EPTCasual Balance - Updated May 30 - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
aka_star
United Kingdom1546 Posts
| ||
|
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
 | ||
|
Oddysay
Canada597 Posts
( so many name and title when in fact we are only players ) if you are bad , play other game or try to improve that all . | ||
|
SuperJongMan
Jamaica11586 Posts
And others don't seem to understand competitive balance... You can't really have casual balance without having competitive balance. Sure a newbie will die to newbie strats, that's why he's a noob. That's really irrelevant cuz he will never understand or grip what balance is nor how to play. However, competitive players are the only players truly capapble of "breaking" a game. So you really have to balance there or the game will busto. It's really simple to me. I must be really dum.. or.. the others. | ||
|
Tropics
United Kingdom1132 Posts
On May 26 2010 21:42 Uthgar wrote: The forge rush was actually used to great effect in high levels on the asian server. really? was there any cannon rush outside of the pvz pylon/forge at their ramp thing? because that works pretty much just as well as ever and its the only cannon rush ive ever seen outside of desert oasis | ||
|
Squallcloud
France466 Posts
The competitive scene came later. Hearing some people on this thread they were born progamers with a copy of BW right of the womb of their mother. The OP say only that they may be some other factors to balance. Like easing new player into the multiplayer game. You may disagree but the answers he gets are "huhu you shitty shitty OP u retarded". Some answers aren't even about the point he try to make. | ||
|
SuperJongMan
Jamaica11586 Posts
Now amongst casuals, it's far less about handspeed/muscle memory and more about your ability to play fast, think fast etc. I think that is the great balancer in all this. The amazing thing I've come to love~ MBS Automine. I can't BW now cuz of it. If I could only select 2 probes and push BP for pylon in BW too T.T | ||
|
Seltsam
United States343 Posts
Losing to cheese play always bothers me, but I eventually learn to deal with it, and I generally take solace in the idea that the constant cheesers will probably move up to silver league at best, while I will continue to improve and eventually reach platinum/diamond. I haven't done my placements post-patch yet, but I was mid Platinum before it, and I used a friend invite key to make a second account, with which I intentionally lost all 5 placement matches. The reason for doing so was to play in copper, where most cheeses take place. I was having trouble with some cheeses and wanted to learn to counter them. And now I have very little trouble with cheeses because I played probably something like 50 games, of which something like 45 of them were cheese plays. But again, I think a lot of these play-to-win types who don't want to deal with actually learning the game (the type that will typically cheese) will eventually filter out once the BGH's and Fastest Maps of SC2 come out. In response to the OP, I think there is some validity in the argument, and I think it's well worth changing lower-level play as long as it doesn't affect higher level play AND if it promotes playing to improve rather than playing to win. Otherwise, all the balance changes in the world are pointless. While I am by no means a game designer (nor am I qualified to be anything like one), such a task seems to be difficult if not impossible. As such, it seems the logical choice to do it the opposite way: balance high-level and try not to change lower level play too much. Playing secretively is part of the game; you could certainly get rid of all cheese play simply by removing the fog of war. Then, everyone sees everything, and everyone is forced to win through pure mechanics. But trying to keep your opponent in the dark is a part of the game. | ||
|
Goobahfish
Australia71 Posts
Noobcakes players: These players have no idea. They either are not good at games in general or have no talent for RTS games. Alternatively, this might be their first few games. Cheeseball players: These players don't really have much talent for RTS's in general. Their main prerogative is to win games. They misplace themselves in the leagues to stomp Noobcake-players. Casual players: These players do have some idea. The probably have played other games before to a decent level of skill. They may not have played RTS games before but after playing the campaign and a few custom games against computer AI, they venture forth onto BNet. Casual players cover a broad range of skill levels. Invested players: These players play a lot. They read up on strategies and check websites. They