minimap). I agree with your core argument for sure, it shouldn't be changed if it has no positive effect (though as i said, even something as simple as more people enjoying it is actually a positive effect). There really aren't any new perspectives about this at this point though. | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES49704 Posts
| ||
|
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19201 Posts
On May 23 2018 00:48 lestye wrote: Doesn't matter. That warning is now proof you are a CONVICT, and will be cited when someone disagrees with you in a different thread. Looks like your proof has gone poof. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
Just one thing: It is not that this feature would be new and untested or anything. FOW free map versions have been there since forever, and it's been tested in countless other strategy games as well. All the discussion is really about is whether Blizzard should implement this as an option on their side, because the current implementation have a number of problems (needing separate map files, for one). It's actually quite like customizable hotkeys – in a way they have always been there, just very badly implemented (in the form of different language versions of the game). | ||
|
Gorgonoth
United States468 Posts
| ||
|
seNsiX
United States22 Posts
| ||
|
Dead9
United States4725 Posts
one of the few changes that raises the skill floor without lowering the skill ceiling | ||
|
B-royal
Belgium1330 Posts
On May 21 2018 20:19 niteReloaded wrote: Ok, I admit poor argument by me. When you say you got Blizzard to thank for not playing, you can't mean the custom hotkeys? :/ No, custom hotkeys actually didn't have anything to do with it. I disliked the choice, but it doesn't really affect my playing experience. The times I've played I don't even think about the fact that other people could be using custom hotkeys. Unfortunately I find the remaster to be not where it should have been, and I think it is not unreasonable of me to say so. There were plenty of features advertised to be included at launch, that still don't even seem to be on the horizon 8+ months after release. This should be inexcusable on its own. But furthermore, the release has been quite buggy, and is missing a lot of modern features that I expected to be included. I can elaborate on this if you're interested. Also back on topic. I don't want this to change at all because a black minimap actually helps me a lot. It reminds me which places I have not scouted in case I'm suspicious of something fishy going on, or in case my opponent must have a hidden base somewhere. Also the only reason I can see to remove it is an argument out of laziness. There's nothing stopping you at all from loading up the map once in single player and typing "black sheep wall" and having a look around. In fact, do you really think that you have any chance of winning a game on a map you've never played before, regardless of whether you now know where the minerals are? It takes genuine practice to be able to play well on a map. In any case, don't force your preferences on anyone else. Optional? Acceptable. Mandatory?  | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 25 2018 06:33 B-royal wrote: No, custom hotkeys actually didn't have anything to do with it. I disliked the choice, but it doesn't really affect my playing experience. The times I've played I don't even think about the fact that other people could be using custom hotkeys. Unfortunately I find the remaster to be not where it should have been, and I think it is not unreasonable of me to say so. There were plenty of features advertised to be included at launch, that still don't even seem to be on the horizon 8+ months after release. This should be inexcusable on its own. But furthermore, the release has been quite buggy, and is missing a lot of modern features that I expected to be included. I can elaborate on this if you're interested. Also back on topic. I don't want this to change at all because a black minimap actually helps me a lot. It reminds me which places I have not scouted in case I'm suspicious of something fishy going on, or in case my opponent must have a hidden base somewhere. Also the only reason I can see to remove it is an argument out of laziness. There's nothing stopping you at all from loading up the map once in single player and typing "black sheep wall" and having a look around. In fact, do you really think that you have any chance of winning a game on a map you've never played before, regardless of whether you now know where the minerals are? It takes genuine practice to be able to play well on a map. In any case, don't force your preferences on anyone else. Optional? Acceptable. Mandatory? This is funny, people said the exact opposite: Black minimap helps hiding a base/proxy. And it would be sooo sad if proxy or hidden bases would become less successful. So does it help or doesnt it? It sure cant be both. And if your argument is the correct one, that would lower the skill ceiling. Which should be unacceptable. So what is it? And if both arguments are just preference, why not make it an option? By the way, thanks for forcing your "english-hotkeys-only allowed" on the rest of the world. Or do you want every language only matched against each other? | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10664 Posts
| ||
|
B-royal
Belgium1330 Posts
