I dont like the idea of no rush, one ACCOUNT FOREVER seems more accurate.
Option to Enable No Rush Rule - Page 6
Forum Index > SC2 General |
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
I dont like the idea of no rush, one ACCOUNT FOREVER seems more accurate. | ||
SquashMonster
United States7 Posts
I think a lot of the people here need to understand that the "no rush" mindset extends way beyond enough to prevent cheese. Still, I think a beginner's league that tries to prevent cheese and actual rushes is a good idea. A lot of people reach the wrong conclusion about SC from playing a couple games and getting dominated by "unbeatable" rush and cheese strategies. Handling these is a mostly a matter of knowing how to play the game well under normal circumstances, which new players can't learn when a bunch of trolls on Bnet rush and cheese them constantly. The best way to set it up, as has been suggested, would be map pool. Remember the single player video where magma occasionally comes up and covers the low ground? Imagine a map that starts with a big magma river running through the center, which drains after the first few minutes. There are some very easy to defend (after the magma clears out) expansions flanking the main, but the main is resource-poor to encourage new players to develop the habit of expanding. | ||
Response
United States1936 Posts
On December 15 2009 08:32 L wrote: Beginners don't really care about being able to play the way you do. They just don't want to die before seeing more game content. From a design standpoint, its rather useless to even develop a working and interesting set of upper tier units if the majority of players never survive until that point. This makes sense in the context even in the context of broodwar; if there was a unit that cost 10k min and 10k gas to make and it was never made because its prohibitively expensive to make, why design it into the game in the first place? it's just poor design of the game if you make a unit that has no purpose, it's not the gamers fault for it being completely useless | ||
L
Canada4732 Posts
On December 18 2009 05:15 Response wrote: it's just poor design of the game if you make a unit that has no purpose, it's not the gamers fault for it being completely useless But that's the thing, the design of the game will make different units have different roles depending on the skill of a player. If you keep dying before the game even gets started, then all your design work is useless and people just get frustrated and quit because they rarely get to the game's 'goods' so to speak. Units like carriers, BCs, ultras, guardians, etc. are all a waste of design space for the majority of new players in competitive games because they simply won't get to the point where they can make them. Is that poor design? No, not really. It just explains the desire for a fairly large group of players to play a no-aggression macro game until they can get such units, THEN start fighting. | ||
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
| ||
emikochan
United Kingdom232 Posts
Just maps of scaling difficulty, that cause good habits (as said above with the mineral poor mains to encourage expanding) Long distances between bases, easy to defend expansions etc, like an expansion and main sharing a cliff (cliff overlooking the minerals) or with ramps on the friendly side. Blizz do know this though, they said the main difference in the newbie league was the map pool. It'll be nice to see how they turn out... Definitely voting NO to changing the game rules for different leagues though, the map style is enough. | ||
heroyi
United States1064 Posts
i like what blizzard is doing for the noobs. *oh btw my friend also states he would play sc more if it was a console game...........................................................he thinks sc or rts in general is better on console.............................i literally kicked his ass in halo 3 to make him pay for that reply *face palm | ||
Navane
Netherlands2693 Posts
| ||
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
| ||
EximoSua
171 Posts
| ||
Kimera757
Canada129 Posts
On December 17 2009 00:57 BabyRhino wrote: most beginners won't log on b.net and know which "community" to go to to play with beginners. They will in StarCraft II. The learning tools start before the new player ever goes on battle.net. They'll be told where to go. And if not, the AMM qualification will put them in the lower leagues anyway. | ||
oshibori_probe
United States2932 Posts
| ||
honey_badger
Djibouti46 Posts
| ||
FieryBalrog
United States1381 Posts
Those people aren't affected by this OPTION because they'll jump into the competitive leagues anyway. Try to step into someone elses shoes. They may not care to improve, it is a GAME after all. So what if it teaches them "bad habits"? BGH teaches bad habits, yet BGH players probably outnumber the people on ICCUP... | ||
DeCoup
Australia1933 Posts
On December 21 2009 20:42 FieryBalrog wrote: Half the people here need to grow up. "Bad habits"? Not everyone cares to learn good habits. That only matters if you assume every player is like yourself, i.e., they want to train and improve and get really competitive. Those people aren't affected by this OPTION because they'll jump into the competitive leagues anyway. Try to step into someone elses shoes. They may not care to improve, it is a GAME after all. So what if it teaches them "bad habits"? BGH teaches bad habits, yet BGH players probably outnumber the people on ICCUP... Everyone would be effected by this option. Your just being narrow minded. By including an option which divides the community you lower the pool of potential good players. Because they get so dependant on these 'options' that it is the only way they will play the game. Blizzards approach of creating maps and gamespeeds which prevent rushes and possibly lower the ability to cheese without changing the game rules give new players an area to learn and improve. The AMM system will make sure that as they progress their opponents are of an equal level and the players help each other to improve. An 'option' like the one described by the OP here will change the way new players learn. If mineral line harass is not possible in the early game they will not learn to balance between building units for defence and teching. They will not learn to place defensive structures at key locations to prevent the first wave of attacks. They will not learn to perform early pressure and expand in order to gain from it. Once they 'progress' from your 'optional' mode and are finally at the point where they are ready to join a league without this option there will be a big steap learning curve as they attempt to learn the many many things that they have not had to deal with all at once. They will either sink (and never progress beyond the 'option' barrier) or swim. Blizzards strategy seems to be to give a gradual learning experience in which you learn everything all at once, but against people of your skill level. So there is never a skill gap or steap learning curve. You can just improve and improve. If you every do get to the point where you won't improve. Then you will still be enjoying the game because you are still playing people at your skill level, and winning half your games. Blizzards option has no downsides. Everyone seems to play with people at their level and can naturally progress if and when they choose. | ||
TriniMasta
United States1323 Posts
| ||
T-P-S
United States204 Posts
On December 17 2009 01:46 LaughingTulkas wrote: To me, it's kinda like playing HORSE with a basketball, taking all kinds of goofy shots and stuff, and then having a bunch of college basketball players (NBA is korea) saying, YOU CAN'T SHOOT LIKE THAT!! IT'LL NEVER WORK IF A MAN IS GUARDING YOU CORRECTLY!!! But this analogy doesn't accurately portray the problem. I couldn't care less if people want to play with strange rulesets or maps. Nobody should care what people do in their own game. However, this discussion is regarding Blizzard's use of time in developing the game. If they have to delay the release of the game that I've anticipated so hungrily, of course I'll object to them spending time implementing features that I know I'll never use or appreciate. There is absolutely no reason for them to spend time putting a 'league' together to placate the people who don't actually want to play the game. And no, I'm not being elitist when I say that NR20 detracts from the game. If people don't enjoy the game as it is, including the freedom to do anything that you're capable of within the bounds of the engine, it is absolutely their loss for limiting their own experience. And even if it was found to be some fault with sc2 according to the casual community, if you think that rules like no rush, a force field, or strange fog of war behavior is going to keep people from stomping noobs by any of a dozen other 'cheap' (ahaha) methods, then you're either deluding yourself or you don't respect the inherent diversity of options in starcraft. | ||
MountainDewJunkie
United States10340 Posts
Select your game mode: [ ] Standard Mode [x] Vagina Mode | ||
| ||