|
On October 26 2012 02:54 tritonice wrote:
I'm fine with this, and it will have some holding power, but not for very long. I am in the wait-and-see mode at the moment. Blizzard seems to be rolling out several features for HOTS, and some more will probably be revealed. There are some good improvements, and hopefully more will roll out. I will play SC2 no matter what with a mix of ladder and monobattle customs for the most part.
My main complaint is the ladder. I am a big boy, just show me where I rank across the entire silver ladder. What is the purpose of the 100 person group? I know they made some changes to better reflect where you are relative to promotion, but that has a limit in given 100 person groups. If I know I am ranked 24,637 out of 54,382 current season silver players, that gives me more incentive than rank 24 of an arbitrary set of 100 players.
With having so many players, the random noise is a big factor. You can lose 10 or 20 ranks with doing nothing. The devision also allows for a more personal experience "oh that damn zerg on rank 1 is always 50 points above me". You remember his name and compete against the rank of a name instead of just looking at large numbers.
|
Oh my god you really cant please some people. We have an absolute storm of drama going on after the destiny post with lots of people bandwagoning on getting more casual features implemented. When these features begin to be added people start complaining about how bad the game is that you need to add them at all or that its to casual focused.
I guess some people just love being angry and nothing will ever be good enough for them.
|
On October 26 2012 02:54 Rassy wrote:
"Still not free to play.
This is just another reason for people that dont like the game to play it for no reason."
Also:THIS so much.
I don't think that "free to play" would be a good model for SC2. With "free" to play you always fear new DLC for money. With the Blizzard SC2 marketing model for the western world, you pay once and get lifetime support and content patches.
There is a Wings of Liberty starter edition which allows you to try the game without paying for it.
|
On October 26 2012 02:59 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 02:58 Wildmoon wrote:On October 26 2012 02:57 GizmoPT wrote:
would be nice to get maybe unit with different models for leveling up instead of just decals and portraits Different model for the same unit could potentially harm the gameplay. The 2 DT skins. The 2 Thor skins. Well, Blizzard may/should make such changes so obvious like the above one that no one gets mistaken.
One should play the opponent, not brag around with unmistakable extra skins. SC2 already allows to have decals to show off.
Too many different models would also make the game harder to read for newbies.
|
On October 26 2012 03:21 hpTheGreat wrote:
Pointless garbage.
Although the concept of XP is great, you are giving me something that I can get right now by playing x amount of games...
How is this different?
I wish blizzard would stop hiring morons and fix this game already
I don't think that morons work with Blizzard.
Currently you get portraits by wins. With XP, you will get portraits by playing (building and killing units.) "Even if I don't win this game, I can gather some XP" – a good concept for casual players who are not much into competition anyway.
|
On October 26 2012 20:37 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 02:54 Rassy wrote:
"Still not free to play.
This is just another reason for people that dont like the game to play it for no reason."
Also:THIS so much. I don't think that "free to play" would be a good model for SC2. With "free" to play you always fear new DLC for money. With the Blizzard SC2 marketing model for the western world, you pay once and get lifetime support and content patches. There is a Wings of Liberty starter edition which allows you to try the game without paying for it.
I wouldnt be surprised if they put sc2 and Blizzard alls stars in the same client. They could make it free to play with a store for skinsand such.
And if this would happen they would probably give people the oppertunity to seel their costum maps, and blizzard would take a margin of the profit.
It probably wouldnt make any difference for people that just want to play ladder.
|
The general concept of the XP system seems to be great.
At first, a player plays his favorite race. Then he needs more and more XP for an additional level. The other two races offer to gain some levels there quick, so he tries them out.
Grinding XP and levels requires no skill, only time. But this is great, because the player gets rewarded for playing. The more players we have with basic SC2 knowledge, the bigger the potential for large viewerships in esports. Also the game gets more talked about and sinks deeper into our culture.
Not everyone likes real competition. Starcraft can be a game where some friends play 2v2, just to have a shared experience.
|
On October 26 2012 19:51 Alpina wrote:
All this idea is just a wasted development time imo.
Your signature seems in line with your post.
If think that this is wasted devolpment plese explain why. I dont see it. Maybe that there can be an actual conversation after some reasoning.
|
On October 26 2012 20:32 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 02:54 tritonice wrote:
I'm fine with this, and it will have some holding power, but not for very long. I am in the wait-and-see mode at the moment. Blizzard seems to be rolling out several features for HOTS, and some more will probably be revealed. There are some good improvements, and hopefully more will roll out. I will play SC2 no matter what with a mix of ladder and monobattle customs for the most part.