play as much as they can. They often dislike change to the game balance as it may upset their 'training', but can often be adaptable too. Their skill level is almost certainly above casual, but not in the pro league. Pro Wannabes: Most of the posters on this forum (j/k). They talk tougher than they play. They probably play reasonably well and love to post L2P... they can be invested players, they can be cheeseballs. Pros: They are mature enough to not post L2P every second post. They are good at the game and can offer valuable information about minor tweaks to top-level competetive gameplay (not major design necessarily however). It is mostly useful to have a pro's opinion. They don't have much valuable opinion about cheese, because at the pro level, cheese is generally meaningless. The problem is, that casuals can easily turn into invested players and then into pros if the conditions are right. At the moment there is a false dichotomy being bandied around. It's not that casual players are bad, cry and quit, rather that they are inexperienced, have a 1-dimensional experience and turn their attention to more interesting pursuits. If their first experience of ladder SCII is cheeseballs, then they will get switched off SCII and go back to games they enjoy more. These may not be WOW (as so many people keep saying) but other styles of games such as FPS, or other RTS's where cheese is less prevalent. The simple example I will give is three of my friends. Two friends played relatively normal SC games. Build/rush/drops/sneaky stuff. Sometimes I got burned, sometimes I didn't. My third friend was a cheeseball. ZvZ it was sunkens on my creep, ZvP it was 2 zealot rushes... the play was 2-dimensional and boring. Yeah I got burned the first 2 times, then I adapted. Then I got bored and I just stopped playing against that friend. If my first foray into ladder matches were continuous cheese matches, whether I won or lost I would lose interest very quickly because frankly those games just aren't fun or interesting. Multiplayer SCII would appear to be stale cheese. That's the point. Maybe some people hate losing full stop. Well, they'll never win with the new AMM system because it essentially enforces 50% win rates. But the players you don't want to quit are the ones who play a dozen ladder matches before realising that there is no point for them to become an invested player because the game is 'as boring as shit' due to the prevalence of cheese. All players begin as noobcakes or casual. The reason all of you invested players, cheeseballs and pro wannabes are still in the game is because your first fifty matches probably weren't all cheese-fest NPE's. | ||
|
Insanious
Canada1251 Posts
But at the same times level 1 - 50 take 5,000 hours of grind to finish, with no rewards, and PvP isn't unlocked till 50. Hardcores will grind up to 50, will tout the amazingness of the game, and how balance at lower levels doesn't matter now that they are in the god tier, and just their PvE and PvP experiences matter since they are the pros. While down in noob land, people are quitting left right and center, the game slowly dieing. With no balance for low level fun, games die... No matter how much potential a player has, if they are not having fun they will not continue playing. If you come from a non-RTS background, and are not in beta, if the game isn't fun for you, you wont play it... and you will tell your friends not to waste their money... and they will tell their friends not to... Remember in business, a happy customer will on average bring in 2 - 3 new customers, an unhappy customer will drive away 10 potential customers. Personally, I don't think lower level play is fun. I've had to teach a few of my friends who i've given keys to how to play better so they can leave copper (which it was around). They were all going to quit the game due to how many NPEs they had down there... and this is coming from people i've played video games with (competitively even) for from 2 to 10 years... Low level play needs a fun boost, this might come from custom games, but well... people wont buy SC2 for custom games, they want to ladder... and unless you foster the new generation there wont be any young blood to replace the seasoned pros. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
Learn to defend zergling rushes you nitwit, or Dt rushes, or cannon rushes, it would be like me losing in 4 moves in chess and complaining after i lose to it over and over. Being able to beat "cheeseballs" should give you a sense of accomplishment. God you guys are terrible. | ||
|
gdroxor
United States639 Posts
