|
Screw this... I want every game to be published and every build to be seen whenever I want to and I see no reason why this is a disadvantage. If your build depends on not beeing seen you won't compete in the long run anyways.
As for tournaments why would it be different? You work on a build, others copy it. Execution is what makes the difference. I want the community to grow and the skill to increase. The more danger, the more honor.
Everyone is talking about how cheesy and noob a lot of players are and that they don't know how to play properly.Still you want to deny them the access to the best source for advancement? I don't get it...
Watching your opponents replays and preparing for exactly that strategy is stupid or as Artosis said it: "Then you are a blindcounter nooby!".
There is no metagame!
|
On June 24 2010 14:40 DanielD wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2010 13:49 tedster wrote:
So many horrible and ignorant posters in this thread. If you really think pro-level players can "fake" a build byactually running a build they haven't practiced at all in the tournament game, and that this is somehow an acceptable and +EV solution, you don't know anything whatsoever about practice and competitive gaming.
This is like a fastball pitcher coming out and throwing knucklers for an entire game. Yeah, it would be totally awesome except he NEVER GOT TO PRACTICE THROWING THE KNUCKLEBALL.
This is absolutely a ploy by blizzard to force every pro player to have smurf accounts, and probably several. Right, except that you aren't a versatile Starcraft player if you can't 'throw more than one pitch', and you can scout your opponents next swing if you micro properly and time it right. Just because the Korean progamers have players that practice as snipers to do one build against one player doesn't mean thats how SC2 needs to be.
So players shouldn't be able to prepare new or special or tricky builds for a series, awesome.
Actually why don't we start everyone at 200/200 supply and have the game go from there? If everyone has 200 supply no one can complain!
Also let's play on BGH because map-specific strategies don't truly show player skill if you can only do well on certain maps.
|
Make the build order available only immediately after the match in the scoring screen. Easy solution. The player you just played with will have the replay of the game anyways and so we might as well save everyone a bit of time.
|
A lot of people supporting the transparency are comparing it to viewing past videos of opponent teams in other sports such as football, etc.
This comparison might be true for public games played on the blizzard ladder for example. The transparency allows even custom practice games to be scouted. This is like allowing another team go to your stadium during practice time and watch you practice or read your playbooks. It doesn't make any shred of sense.
|
On June 24 2010 13:53 tedster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2010 12:50 Cloak wrote:
For those who say this will ruin competitive play. What's the outcome of two players who have "figured out" each other's build? They can't both come out ahead. The outcome is shitty games determined entirely by guesswork and outside activities and not in-game action or clever strategies This should be completely self-evident if you just thought a bit about your own post.
Aight, you. The only one with an apparent lack of tact and thought put into his post seems to be none other than yourself.
Just because you arrived to a conclusion easily neither makes the problem easy nor you correct. The first obvious flaw in your logic is how would figuring out someone's build order and they figuring out your's force more of a reliance on chance? If everything was planned out, that'd be the least of their worries, and it'd come down to pure mechanical competition.
Second, how does turning up the pressure cooker on build variability not promote build creativity? You can argue that people coming up with novelty one-time-use builds are punished, but the good builds are the ones that are successful even when it's within the realm of possibility. If there is an ideal set of builds to be had for all scenarios, then removing the share replay feature would only delay the inevitable stagnancy of the metagame. I'd rather we accelerate the process and address the issues should we hit a road block, or continue to be surprised and give the naysayers a reason to squirm.
|
I am in the camp that wishes for this to be an option to share or not share certain info.
|
This is getting off topic ...
Chess openings have little to do with BO, but the pro football comparison is quiet good. SC has indeed a lot in common with american football. Think about it, football is a real time strategy game as well. Spying on pro team trainings will get you in jail, cause this knowledge gives you an unfair advantage. You know what to look for and you can prepare counters or abuse their weaknesses.
It is like stealing the play-book. The BO listing is not nearly as valuable as a play-book, but experienced players can read a lot off BOs, especially if they get tons of them from the same individual. So hiding them makes sense.
And again, players should decide for themselves ... it is their property.
|
The football analogy only works if you share nothing but tournament games. Like what ccou said, it's not like football teams let others watch their practices and the plays that they are preparing for the game. Same goes for custom and ladder games, which are just practice games for progamers obviously.
|
On June 24 2010 12:12 Trinton07 wrote:
I'm not sure how huge of a deal this is because most top players should have a large variety of builds they can do. But still, I do think you should be able to choose if your builds can be seen or not.
yah it's a huge deal.
i can think up of a solution off the top of my head easily:
by default, other ppl cannot see your BO.
u can allow ppl on your friends list to see.
u get a list of friends who u've allowed, so that u can easily manage it and not lose track.
|
You should win be being better than someone. Not by having an ace up your sleeve with some build order trick.
|
^ that's part of being better.
|
it only shows last 10-15 games doesn't it?
even if it shows every game don't see problem with this tbh, if you have a problem with it l2play random :p
also isn't it only to 30 supply it shows? doesn't show past 30 supply I believe.