My main complaint is the ladder. I am a big boy, just show me where I rank across the entire silver ladder. What is the purpose of the 100 person group? I know they made some changes to better reflect where you are relative to promotion, but that has a limit in given 100 person groups. If I know I am ranked 24,637 out of 54,382 current season silver players, that gives me more incentive than rank 24 of an arbitrary set of 100 players. With having so many players, the random noise is a big factor. You can lose 10 or 20 ranks with doing nothing. The devision also allows for a more personal experience "oh that damn zerg on rank 1 is always 50 points above me". You remember his name and compete against the rank of a name instead of just looking at large numbers.
This is just nonsense.
That damn zerg on rank 1 doesn't matter because rank 1 in a division is utterly meaningless. It means nothing. You're being ranked with 100 arbitrary, faceless men. It has no meaning. It says nothing about how good you are.
Even with noise, a global ladder is still better because it gives you an approximation of your position compared to the entire playerbase, instead of 100 pointless players.
You talk about noise as if it's the death of the global ladder. But this can be address by using a percentile (e.g. 67th percentile), or incrementing percentiles by 5 (e.g. top 5%, top 10%, top 15%, etc). But guess what, changes in division ranks are also completely meaningless due to the fluctuation caused by bonus pool. You log off for a 2 days and you've fallen 10 ranks because everyone else has used up their bonus pool. That's noise that distorts the already worthless division rank. Why don't you complain about that?
The division system is literally the worse ranking system ever devised in any serious competitive video game. It makes your rank utterly meaningless, worthless, unimportant. There is absolutely no reason to care about your division rank because it can't be compared with other player's. Ranks are for measuring epeen. It's impossible to measure epeen with division ranks, because division ranks are incomparable and meaningless.
|
On October 26 2012 20:40 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 02:59 darkness wrote:On October 26 2012 02:58 Wildmoon wrote:On October 26 2012 02:57 GizmoPT wrote:
would be nice to get maybe unit with different models for leveling up instead of just decals and portraits Different model for the same unit could potentially harm the gameplay. The 2 DT skins. The 2 Thor skins. Well, Blizzard may/should make such changes so obvious like the above one that no one gets mistaken. One should play the opponent, not brag around with unmistakable extra skins. SC2 already allows to have decals to show off. Too many different models would also make the game harder to read for newbies.
You can also just have an option to turn it back to normal, or to only have your own custom skins to appear in the game. If you're going customizable, you should always make it optional. That's just how it works.
|
I do not understand this snobish elite with their high noses talking down on the casualizing of starcraft.
I find it great that blizzard takes a step into the right direction.
Why is it important that an esports title has a large active casual fanbase ?
Because only then many people are playing the game, because only then many people are watching streams, because only then many people are watching tournaments, AND ONLY THEN sponsors will pump significant amounts of money into the pro scene allowing them to train and play. It is not enough to play good, you also have to entertain the masses.
In my opinion starcraft has to grow at the base to reach a higher Top, anything else is doomed to fail and that is where blizzard would have to invest in the upcoming expansions, in growing the base.
And measures like this XP system is a great first step in the right direction in my opinion.
|
On October 26 2012 21:11 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 20:32 [F_]aths wrote:On October 26 2012 02:54 tritonice wrote:
I'm fine with this, and it will have some holding power, but not for very long. I am in the wait-and-see mode at the moment. Blizzard seems to be rolling out several features for HOTS, and some more will probably be revealed. There are some good improvements, and hopefully more will roll out. I will play SC2 no matter what with a mix of ladder and monobattle customs for the most part.
My main complaint is the ladder. I am a big boy, just show me where I rank across the entire silver ladder. What is the purpose of the 100 person group? I know they made some changes to better reflect where you are relative to promotion, but that has a limit in given 100 person groups. If I know I am ranked 24,637 out of 54,382 current season silver players, that gives me more incentive than rank 24 of an arbitrary set of 100 players. With having so many players, the random noise is a big factor. You can lose 10 or 20 ranks with doing nothing. The devision also allows for a more personal experience "oh that damn zerg on rank 1 is always 50 points above me". You remember his name and compete against the rank of a name instead of just looking at large numbers. This is just nonsense. That damn zerg on rank 1 doesn't matter because rank 1 in a division is utterly meaningless. It means nothing. You're being ranked with 100 arbitrary, faceless men. It has no meaning. It says nothing about how good you are. Even with noise, a global ladder is still better because it gives you an approximation of your position compared to the entire playerbase, instead of 100 pointless players. You talk about noise as if it's the death of the global ladder. But this can be address by using a percentile (e.g. 67th percentile), or incrementing percentiles by 5 (e.g. top 5%, top 10%, top 15%, etc). But guess what, changes in division ranks are also completely meaningless due to the fluctuation caused by bonus pool. You log off for a 2 days and you've fallen 10 ranks because everyone else has used up their bonus pool. That's noise that distorts the already worthless division rank. Why don't you complain about that? The division system is literally the worse ranking system ever devised in any serious competitive video game. It makes your rank utterly meaningless, worthless, unimportant. There is absolutely no reason to care about your division rank because it can't be compared with other player's. Ranks are for measuring epeen. It's impossible to measure epeen with division ranks, because division ranks are incomparable and meaningless.
