|
On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning.
Perhaps, but there's a simple answer. They've acknowledged that the depot is important to tournament level play for the spectator - games that end in 4 minutes without much back-and-forth aren't fun to watch at all. Blizzard's philosophy with the ladder, however, is different. On the ladder they maintain that all strategies should be viable - if it's possible to do in a vacuum, it should be possible on the ladder.
|
A complicated solution that creates new problems to a simple issue which can be solved by placing 1 lower supply depot
|
On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2012 10:29 SiskosGoatee wrote:On August 10 2012 08:56 Plexa wrote:On August 10 2012 07:46 NewSunshine wrote:
The problem is, you'd be changing something that 1) players have been used to for 2 years now, and 2) has no actual problems concerning gameplay. And actually, a permanent no-build section would be more irritating, since it would always be a small infringement on build space, where a depot can be cleared up for more stuff.
The only problem with the depot is that Blizzard has refused to use them in ladder maps. If they don't want neutral depots in a map, how do you think they'll treat a totally new ramp footprint? Not to mention one that's only used on main ramps. This has been thought out, clearly, but it's not a solution, because there's not a problem. Actually a solution like this might actually be useful for the reason you point out in your second paragraph. Blizzard are objected to using depots, and it doesn't take much to think of why. (Because having to put depots on the bottom of ramps illustrates that there is a broken strategy in a very visible way i.e. joe noob asks his friend why there are depots on his ladder maps and he replies 'becuz cannons too stronk' or equivalent). A subtle change like this means that ramp wall offs don't register as imbalanced with lower level players and hence is a solution that blizzard could (and should) look into. However, that they don't indicates something. Blizzard has the full capacity to modify the footprint of ramps, and they in fact have done so, you used to be able to wall with only 2 pylons, they changed it to three, which shows they are willing to change this, and could change this to four if they consider it imbalanced (they considered 2 to be imbalanced), but they don't. Now, honestly, I have more faith in Blizzard than in anyone else regarding this or any decision regarding balance, some of the things they did seemed mad at first glance and later on ended up making sense, in fact, that they seem mad exactly illustrates it, David Kim has a university degree, he's not stupid, and assuming that he's supposedly stupid and we know it better is just hubris, he has access to all the statistics regarding everything that we don't, if his decisions seem mad, I choose to believe that it means that he knows something that we don't. He could probably in five minutes change the footprints of ramp from his desk to require 4 pylons to be walled off or whatever he wanted, but he doesn't, even though he has shown in the past to be more than willing to make such changes, which indicates one thing, he doesn't consider it imbalanced. And he has access to all the stats and designed the game, so I would definitely put more faith into him than in the 'community'. Blizzard uses neutral supply depots in its WCS maps. Why would they do that if they didn't think ramp blocks were detrimental to competition and/or imbalanced? Rather, I'm going to venture to guess that it's just not very high on the priority list for Blizzard to release a solution at this very moment, given they're doing a lot of work on stuff like patch 1.5 (just released, and lots of work in fixing bugs from that...), Heart of the Swarm, and more general balance/gameplay issues (just released a test map for balance changes to creep spread and raven). The reason for that is because the odd auto-loss for Zerg on the ladder isn't really consequential in the greater scheme of things, while it can have huge ramifications in tournament play, where people are playing for money. I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning. Maybe they're just giving in to mass QQ, who knows?
The point is, it's extremely easy for them to require a ramp to henceforth require 4 pylons or 3 bunkers or whatever number they want to wall off at the bottom, but they don't. They could let you build buildings on ramps or into dead space if they wanted to at the flip of a button.
If ramp blocking was really imbalanced, don't you think David Kim would've edited ramp footprints by now? He's not going to be like 'Yeh, our stats clearly indicate that this strategy is nearly unstoppable and I can fix this in 5 minutes, but nahhh, I'd rather troll people instead.'
Someone should just ask him in an interview though, yes or no, if he considers it imbalanced. A lot of things the community considers, or has considered imbalanced, like TvP lategame, he's flat out said when asked 'No, our stats indicate that this is not imbalanced at all, I disagree.
