|
On December 30 2010 05:40 TheRealPaciFist wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 05:36 TedJustice wrote:
you're asking for just about everything here.
If you want real progress, you need to do it in baby steps.
Ask for LAN or one other thing. Focus on that. Once that's done with, or they've made some kind of response to it, you can focus on something else. I agree at least to the extent that the post should be prioritized. Make LAN the number one bullet point, because the loss of LAN is something that has alienated many players. Then try to work out the most important changes from there. I would personally love to have separate rankings for different races, and I would love to be able to choose which race I ladder against (so I could, say, work on my ZvZ whenever I felt like it - I'm a random player btw), but that might not be so important for other people.
LAN is also one of the least likely elements to be implemented (outside of possibly tournament editions) in his entire post, and would also only majorly impact a small portion of the community.
If you were to focus this petition, it should be on something more likely and more widespread. Replay sharing is the one that stands out to me, but clan tags or offrace laddering could work too.
|
I pretty much agree with CecilSunkure's entire post. They make tremendous sense for progamers and lower level players like myself. I will provide my experience to help emphasize how these features need to be added.
Replays
I am trying to have my friends play the game more and raise their skill level. One of the things we do is to review replays of their game but having no way to share and view the same thing is extremely frustrating. First you have to locate the replay and often times they don't even know where to find it to send it. After that I have to tell the time, speed, location of the camera and only then being able to explain/teach. This is very time consuming and often time the people I try to help just give up. A way to share replays in game as well as a multiplayer replay would help tremendously.
Clan Tags:
This is somewhat very minor for me but I would consider it somewhat major for the progamers. I don't have much to add on this subject other than clan names needs to allow special characters. So as CecilSunkure said, a radiobox to select where the tag should appear, a textbox to type in the clan name with brackets if said clan wants brackets and a way to disable them if you don't want to see them.
Matchmaking/Ladder:
This is probably the thing that I mind the less about and I could see this being abused and/or it might split the community even more. Maybe allow the first games of a 12h period to be unranked or to have less impact on your points when winning/losing. But honestly, I don't see this bothering me as a lower level player.
Laddering with offrace:
I am mainly playing zerg and the only reason I don't play the other races is because I would have to lose games for a week straight to go down in the ladder system to be able to play people of my skill level. And if I start playing zerg again I will ruin the games of several people while I move back up the ladder. We already have different ladders when we play with different 2v2 buddies, why can't we get a different ladder when we play a different race in 1v1?
Chat commands:
I currently have no idea how to message people in games other than opening the chat interface which is not very practical in game. IRC-like commands has and will always be the simplest and fastest way to message people without having to go through a less than good GUI.
FFA:
No comments, I don't play FFA but it is kind of surprising this does not have its own ladder.
Map pool:
We need bigger and better maps. You have a community of players that are willing to help out, why not have a few maps enter a rotation every 2 weeks/1 month to help improve and diversify the map pool. Not only will it help the players get better maps but it will also help tournaments be interesting. At the moment I enjoy watching SC1 much more than SC2 games because the maps in BW make it so that you can defend in time if you scout a rush and bigger maps mean you can reinforce an army that was defeated before the other player's army reaches your base. In BW you had a certain back and forth movement while in SC2 it's more of a "whoever wins the first fight automatically wins" scenario since the maps are too small to reinforce your army/build defenses.
Bigger/Better maps = Better/more epic games.
LAN:
No idea why in 2010 we do not have LAN option specially for actual LAN events/tournaments. Not going to add more as what needed to be said was said several times by people who have much better skills at voicing opinions, but know that I do not agree with a LANless game.
Cross-Realm play:
This is my biggest concern. I have friends who bought the game in french (Quebec) and guess what... They are stuck playing on the EU realm. Not only can I not play with friends that live in the same city as I do, but when they try to play there is almost nobody online since it's 2+am local time in europe. My friends play 2v2 and everytime they try and find a match they have to wait several *minutes* to play since nobody plays. Often times they just end up playing the same team all night because there is nobody else playing 2v2.