Division ranks now no longer have a hidden modifier, so you get a rough picture where you stand. You get no accurate account, but this is intentional as you should play the game, not the ladder.
The 100 players in the division are not "pointless". A group of about 100 can be understood by a human mind. Numbers like tenthousands on the other hand are meaningless. We can compare them, but not really grasp them.
Of course you need to compare ladder rank with bonus pool, which you have to do manually. Division rank rewards constant playing. If you are a competitive player, you could play online tournaments and see who you can beat. It makes little sense to create a really competitive environment for the most of the players.
Why would you know "how good you are"? You get a rough idea by your league. Most players make little or no progress anyway, because the MMR does not increase (unless someone really commits.) If would be frustrating to see that you are stuck or even falling behind compared to the general population. If you like real competition, again, there are online tournaments.
|
most of my freinds will love this,
|
Is this patch coming out today?
|
On October 26 2012 21:12 Fragile51 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 20:40 [F_]aths wrote:On October 26 2012 02:59 darkness wrote:On October 26 2012 02:58 Wildmoon wrote:On October 26 2012 02:57 GizmoPT wrote:
would be nice to get maybe unit with different models for leveling up instead of just decals and portraits Different model for the same unit could potentially harm the gameplay. The 2 DT skins. The 2 Thor skins. Well, Blizzard may/should make such changes so obvious like the above one that no one gets mistaken. One should play the opponent, not brag around with unmistakable extra skins. SC2 already allows to have decals to show off. Too many different models would also make the game harder to read for newbies. You can also just have an option to turn it back to normal, or to only have your own custom skins to appear in the game. If you're going customizable, you should always make it optional. That's just how it works.
You would need an option as an observer to only show default models. But then there it is little point to earn custom models anyway if you cannot show them off in the game. The clarity of the actual ingame view should not be compromised by custom models. (Having the thor as an exception to this proposed 'rule'.)
|
|
|
i really think blizz should give skins as xp rewards. in lol there are also tons of skins and no one gets confused. i would love to see mmm-balls not all looking the same.
|
On October 26 2012 22:31 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 21:11 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 26 2012 20:32 [F_]aths wrote:On October 26 2012 02:54 tritonice wrote:
I'm fine with this, and it will have some holding power, but not for very long. I am in the wait-and-see mode at the moment. Blizzard seems to be rolling out several features for HOTS, and some more will probably be revealed. There are some good improvements, and hopefully more will roll out. I will play SC2 no matter what with a mix of ladder and monobattle customs for the most part.
My main complaint is the ladder. I am a big boy, just show me where I rank across the entire silver ladder. What is the purpose of the 100 person group? I know they made some changes to better reflect where you are relative to promotion, but that has a limit in given 100 person groups. If I know I am ranked 24,637 out of 54,382 current season silver players, that gives me more incentive than rank 24 of an arbitrary set of 100 players. With having so many players, the random noise is a big factor. You can lose 10 or 20 ranks with doing nothing. The devision also allows for a more personal experience "oh that damn zerg on rank 1 is always 50 points above me". You remember his name and compete against the rank of a name instead of just looking at large numbers. This is just nonsense. That damn zerg on rank 1 doesn't matter because rank 1 in a division is utterly meaningless. It means nothing. You're being ranked with 100 arbitrary, faceless men. It has no meaning. It says nothing about how good you are. Even with noise, a global ladder is still better because it gives you an approximation of your position compared to the entire playerbase, instead of 100 pointless players. You talk about noise as if it's the death of the global ladder. But this can be address by using a percentile (e.g. 67th percentile), or incrementing percentiles by 5 (e.g. top 5%, top 10%, top 15%, etc). But guess what, changes in division ranks are also completely meaningless due to the fluctuation caused by bonus pool. You log off for a 2 days and you've fallen 10 ranks because everyone else has used up their bonus pool. That's noise that distorts the already worthless division rank. Why don't you complain about that? The division system is literally the worse ranking system ever devised in any serious competitive video game. It makes your rank utterly meaningless, worthless, unimportant. There is absolutely no reason to care about your division rank because it can't be compared with other player's. Ranks are for measuring epeen. It's impossible to measure epeen with division ranks, because division ranks are incomparable and meaningless. Division ranks now no longer have a hidden modifier, so you get a rough picture where you stand. You get no accurate account, but this is intentional as you should play the game, not the ladder. The 100 players in the division are not "pointless". A group of about 100 can be understood by a human mind. Numbers like tenthousands on the other hand are mepaningless. We can compare them, but not really grasp them. Of course you need to compare ladder rank with bonus pool, which you have to do manually. Division rank rewards constant playing. If you are a competitive player, you could play online tournaments and see who you can beat. It makes little sense to create a really competitive environment for the most of the players. Why would you know "how good you are"? You get a rough idea by your league. Most players make little or no progress anyway, because the MMR does not increase (unless someone really commits.) If would be frustrating to see that you are stuck or even falling behind compared to the general poulation. If you like real competition, again, there are online tournaments.