The community is prone to mass outcry and has been wrong in the past, I can still remember people complaining about marauders being too strong and how Blizzard were idiots for not nerfing them, nowadays people agree that they were fine all along.
|
On August 10 2012 12:10 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:On August 10 2012 10:29 SiskosGoatee wrote:On August 10 2012 08:56 Plexa wrote:On August 10 2012 07:46 NewSunshine wrote:
The problem is, you'd be changing something that 1) players have been used to for 2 years now, and 2) has no actual problems concerning gameplay. And actually, a permanent no-build section would be more irritating, since it would always be a small infringement on build space, where a depot can be cleared up for more stuff.
The only problem with the depot is that Blizzard has refused to use them in ladder maps. If they don't want neutral depots in a map, how do you think they'll treat a totally new ramp footprint? Not to mention one that's only used on main ramps. This has been thought out, clearly, but it's not a solution, because there's not a problem. Actually a solution like this might actually be useful for the reason you point out in your second paragraph. Blizzard are objected to using depots, and it doesn't take much to think of why. (Because having to put depots on the bottom of ramps illustrates that there is a broken strategy in a very visible way i.e. joe noob asks his friend why there are depots on his ladder maps and he replies 'becuz cannons too stronk' or equivalent). A subtle change like this means that ramp wall offs don't register as imbalanced with lower level players and hence is a solution that blizzard could (and should) look into. However, that they don't indicates something. Blizzard has the full capacity to modify the footprint of ramps, and they in fact have done so, you used to be able to wall with only 2 pylons, they changed it to three, which shows they are willing to change this, and could change this to four if they consider it imbalanced (they considered 2 to be imbalanced), but they don't. Now, honestly, I have more faith in Blizzard than in anyone else regarding this or any decision regarding balance, some of the things they did seemed mad at first glance and later on ended up making sense, in fact, that they seem mad exactly illustrates it, David Kim has a university degree, he's not stupid, and assuming that he's supposedly stupid and we know it better is just hubris, he has access to all the statistics regarding everything that we don't, if his decisions seem mad, I choose to believe that it means that he knows something that we don't. He could probably in five minutes change the footprints of ramp from his desk to require 4 pylons to be walled off or whatever he wanted, but he doesn't, even though he has shown in the past to be more than willing to make such changes, which indicates one thing, he doesn't consider it imbalanced. And he has access to all the stats and designed the game, so I would definitely put more faith into him than in the 'community'. Blizzard uses neutral supply depots in its WCS maps. Why would they do that if they didn't think ramp blocks were detrimental to competition and/or imbalanced? Rather, I'm going to venture to guess that it's just not very high on the priority list for Blizzard to release a solution at this very moment, given they're doing a lot of work on stuff like patch 1.5 (just released, and lots of work in fixing bugs from that...), Heart of the Swarm, and more general balance/gameplay issues (just released a test map for balance changes to creep spread and raven). The reason for that is because the odd auto-loss for Zerg on the ladder isn't really consequential in the greater scheme of things, while it can have huge ramifications in tournament play, where people are playing for money. I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning. Maybe they're just giving in to mass QQ, who knows? The point is, it's extremely easy for them to require a ramp to henceforth require 4 pylons or 3 bunkers or whatever number they want to wall off at the bottom, but they don't. They could let you build buildings on ramps or into dead space if they wanted to at the flip of a button. If ramp blocking was really imbalanced, don't you think David Kim would've edited ramp footprints by now? He's not going to be like 'Yeh, our stats clearly indicate that this strategy is nearly unstoppable and I can fix this in 5 minutes, but nahhh, I'd rather troll people instead.' Someone should just ask him in an interview though, yes or no, if he considers it imbalanced. A lot of things the community considers, or has considered imbalanced, like TvP lategame, he's flat out said when asked 'No, our stats indicate that this is not imbalanced at all, I disagree. The community is prone to mass outcry and has been wrong in the past, I can still remember people complaining about marauders being too strong and how Blizzard were idiots for not nerfing them, nowadays people agree that they were fine all along.