I will crosspost this to BNET as well.
|
You have a community of players that are willing to help out, why not have a few maps enter a rotation every 2 weeks/1 month to help improve and diversify the map pool.
That would be insane. Nobody would have the chance to actually learn any maps.
Personally, a 6 month rotation makes more sense. Obviously, emergency removals would be necessary, but having a new set of maps show up every 6 months would be good.
The ladder will not, and should not, have dozens of maps available to it. The ladder needs to keep itself down to a reasonable set of maps.
|
The quality of posts on this topic has increased a ton since we started posting. The discussion is actually valuable for Blizzard to read now. I feel that even if what we ask doesn't get implemented now, whenever it is read it will help to assure Blizzard that the plans they have are headed in the right direction. Perhaps what is said can also help expedite the patching process. Good job and keep it up.
|
On December 30 2010 04:43 CecilSunkure wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 04:39 ParasitJonte wrote:
I like your post.
Especially the part about laddering with off-races. However, what I miss there is that some of us want to racepick depending on matchup... This was standard and a non-issue in brood war. Very, very seldom (never happened to me) did you run into an infinite loop:
I see him pick zerg.
I pick protoss.
He picks protoss.
I pick terran.
He picks zerg.
I pick protoss...
Personally I don't want to play PvP. I don't want to play any mirror matchup. It doesn't suit my type of play and it's just boring. My solution was always to play ZvP. My current solution for sc2 is to borrow a friend's account and use Z on that (so I can practice ZvP). But then I have to play a bunch of zergs and terrans! Oh, perhaps it would be reasonable to ask for a preference option on ruling out specific match-up, similar to the current ruling out of specific maps while laddering? I think this is really reasonable, and people did it in Brood War. I'll write a section detailing about that momentarily.
I'm not 100% sure. I think you should have to play all races ~1/3 of the games because otherwise you can abuse the ladder. But race-picking should be totally fine.
|
I agree with it . I would as myself really like clan support in Starcraft 2 of having a clan with people in it . I would also really LOVE laddering with an off race . This would make me a high diamond toss player and maybe a low diamond terran player instead of losing 20 games straight in a row .
|
On December 30 2010 05:02 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +However, what I miss there is that some of us want to racepick depending on matchup... The ladder is supposed to be a very specific kind of environment. You shouldn't get to say that you don't want to play a certain matchup. If you want that, if you want to play certain matchups or not play others, then you should play a custom game.
Yes. That is why I don't agree on say "voting down" all zerg matchups in some preference section.
But I do think you should be able to play, like I said, PvT, PvZ and ZvP. Because then you're playing versus all races.
This is about who is better at the game. There is no rule, official or inofficial, that says you can't race pick and it was quite common before. I remember SaFT winning WCG Sweden through his ability to pick race depending on map and opposition.
|
On December 30 2010 05:17 Stropheum wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 04:43 CecilSunkure wrote:On December 30 2010 04:39 ParasitJonte wrote:
I like your post.
Especially the part about laddering with off-races. However, what I miss there is that some of us want to racepick depending on matchup... This was standard and a non-issue in brood war. Very, very seldom (never happened to me) did you run into an infinite loop:
I see him pick zerg.
I pick protoss.
He picks protoss.
I pick terran.
He picks zerg.
I pick protoss...
Personally I don't want to play PvP. I don't want to play any mirror matchup. It doesn't suit my type of play and it's just boring. My solution was always to play ZvP. My current solution for sc2 is to borrow a friend's account and use Z on that (so I can practice ZvP). But then I have to play a bunch of zergs and terrans! Oh, perhaps it would be reasonable to ask for a preference option on ruling out specific match-up, similar to the current ruling out of specific maps while laddering? I think this is really reasonable, and people did it in Brood War. I'll write a section detailing about that momentarily. I think the race voting might be useful in custom matches, but it could skew ladder results, and I think that's why bliz might not consider this as strongly. If you're REALLY good ZvT, but are weak vs. protoss and terran, then you can just ZvT all day every day and not worry about your weak points. Also you have to put in less effort than other ladder players practicing all their matchups
See my other posts.