It's really not hard to stop early all-in crap like 6 pools, 3 gate, 8 rax, etc. I don't see what the issue is. If you keep losing to the same strategy over and over because you're doing the same thing, that's basically the paraphrased definition of insanity. | ||
|
Cheezy
Sweden112 Posts
And you shouldn't say cheese is impractical in higher level play. Even progamers win with 4pool. | ||
|
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
On May 27 2010 00:33 Sadist wrote: wow the level of posting in the sc2 forum is fucking atrocious. Noobcakes? Are you kidding me? Learn to defend zergling rushes you nitwit, or Dt rushes, or cannon rushes, it would be like me losing in 4 moves in chess and complaining after i lose to it over and over. Being able to beat "cheeseballs" should give you a sense of accomplishment. God you guys are terrible. so are you saying that if you lose against cheese, then either your opening is not polished enough or your scouting is weak or both? I kinda agree. (for example in pvt i allways open with 10gate, core, stalker, stalker.) and I believe that "cheese" as itself is only a way to exploit bad scouting or unflexible openings. nothing else. | ||
|
Goobahfish
Australia71 Posts
wow the level of posting in the sc2 forum is fucking atrocious. Noobcakes? Are you kidding me? I was just trying to be light-hearted. Calm down. Calling them noobcakes and cheeseballs makes it sound a bit more fun and kind of describes them in a slightly less, 'you suck' kind of way. Learn to defend zergling rushes you nitwit, or Dt rushes, or cannon rushes, it would be like me losing in 4 moves in chess and complaining after i lose to it over and over. Being able to beat "cheeseballs" should give you a sense of accomplishment. God you guys are terrible. Ok, as this follows on to a direct quote form a term I coined, I can only interpret this comment as being directed at me. What the hell are you talking about? The above stated rushes are easy to defend, they are just boring to play against because it makes the game 1-dimensional (rush works/doesn't work... gg). The reason it doesn't give a sense of achievement is because it repetitive. Using your own analogy, it's like a 4-move mate, except there is a 6-move counter-mate. Either way I'm stuck with a 6-move game... huzzahs >_> | ||
|
Three
Japan278 Posts
By "balancing" for lower tiers, people just mean removing certain strats from the game, nothing more, nothing less. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
On May 27 2010 00:50 Goobahfish wrote: I was just trying to be light-hearted. Calm down. Calling them noobcakes and cheeseballs makes it sound a bit more fun and kind of describes them in a slightly less, 'you suck' kind of way. Ok, as this follows on to a direct quote form a term I coined, I can only interpret this comment as being directed at me. What the hell are you talking about? The above stated rushes are easy to defend, they are just boring to play against because it makes the game 1-dimensional (rush works/doesn't work... gg). The reason it doesn't give a sense of achievement is because it repetitive. Using your own analogy, it's like a 4-move mate, except there is a 6-move counter-mate. Either way I'm stuck with a 6-move game... huzzahs >_> then youll get better and play better players. Thats the entire point of the way the ladder is. What the hell is your problem. | ||
|
nttea
Sweden4353 Posts
| ||
|
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
On May 27 2010 00:50 Goobahfish wrote: I was just trying to be light-hearted. Calm down. Calling them noobcakes and cheeseballs makes it sound a bit more fun and kind of describes them in a slightly less, 'you suck' kind of way. Ok, as this follows on to a direct quote form a term I coined, I can only interpret this comment as being directed at me. What the hell are you talking about? The above stated rushes are easy to defend, they are just boring to play against because it makes the game 1-dimensional (rush works/doesn't work... gg). The reason it doesn't give a sense of achievement is because it repetitive. Using your own analogy, it's like a 4-move mate, except there is a 6-move counter-mate. Either way I'm stuck with a 6-move game... huzzahs >_> if this is really true (you repetatively win against cheesy openings) then your rating gets pushed up faster. with higher rating you will get better opponents who will not "cheese" you with no reason. I never saw someone win with a cheese opening against a good player with a flexible opening and at least decent scouting. | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On May 26 2010 21:51 aka_star wrote: I was confused by the OP.... lets just balance the game? The point was that "balancing the game" is more complicated than... "just balancing the game." | ||
| ||