On May 25 2018 07:44 10dla wrote: This is funny, people said the exact opposite: Black minimap helps hiding a base/proxy. And it would be sooo sad if proxy or hidden bases would become less successful. So does it help or doesnt it? It sure cant be both. And if your argument is the correct one, that would lower the skill ceiling. Which should be unacceptable. So what is it? And if both arguments are just preference, why not make it an option? By the way, thanks for forcing your "english-hotkeys-only allowed" on the rest of the world. Or do you want every language only matched against each other? Your arguments or reasoning never make any sense. Yes it can be both. It's not exactly a global truth or anything, it can be dependent on the person that's playing. Some people even play with an all-black minimap to supposedly see enemy units (drops for example) more easily. Guess what, I don't find that easier with a black minimap, another personal preference hmm. Also, yes in a sport you generally want there to be global standards, and I consider hotkeys to be one part of mastering the game, as did almost everyone for the past 18 years. In any professional tournament (i.e. Korean tournament), English hotkeys seems to have been the standard. In fact, if I were a tournament organizer, I would even demand for QWERTY to be the lay-out that has to be used by everyone. | ||
|
Djabanete
United States2786 Posts
On May 21 2018 12:43 10dla wrote: ASL uses Starcraft 2 minimap settings for months. It cant be that bad, otherwise they or Blizzard would have changed it by now. Or have you seen negative feedback on that one in here? It's amazing how I didn't consciously notice the pre-explored map in the ASL broadcasts but nonetheless took advantage of the feature to show my wife map features and expansion locations that would otherwise have been blacked out. I revise my opinion: (*) Good for new players (*) Good for spectators (*) Irrelevant for pros Sounds good to me. | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
On May 26 2018 01:00 Djabanete wrote: It's amazing how I didn't consciously notice the pre-explored map in the ASL broadcasts but nonetheless took advantage of the feature to show my wife map features and expansion locations that would otherwise have been blacked out. I revise my opinion: (*) Good for new players (*) Good for spectators (*) Irrelevant for pros Sounds good to me. the observer shows the pre-explored map but what about the players? I always assumed it was the original blacked out map for players. | ||
|
10dla
127 Posts
On May 26 2018 01:07 Golgotha wrote: the observer shows the pre-explored map but what about the players? I always assumed it was the original blacked out map for players. You are able to communicate with them in a non awkward way. You could dig for some information | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On May 26 2018 00:31 B-royal wrote: Your arguments or reasoning never make any sense. Yes it can be both. It's not exactly a global truth or anything, it can be dependent on the person that's playing. Some people even play with an all-black minimap to supposedly see enemy units (drops for example) more easily. Guess what, I don't find that easier with a black minimap, another personal preference hmm. Also, yes in a sport you generally want there to be global standards, and I consider hotkeys to be one part of mastering the game, as did almost everyone for the past 18 years. In any professional tournament (i.e. Korean tournament), English hotkeys seems to have been the standard. In fact, if I were a tournament organizer, I would even demand for QWERTY to be the lay-out that has to be used by everyone. Are you gonna call me a cheater again for using a qwertz keyboard and german hotkeys? | ||
|
TheFoReveRwaR
United States10657 Posts
On May 21 2018 04:19 BisuDagger wrote: The SC2 solution is a great one imo. I play SC2 occasionally and am glad I don't have to memorize all the expansions. It gives nothing away by having the fog of war semi-transparency version. User was warned for this post What the ??? Why was he warned for this post? Do some mods just hate when people have opinions about things? I seriously just don't understand. If you disagree with something he said enough to warn him. How about responding to him like a regular person would. Nothing seemed wrong with this post. | ||
2Pacalypse-
Croatia9488 Posts
On May 26 2018 19:55 TheFoReveRwaR wrote: What the ??? Why was he warned for this post? Do some mods just hate when people have opinions about things? I seriously just don't understand. If you disagree with something he said enough to warn him. How about responding to him like a regular person would. Nothing seemed wrong with this post. It was a joke bro, relax. | ||
|
c3rberUs
Japan11285 Posts
On May 26 2018 19:55 TheFoReveRwaR wrote: What the ??? Why was he warned for this post? Do some mods just hate when people have opinions about things? I seriously just don't understand. If you disagree with something he said enough to warn him. How about responding to him like a regular person would. Nothing seemed wrong with this post. It's an inside joke lol My take is that aside from aiding new players ease into the game, removing or keeping the fog of war doesn't really change the skill level in any significant way. Either way, a way to turn it of would be a nice addtional option but for various reasons (aesthetics, status quo appeal etc), professional or serious matches should retain it. (It's not like pros need to see through the terrain through the fog) | ||
|
jimminy_kriket
Canada5489 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
SOOP
PiG Sty Festival
Clem vs SKillous
Rogue vs Zoun
Afreeca Starleague
ZerO vs BeSt
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
PiGosaur Monday
PiG Sty Festival
Serral vs MaNa
ByuN vs Classic
Afreeca Starleague
Jaedong vs Light
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs Creator
Cure vs ShoWTimE
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