Actually, Blizzard came out and clearly noted late-game TvP favoured Protoss, but at the same time acknowledged mid-game favoured aggressive Terran play, which could be utilized to nullify the imbalanced late game (hence the final verdict: not imbalanced). Lots of people were pretty upset that his was Blizzard's official stance on it, as it nullifies anything but aggressive, drop-heavy Terran play style to have a chance to win late game TvP. Don't take my word for it, though; read the official blue post.
Of course, Heart of the Swarm looks to introduce more viable mech strategies, which will probably open things up a lot more. For now, however, we just gotta deal with it. It's certainly not something anyone considers desirable -- not even Blizzard, as seen by their efforts to give Terrans more versatile options in late-game TvP with their later tech come HotS.
Regarding the marauder: it's other units/abilities that got respectively buffed and aspects of the marauder (such as stim) that got nerfed which made the marauder all right. Even now, it's still really strong with certain rushes (like the proxy marauder rush), but not so much to be considered imbalanced.
|
On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning.
They wanted to legitimate the WCS compared to other tournements. The depots are so incarnated at tournement play, and they didn't want any larger changes to balance in their own tournement. It is about image. It simply comes down to that. That doesn't mean they accept it on ladder through. Besides much larger balance disparities exist on ladder than the pylon block. They aren't really that concerned.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On August 11 2012 01:48 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning. They wanted to legitimate the WCS compared to other tournements. The depots are so incarnated at tournement play, and they didn't want any larger changes to balance in their own tournement. It is about image. It simply comes down to that. That doesn't mean they accept it on ladder through. Besides much larger balance disparities exist on ladder than the pylon block. They aren't really that concerned.
The point, though, is that if you need to add a Supply Depot to make your tournament legitimate, and even Blizzard does this, it's a tacit admission that the ladder maps, which are under Blizzard's control, are not legitimate. The very fact that they tacitly admit the problem, and even fix it for their tournament, but don't do so on the ladder, merits questioning.
|
On August 11 2012 02:01 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 01:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning. They wanted to legitimate the WCS compared to other tournements. The depots are so incarnated at tournement play, and they didn't want any larger changes to balance in their own tournement. It is about image. It simply comes down to that. That doesn't mean they accept it on ladder through. Besides much larger balance disparities exist on ladder than the pylon block. They aren't really that concerned. The point, though, is that if you need to add a Supply Depot to make your tournament legitimate, and even Blizzard does this, it's a tacit admission that the ladder maps, which are under Blizzard's control, are not legitimate. The very fact that they tacitly admit the problem, and even fix it for their tournament, but don't do so on the ladder, merits questioning.
As i said on ladder balance isn't taken with that high standard. If they strifed for perfect balance they would for example have to take out Cloud kingdom, as it is extremely biassed for protoss against terran, on ladder.
What they aim for is that most game concepts are simple to understand for the lower leage players.
But you are right in WOL tournements needs the depots to be legimate, which is why i think the HOTS transition is the perfect time to shout about this and really test if tournements without the depots causes pure cheesefests. Onesided cheesfests i might add because it could turn out that Zergs have figured out how to break the block. We wouldn't know at this point.
|
Whatever the solution to an unbuildable area is in a melee map played on professionally is, it must contain visual information regarding the fact that the area is unbuildable. That's why no one has ever used the unbuildable pathing brush on pro melee maps.
|
On August 11 2012 02:01 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 01:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning. They wanted to legitimate the WCS compared to other tournements. The depots are so incarnated at tournement play, and they didn't want any larger changes to balance in their own tournement. It is about image. It simply comes down to that. That doesn't mean they accept it on ladder through. Besides much larger balance disparities exist on ladder than the pylon block. They aren't really that concerned. The point, though, is that if you need to add a Supply Depot to make your tournament legitimate, and even Blizzard does this, it's a tacit admission that the ladder maps, which are under Blizzard's control, are not legitimate. The very fact that they tacitly admit the problem, and even fix it for their tournament, but don't do so on the ladder, merits questioning.