|
On June 24 2010 15:05 Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2010 13:53 tedster wrote:On June 24 2010 12:50 Cloak wrote:
For those who say this will ruin competitive play. What's the outcome of two players who have "figured out" each other's build? They can't both come out ahead. The outcome is shitty games determined entirely by guesswork and outside activities and not in-game action or clever strategies This should be completely self-evident if you just thought a bit about your own post. Aight, you. The only one with an apparent lack of tact and thought put into his post seems to be none other than yourself. Just because you arrived to a conclusion easily neither makes the problem easy nor you correct. The first obvious flaw in your logic is how would figuring out someone's build order and they figuring out your's force more of a reliance on chance? If everything was planned out, that'd be the least of their worries, and it'd come down to pure mechanical competition. Second, how does turning up the pressure cooker on build variability not promote build creativity? You can argue that people coming up with novelty one-time-use builds are punished, but the good builds are the ones that are successful even when it's within the realm of possibility. If there is an ideal set of builds to be had for all scenarios, then removing the share replay feature would only delay the inevitable stagnancy of the metagame. I'd rather we accelerate the process and address the issues should we hit a road block, or continue to be surprised and give the naysayers a reason to squirm.
Because creative builds could be spotted in advance and prepared for, rendering them shitty. Also the longer you work on a specific timing or clever map-specific move, (which takes a lot of time and practice to figure out and get right) the more obvious it is what you're doing and the more useless it will be when you finally decide to whip it out.
Pure mechanical competition is identical armies with identical supply counts playing micro wars, not a game with branching paths and options and fog of war.
If you seriously think pro football teams sharing playbooks and inviting opposing coaches to pre-playoff practices is a totally awesome and logical idea, then there's no arguing with you because you don't understand anything at all about competition and never will.
|
Im just gonna throw this out there:
If you can see a persons build orders and replays... how exactly does that help you in game? Even if they practiced the same build 20x in a row before your game, thats just more of an incentive for him to throw you off and do something different in the tournament game. Pro players arent stupid (thats how they get to be pros), and remember that EVERYONE can see EVERYONE ELSES stuff- so theres no imbalance there. Since everyone can do it, its 100% even steven. If someone was cheating to get replays and BOs that would be something else entierely...
|
Everyone here saying that BO's should be visible needs to talk to ANY professional player. Then, come back and present your argument again.
Players should be able to do multiple builds, but if the opponent is expecting some sort of build, he can prepare for it. The point is- builds should be able to be kept secret if a player feels that if his opponent knows, then he will be at a disadvantage.
|
On June 25 2010 02:23 monitor wrote:
Everyone here saying that BO's should be visible needs to talk to ANY professional player. Then, come back and present your argument again.
Players should be able to do multiple builds, but if the opponent is expecting some sort of build, he can prepare for it. The point is- builds should be able to be kept secret if a player feels that if his opponent knows, then he will be at a disadvantage.
But how can you say he will be at a disadvantage when he can do the exact same thing to his opponent?
Edit: Plus- theres plenty of ways to practice builds without having them on B.net. Make a custom map where you and your opponent can reset without leaving the game, for example (already exists for a single player- YABOT- why cant it be for 2 players?)
|
i'm pretty sure i know what BO flash is going to use in his next BW game.
|
United States5162 Posts
Allowing or disallowing people to see build orders as they can now shouldn't be a advantage to either player as they can both see what the other has been doing lately.
It's bad because it removes part of the unknown involved in the game. It's also bad because it would force players to find ways to circumvent the system, which makes it pointless in the first place. Just remove build orders from custom games or create a way to stop people from viewing profiles and this whole problem is solved. I don't see why that's such a big deal.
|
Ladder/tournament games are public and the community needs to accept and embrace open build orders and replays. This leads to increased interest in eSports.
Custom games should be private and players should be able to practice build orders in secret and reveal them in high profile tournaments. This leads to increased interest in eSports.
This definitely needs to be fixed.
|
On June 24 2010 14:56 tedster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2010 14:40 DanielD wrote:On June 24 2010 13:49 tedster wrote:
So many horrible and ignorant posters in this thread. If you really think pro-level players can "fake" a build byactually running a build they haven't practiced at all in the tournament game, and that this is somehow an acceptable and +EV solution, you don't know anything whatsoever about practice and competitive gaming.
This is like a fastball pitcher coming out and throwing knucklers for an entire game. Yeah, it would be totally awesome except he NEVER GOT TO PRACTICE THROWING THE KNUCKLEBALL.
This is absolutely a ploy by blizzard to force every pro player to have smurf accounts, and probably several. Right, except that you aren't a versatile Starcraft player if you can't 'throw more than one pitch', and you can scout your opponents next swing if you micro properly and time it right. Just because the Korean progamers have players that practice as snipers to do one build against one player doesn't mean thats how SC2 needs to be. So players shouldn't be able to prepare new or special or tricky builds for a series, awesome. Actually why don't we start everyone at 200/200 supply and have the game go from there? If everyone has 200 supply no one can complain! Also let's play on BGH because map-specific strategies don't truly show player skill if you can only do well on certain maps.
You make a good point and then proceed to be a dick. Your analogy sucked and I responded to that. I don't disagree that you should have some way to practice without it being public.
More importantly, has it been confirmed here yet that you can see the BOs from previous custom games?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