No, division ranks continue to be meaningless. Division modifiers apply to points, not division ranks. For more than 2 years points have also been completely meaningless. It's only since this season that points can be compared.
100 can be understood, but not 100,000? Are you just too stupid to understand large numbers or do you like strawman arguments? Have you heard of division? You can divide 230,130 out of 502,010 to get 46/100.
Where are you getting this idea that a global ladder would suddenly create an ultra-competitive environment and that this would be bad for the game? In the recent UI update, Blizzard basically admitted that they lied about why they were hiding losses, and admitted that the true reason was ladder anxiety. They argue that we can have stats in HotS because unranked play solves ladder anxiety. Why doesn't Blizzard's logic apply here? After all, a global rank, or percentile, is just another stat, like win ratio.
You say that you have to take out bonus pool before comparing rank, but that's got nothing to do with what I said. It's a dodge. I asked you why you aren't complaining about bonus pool adding noise to the division rank. Why are you hypocritically using the noise argument against a global ladder but not against the bonus pool system?
You also say that division rank rewards constant playing. If this were true, then points would be completely meaningless, because it would imply that the more you play, the more points you get, and the higher your division rank. But it's not true. The ladder system rewards playing only to the extent that bonus pool is used up. Not only is this statement wrong, it's also irrelevant to the discussion.
Next, you talk about leagues giving an idea of how good you are. But this is very broad. If you're in diamond this means you're in the top 20%-40%. This is a very large skill range, and gives very little information. This is why there should be a global ladder or percentile. Even if it's in increments of 5%, it would still provide like 4 times more information. Also, how does a tournament solve anything? Does it reveal your true rank? How can I compare my rank to yours? This is basically the argument behind Master's league: 98% of the players don't deserve to see their true rank. It's very condescending.
Despite the fact that most player's MMR won't tend to improve, it is a horribly bad argument to claim that a global ladder discourages playing due to the feeling of getting stuck. Firstly, there's no reason why anything needs to be taken away. If you're encouraged to play because you really care about how you're ranked in your division of 100 faceless randoms, then there's no reason why that can't continue to motivate you. Secondly, the new level system is designed to encourage people to play. Thirdly, why don't you complain about bonus pool discouraging people to play? Blizzard claims that bonus pool is to help people to "catch up", but this is completely wrong. The bonus pool CAUSES the gap in the first place. When you log on, your meaningless division rank would have fallen BECAUSE other player's have used their bonus pool. The bonus pool is the problem, not the solution. Why doesn't the fact that everyday the bonus pool is the cause of seeing your rank fall, which is psychologically worse than stagnating, discourage people from playing? Why don't you use this argument to complain about the bonus pool. Fourthly, a global ladder would continue to rank using points, so there will be no stagnation because of the bonus pool system (it's worse). So you're completely wrong, But even worse, it is utterly hypocritical for you to claim that the problem is noise and fluctuation in your previous post and then claim that the problem is actually stagnation in the above post. What is it? At least get your story straight.
I find the level of your cognitive dissonance in defending Blizzard's flawed and contradictory design very troubling.
|
|
|
On October 26 2012 20:40 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 02:59 darkness wrote:On October 26 2012 02:58 Wildmoon wrote:On October 26 2012 02:57 GizmoPT wrote:
would be nice to get maybe unit with different models for leveling up instead of just decals and portraits Different model for the same unit could potentially harm the gameplay. The 2 DT skins. The 2 Thor skins. Well, Blizzard may/should make such changes so obvious like the above one that no one gets mistaken. One should play the opponent, not brag around with unmistakable extra skins. SC2 already allows to have decals to show off. Too many different models would also make the game harder to read for newbies.
TF2 has dozens of hats and it doesn't make the classes any harder to distinguish from each other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