There's no admission of a problem, implicit or not. The depot is used to keep the games from being boring cheese-fests, where illegitimate(for lack of a better term) plays run rampant, because of how quickly it can win or lose a game. It's obviously been assumed by many people that the depot is used because the strategy is imbalanced. That isn't the reason, and has no reflection on Blizzard's ladder maps. Cloud Kingdom, Daybreak, Entombed Valley, and Ohana are used in several tournaments the world over, the tournament version has a depot, the ladder version does not. Blizzard has stated, on their forums and possibly in other media as well, that they don't want to restrict the spectrum of strategy on the ladder. I see no problem with their reasoning, but everyone seems to want to read into it, when there's nothing to read.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On August 11 2012 03:42 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 02:01 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 01:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 10 2012 11:41 iamcaustic wrote:
I'm really only speculating, though. At the end of the day, the facts are that Blizzard won't implement the neutral depot on the ladder, while they make sure to include it in their tournament maps -- and that alone is enough discrepancy to warrant questioning. They wanted to legitimate the WCS compared to other tournements. The depots are so incarnated at tournement play, and they didn't want any larger changes to balance in their own tournement. It is about image. It simply comes down to that. That doesn't mean they accept it on ladder through. Besides much larger balance disparities exist on ladder than the pylon block. They aren't really that concerned. The point, though, is that if you need to add a Supply Depot to make your tournament legitimate, and even Blizzard does this, it's a tacit admission that the ladder maps, which are under Blizzard's control, are not legitimate. The very fact that they tacitly admit the problem, and even fix it for their tournament, but don't do so on the ladder, merits questioning. There's no admission of a problem, implicit or not. The depot is used to keep the games from being boring cheese-fests, where illegitimate plays run rampant, because of how quickly it can win or lose a game. It's obviously been assumed by many people that the depot is used because the strategy is imbalanced. That isn't the reason, and has no reflection on Blizzard's ladder maps. Cloud Kingdom, Daybreak, Entombed Valley, and Ohana are used in several tournaments the world over, the tournament version has a depot, the ladder version does not. Blizzard has stated, on their forums and possibly in other media as well, that they don't want to restrict the spectrum of strategy on the ladder. I see no problem with their reasoning, but everyone seems to want to read into it, when there's nothing to read.
I didn't say it was a tacit admission the maps are imbalanced, just that they're not legit. Do you really think Blizz wants tournaments to be good but the ladder to be a cheese fest? o_O I don't really think they're that "together" on it. I think they just don't like the look of neutral depots, but they're forced to put them in on tournament maps because if they didn't they'd get crap for a crappy map. On the ladder they can get away with it, so they do, and it makes the game worse.
|
On August 11 2012 03:45 Blazinghand wrote:
I didn't say it was a tacit admission the maps are imbalanced, just that they're not legit. Do you really think Blizz wants tournaments to be good but the ladder to be a cheese fest? o_O I don't really think they're that "together" on it. I think they just don't like the look of neutral depots, but they're forced to put them in on tournament maps because if they didn't they'd get crap for a crappy map. On the ladder they can get away with it, so they do, and it makes the game worse.
They're not doing it because they can get away with it, I'm not sure where you're even getting this. It's simple, if there's no depot on a tournament map, the pro's will abuse it, taking every possible advantage to win. There's money in tournaments, so of course they'll resort to whatever they can. The ladder is different, because it's an entirely different set of circumstances. There's no money, the players aren't as good, and it's where players sharpen their skills. Totally different. The ladder pool is as legitimate as any other, because just as the tournament maps do, they cater to the pool of players, and the circumstances under which they play. It is that simple.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On August 11 2012 03:48 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 03:45 Blazinghand wrote:
I didn't say it was a tacit admission the maps are imbalanced, just that they're not legit. Do you really think Blizz wants tournaments to be good but the ladder to be a cheese fest? o_O I don't really think they're that "together" on it. I think they just don't like the look of neutral depots, but they're forced to put them in on tournament maps because if they didn't they'd get crap for a crappy map. On the ladder they can get away with it, so they do, and it makes the game worse. They're not doing it because they can get away with it, I'm not sure where you're even getting this. It's simple, if there's no depot on a tournament map, the pro's will abuse it, taking every possible advantage to win. There's money in tournaments, so of course they'll resort to whatever they can. The ladder is different, because it's an entirely different set of circumstances. There's no money, the players aren't as good, and it's where players sharpen their skills. Totally different. The ladder pool is as legitimate as any other, because just as the tournament maps do, they cater to the pool of players, and the circumstances under which they play. It is that simple.