|
I don't want a matchmaking system that isn't ranked, nor do I care about laddering with offraces so no, I wont be supporting this. Blizzard already knows we want the replay features and clan functionality.
|
awesome ideas ^^ when i get home i'll "like" it on the blizznewb forums. too all the negative feedback ppl that are posting.. if u dont have anything creative to add to the OP no one wants to hear it. stop trolling. no one cares if u think blizzard wont do anything. do you honestly think blizzard doesnt like hearing good ideas for future implementation. heck we are doing there jobs for them.
edit: also if u DONT like the ideas so what.. whats wrong with options?? options are good
|
On December 31 2010 05:12 Wr3k wrote:
I don't want a matchmaking system that isn't ranked, nor do I care about laddering with offraces so no, I wont be supporting this. Blizzard already knows we want the replay features and clan functionality.
You don't care. Others may care.
I hope you mean that you're just prioritizing other features.....
|
I don't agree with the people saying they want matchup preferences in ladder.
The ladder should be a competitive environment, you shouldn't be able to chose anything to your strengths and likings. I don't necessarily even am a big fan of mapvoting, if all maps were atleast reasonably acceptable for all races (which, in due time, they really should be), so right now I agree that it is a necessity.
Also, there shouldn't be a need for a unranked match button when they make customgame join better again, based on lobbies and custom game hosting with names (Like WC3 or an approved version of that), where people could just host a game named "Practice ZvP, I am Z, diamond 2k+) or whatever. Think about it, you want the system to match you based on your MMR by playing games that you don't want to count to MMR, it will give you skillwise unmatched opponents really fast and wouldn't be worth the effort.
Cross Realm play also shouldn't be a problem. Just give me an option to chose the Server at the start of the game. Hell, I don't care if I even can ladder on another server, just let me play customs with my friends, participate in foreign tournments and get/give coaching without buying the game AGAIN.
|
Nice post, one main thing I found issue with was this sentence:
"This is extremely simple and is a very low-risk high-benefit change that could be implemented in a very small patch"
I don't think you can make that presumption on requirements to change features in a complex video game like SC2. Who knows how long it could take to implement a design change and do the required coding etc... It could be very small or very large, but still it might be a "small" patch in the sense of what is updated but could take a very long time to actually implement.
|
only thing i want is cross realm play, and replay hosting, and of course better map pool
the rest is kinda meaningless really, FFA doesnt need to be ranked
|
Completely agree with all of this.
Completely unlikely you'll be taken seriously by Blizzard.
|
I thought this was going to be a qq thread about ht feedback ability.
I agree players need the ability to host their own games in public servers. Custom games blow because only the popular ones are the ones being played and none of the new games are really being promoted.
|
On December 31 2010 08:25 QuackWare wrote:
Nice post, one main thing I found issue with was this sentence:
"This is extremely simple and is a very low-risk high-benefit change that could be implemented in a very small patch"
I don't think you can make that presumption on requirements to change features in a complex video game like SC2. Who knows how long it could take to implement a design change and do the required coding etc... It could be very small or very large, but still it might be a "small" patch in the sense of what is updated but could take a very long time to actually implement.
Perhaps, but I am attending DigiPen for game programming, so I think my opinion on that matter would have a bit of merit to it 
|
On December 30 2010 09:47 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +You have a community of players that are willing to help out, why not have a few maps enter a rotation every 2 weeks/1 month to help improve and diversify the map pool. That would be insane. Nobody would have the chance to actually learn any maps. Personally, a 6 month rotation makes more sense. Obviously, emergency removals would be necessary, but having a new set of maps show up every 6 months would be good. The ladder will not, and should not, have dozens of maps available to it. The ladder needs to keep itself down to a reasonable set of maps.
I'm not saying switch all the maps every week here. You have a map pool that has X maps, every month rotate one map out that might not be good or just has run for several months already. So maps will run several months before being rotated out. Kind of like ICCup is doing it (I think). That way, instead of having a whole set of new maps delivered in one "patch" and having screwed up ladder experience for several days/weeks, you'll have somewhat stable ladder experience except for that one new map.
Hope you understand what I mean and I hope it makes sense ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
