|
First off, it was a great change to split the income of players not present in the game amongst their allies (as opposed to the allies not knowing how much resources the dropped player had yet being able to use them). However, Blizzard overlooked one more thing, which is the supply count of the dropped players.
I haven't seen any discussion on this yet but I think it's something that needs to be changed. Having played several games already in which a teammate has dropped, I can say that it's quite frustrating to try and guess where his supply is at. You end up massing overlords/pylons/supply depots just to ensure they don't get supply capped. Controlling two players is hard enough; controlling two players when you can't see the supply of one is quite a bit harder.
I'm guessing Blizzard expects players to use the dropped player primarily for income (which is a valid strategy). In WarCraft III, teammates couldn't use the dropped player's resources on their own units/buildings but they could see the gold/lumber/supply and control that player. StarCraft II is different because there is no upkeep system and so Blizzard probably thinks the disadvantaged team can just use the extra income to build up armies faster.
As mentioned, while it is a valid strategy to use the dropped player exclusively for income, they should allow us the versatility to be able to play the dropped player standard if the teammates are skilled enough to do so. Being able to see the supply would help quite a bit in order to keep up with timings, etc.
PS. I wrote this only keeping in mind games where players drop at the beginning, because that's what happened in my games each time. In the late game it would be a lot more beneficial to be able to see the supply, as the main and expos should already be saturated and the focus is more about building up armies.
|
I find it sad no one thinks this is a legitimate concern and instead spams one paragraph OPs about marketing and hacks. I thought TL was better than this. I suppose I'll make an account on the battle.net forums so Blizzard actually becomes aware of this.
|
motbob
United States12391 Posts
On July 14 2010 02:38 Kantutan wrote:
I find it sad no one thinks this is a legitimate concern and instead spams one paragraph OPs about marketing and hacks. I thought TL was better than this. I suppose I'll make an account on the battle.net forums so Blizzard actually becomes aware of this.
OK, good luck! I'm sorry that we could not live up to your expectations!
|
iNcontroL
USA29048 Posts
what?
It's fine to make an OP like this but don't post in response to your own OP with some kind of disappointment about the other things that have happened to have been discussed.
Give your own thread a chance man.
|
if you dont have enough patience to wait for an answer in tl, then good luck with blues on blizzard forums.
|
I would prefere the way it was in Warcraft III, with the bar in the top right corner, just to keep you updated. But the shared income is a nice touch, and even used by pros like LiquidJinro and LiquidTLO in the 2v2 TeamAmerica Vs TeamEurope.
But i agree that there should be some versitality in the game and not forcing you to just go econ with the dropped player. This i still not see is the only way, because you always have the option of spending your money in both the players bases.
Still there would be nice with some supply-bars in the corner, much like in WC3!
|
lol, was going to reply to your thread, but then I figured it would be best to post this issue on the blizzard forums first so they can fix it. Unfortunately the forums are undergoing maintenance right now.
I'd like a simple supply display for the dropped player.
|
On July 14 2010 02:40 motbob wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 02:38 Kantutan wrote:
I find it sad no one thinks this is a legitimate concern and instead spams one paragraph OPs about marketing and hacks. I thought TL was better than this. I suppose I'll make an account on the battle.net forums so Blizzard actually becomes aware of this. OK, good luck! I'm sorry that we could not live up to your expectations!
*shrug, I know I came off sounding as a douche but I know that I'm by far not the only one who thinks the quality of the SC2 forums has dropped drastically since beta started. I came to TL in February and basically every thread that popped up as well as the comments within them were great and worth reading. The past couple months, not so much. It's rather frustrating, sorry.
|
I agree with you there man but saying so in this context isn't going to help you any more with the mods.
|
A really good idea, but just chill with the expectation of quick replies. It's not a chat channel, you know?
|
On July 14 2010 02:38 Kantutan wrote:
I find it sad no one thinks this is a legitimate concern and instead spams one paragraph OPs about marketing and hacks. I thought TL was better than this. I suppose I'll make an account on the battle.net forums so Blizzard actually becomes aware of this.
:/ daaamn so self centered
|
ya the posts have lost some quality in the last few months sure. ya some of the newer members are rude have no manners and troll like crazy. yes information is getting harder and harder to obtain because too many people that dont know what there talking about are posting. but dude have you ever been to blizzards website? i dont post much unless i actually have somthing to say, so i will say this. go try blizzards forum. youll be back on TL tomorrow because this is and probably always will be one of the best sc communities anywhere.
|
Lol, the OP derailed his own thread, should change the title of this thread to suit the new discussion about post quality on TL.net.
|
I believe that a better way to fix this would instead of showing your dropped partners supply, instead bump your supply to 400, and allow for both you and your opponents supply buildings to increase the available supply. This would not clutter the UI and allow the disadvantage of a dropped partner to decrease.
|
On July 14 2010 02:57 Kantutan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2010 02:40 motbob wrote:On July 14 2010 02:38 Kantutan wrote:
I find it sad no one thinks this is a legitimate concern and instead spams one paragraph OPs about marketing and hacks. I thought TL was better than this. I suppose I'll make an account on the battle.net forums so Blizzard actually becomes aware of this. OK, good luck! I'm sorry that we could not live up to your expectations! *shrug, I know I came off sounding as a douche but I know that I'm by far not the only one who thinks the quality of the SC2 forums has dropped drastically since beta started. I came to TL in February and basically every thread that popped up as well as the comments within them were great and worth reading. The past couple months, not so much. It's rather frustrating, sorry.
Are you new to the internet? A big increase in posters -> worse quality of posts is pretty standard, no point in getting frustrated about it.
|
So back to the question. Wouldn't an increase to 400 bring some new problems? Like some "super criticalmass" of voidrays or that sort? Still, with two playing protoss it could still end upp that way, with like 120 rays destroying everything. But a shared unitcount seems like a bigger change, i just don't agree with that...
|
Legitimate concern, just a bit poorly expressed.
Anyway, yes the supply count for absent allies should be there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