How is the ladder different? Do people on the ladder NOT take every possible advantage to win? I know I do. I bunker rush, I take advantage of close spawns on antiga, and I see tons of cannon rush and stuff. The Ladder isn't some duel between gentlemen who take turns shooting pistols at each other, the Ladder is two angry drunk Englishmen rolling in the mud, biting, and punching each other while cursing in gently-accented but harsh tones. Also... pros play on the ladder. If the ladder pool is as legitimate as any other... why not make the maps on it the same as the tournament maps? Why not cater to people who are good at the game don't like getting bunker rushed, which is like literally everyone? The fact of the matter is, blizzard does cater to top-level balance, and that's what makes their games good, and the fact of the matter ALSO IS, Blizzard changed the bottom of ramps so the 2-pylon wall stopped working, so clearly they care about the ladder experience.
I think you're attributing a lot of complex thought and stuff to Blizzard when really they're just doing they're thing. No need to go projecting onto them. Englishmen, beer and mud!
|
On August 11 2012 03:53 Blazinghand wrote:
How is the ladder different? Do people on the ladder NOT take every possible advantage to win? I know I do. I bunker rush, I take advantage of close spawns on antiga, and I see tons of cannon rush and stuff. The Ladder isn't some duel between gentlemen who take turns shooting pistols at each other, the Ladder is two angry drunk Englishmen rolling in the mud, biting, and punching each other while cursing in gently-accented but harsh tones. Also... pros play on the ladder. If the ladder pool is as legitimate as any other... why not make the maps on it the same as the tournament maps? Why not cater to people who are good at the game don't like getting bunker rushed, which is like literally everyone? The fact of the matter is, blizzard does cater to top-level balance, and that's what makes their games good, and the fact of the matter ALSO IS, Blizzard changed the bottom of ramps so the 2-pylon wall stopped working, so clearly they care about the ladder experience.
I think you're attributing a lot of complex thought and stuff to Blizzard when really they're just doing they're thing. No need to go projecting onto them. Englishmen, beer and mud!
OK, now you're just overgeneralizing. Are you telling me you get 3 pylon/2 bunker walled, or otherwise cheesed or all-inned, in every single game? You can't speak for the entire populace that plays on every ladder in the world, and if you honestly think that ladders and tournaments are one and the same, despite my having spelled out the entire situation for both sides of the story, I cannot help you.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On August 11 2012 04:08 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 03:53 Blazinghand wrote:
How is the ladder different? Do people on the ladder NOT take every possible advantage to win? I know I do. I bunker rush, I take advantage of close spawns on antiga, and I see tons of cannon rush and stuff. The Ladder isn't some duel between gentlemen who take turns shooting pistols at each other, the Ladder is two angry drunk Englishmen rolling in the mud, biting, and punching each other while cursing in gently-accented but harsh tones. Also... pros play on the ladder. If the ladder pool is as legitimate as any other... why not make the maps on it the same as the tournament maps? Why not cater to people who are good at the game don't like getting bunker rushed, which is like literally everyone? The fact of the matter is, blizzard does cater to top-level balance, and that's what makes their games good, and the fact of the matter ALSO IS, Blizzard changed the bottom of ramps so the 2-pylon wall stopped working, so clearly they care about the ladder experience.
I think you're attributing a lot of complex thought and stuff to Blizzard when really they're just doing they're thing. No need to go projecting onto them. Englishmen, beer and mud! OK, now you're just overgeneralizing. Are you telling me you get 3 pylon/2 bunker walled, or otherwise cheesed or all-inned, in every single game? You can't speak for the entire populace that plays on every ladder in the world, and if you honestly think that ladders and tournaments are one and the same, despite my having spelled out the entire situation for both sides of the story, I cannot help you.
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse.
|
On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:08 NewSunshine wrote:On August 11 2012 03:53 Blazinghand wrote:
How is the ladder different? Do people on the ladder NOT take every possible advantage to win? I know I do. I bunker rush, I take advantage of close spawns on antiga, and I see tons of cannon rush and stuff. The Ladder isn't some duel between gentlemen who take turns shooting pistols at each other, the Ladder is two angry drunk Englishmen rolling in the mud, biting, and punching each other while cursing in gently-accented but harsh tones. Also... pros play on the ladder. If the ladder pool is as legitimate as any other... why not make the maps on it the same as the tournament maps? Why not cater to people who are good at the game don't like getting bunker rushed, which is like literally everyone? The fact of the matter is, blizzard does cater to top-level balance, and that's what makes their games good, and the fact of the matter ALSO IS, Blizzard changed the bottom of ramps so the 2-pylon wall stopped working, so clearly they care about the ladder experience.
I think you're attributing a lot of complex thought and stuff to Blizzard when really they're just doing they're thing. No need to go projecting onto them. Englishmen, beer and mud! OK, now you're just overgeneralizing. Are you telling me you get 3 pylon/2 bunker walled, or otherwise cheesed or all-inned, in every single game? You can't speak for the entire populace that plays on every ladder in the world, and if you honestly think that ladders and tournaments are one and the same, despite my having spelled out the entire situation for both sides of the story, I cannot help you. No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots. ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse.
I haven't put anything in your mouth.
On August 11 2012 03:53 Blazinghand wrote:Do people on the ladder NOT take every possible advantage to win?
I've seen only one tournament game, where they had accidentally used a version of the map with no depot. A 3-pylon wall happened immediately. The game ended in minutes. The atmosphere in a tournament scene is much more competitive, because there's money involved. Despite how much you think you try to win at any cost, odds are you've no idea what it's really like up there. There are plenty of people on the ladder who try to play straight up macro/timing games, it's not as cheesy as you're trying to indicate.
As for the 2-pylon wall, that was straight up imbalanced, and was nixed immediately. A 3-pylon wall requires more time and resources, and is thus much more realistic to stop. Blizzard allows all forms of strategy on the ladder, that IS their philosophy, which I doubt you can change, so don't try to argue the point like I can somehow do something about it. I've explained, quite thoroughly I might add, both the tournament scene's reasons for the depot, and Blizzard's reasons for using no depot. There it is. No alternative to the depot is necessary, no fault with either map pool has been made.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
I still don't see the part where I say that I get cheesed in every game.
Something can't be imba and bad in tourney maps and somehow also good in ladder play.
|
On August 11 2012 04:30 Blazinghand wrote:
I still don't see the part where I say that I get cheesed in every game.
Something can't be imba and bad in tourney maps and somehow also good in ladder play.
It's not imba and bad for the play as you say. I've explained it repeatedly, see, like, 3 of my previous posts in this thread. The spectators are important to an e-sport's success. Now go read again.
|
On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse.
There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC.
They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too.
|
On August 11 2012 02:28 urashimakt wrote:
Whatever the solution to an unbuildable area is in a melee map played on professionally is, it must contain visual information regarding the fact that the area is unbuildable. That's why no one has ever used the unbuildable pathing brush on pro melee maps.
In Brood War there were tournament maps with unbuildable areas (though they tried utilizing textures to indicate the difference). In StarCraft 2, tournaments introduce non-visual changes such as disabling certain spawning locations (e.g. cross-spawn only). What they do in this situation is announce the change.
Besides, there's no visual indication that ramps are unbuildable, except for the fact it's a ramp; this change makes use of the fact and says "hey, it's a ramp, the pathing is like this". I question arguments that rely on statements like "you're changing what players have been used to for so long", etc. because Blizzard's already broken that precedent by changing the bottom ramp pathing to prevent 2-pylon blocks. Like any change, people get used to it after a short time and other wonder why such a big fuss was made in the first place.
|
Blazinghand
United States25558 Posts
On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too.
But my point isn't that Blizzard considers, it okay, it's that Blizzard DOESN'T. The WCS maps have depots on it. If Blizz considered low-ground walls to be okay, yeah, it's all good-- no low ground depots. The issue is that they hold ladder maps to some different standard than tournament maps, which is disappointing and weird.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
