|
I personally like the ladder/matchmaking system, and as people point out it certainly is possible to find practice partners after a good ladder match or on the practice partner retail thread.
The lack of control over matchmaking on the ladder is good, your ladder ranking is an unbiased measure of your skill at the game of Starcraft 2. If you could control the map and matchup you would play on the ladder, some people would just stick to their best matchup and map, and their ladder ranking would not be a measure of their overall skill at SC2.
One feature that Blizzard could implement on Bnet 2.0 that would make competitive SC2 more accessible would be a practice matchmaking system. You could specify the matchup you are looking to practice along with a map (or not specify anything), and then the matchmaking system would pit you against another person who wanted the same matchup on the same map.
Of course, then you can only get so specific with what you want to practice. You can't get all the practice you really need out of a system like this. At some point if a certain build is giving you a lot of trouble, you really need to have a specific practice partner who can do that build against you over and over until you have figured out a good solution.
An alternative to 'practice matchmaking' would be to improve the way you search for custom games. It would be cool if you could filter based on map, matchup, or even ladder ranking. I don't even understand the way it works now.
Right now, the onus is on the player to set up practice partners and practice games.
|
I wonder why there is such a huge factor with maps for sc2, than bw. People played Hunter, LT, Python for years on bw.
There was always new and interesting maps, but the majority of players played on those maps for the majority of the time and still play to this very day.
|
On February 12 2011 22:39 shaladdle wrote:The lack of control over matchmaking on the ladder is good, your ladder ranking is an unbiased measure of your skill at the game of Starcraft 2. If you could control the map and matchup you would play on the ladder, some people would just stick to their best matchup and map, and their ladder ranking would not be a measure of their overall skill at SC2.
You could design a system that gives diminishing returns on points for playing the same match-up and map over and over again. That way if you want to practice on something specific it's still possible, but if you want to be on top of the ladder you'll have to play properly.
|
The matchmaking is incredible. I can instantly find an even matchup just by hitting one button. Also I love people not having the choice of maps, because you would just see people constantly play Python and nothing else in BW. Also if you could pick your opponent people would be using it to game the system
SUmmary - your friend can do everything he said he wanted to do in custom games. The only issue is that the GSL maps should definitely be on the ladder
|
On February 12 2011 19:36 blith wrote:
Wow, I agree with so many things in this post.
I mean battle 2.0 seems like more of a downgrade then an upgrade.
no cross realm play,
no lan,
no clan system,
even chat took a while to implement.
Clan war function woulda be great,
change of map pool- as u mentioned
I just don't see how they are "supporting E-sports"...
Word.
Its amazing how Blizzard delayed the release of this game and the beta because of BNET2.0.
When in reality, it is significantly worse than its original version.
Activision bro, ruining everything.
|
people constantly whine about things like no maps when right now the balance of the game is top priority. Putting out new maps dosn't solve anything right now being as custom games give you tons of maps to play anyways. Just typing iccup in the custom games will give you tons of maps. Right now let Blizzard worry about balance and then things like maps will come. SC1/Broodwar wasn't balanced in a day, yet people seem to expect SC2 to be released as such.
|
On February 12 2011 23:19 IamAnton wrote:
people constantly whine about things like no maps when right now the balance of the game is top priority. Putting out new maps dosn't solve anything right now being as custom games give you tons of maps to play anyways. Just typing iccup in the custom games will give you tons of maps. Right now let Blizzard worry about balance and then things like maps will come. SC1/Broodwar wasn't balanced in a day, yet people seem to expect SC2 to be released as such.
The problem with this post is really that map design ties directly into game balance. If you're balancing the game around horrible maps, the game is not going to be balanced for good maps.
|
You should add a poll to your OP and ask if we think that Blizz is hurting the ladder.
One of the reasons BW has retained its popularity is because most games tend to be long macro games with plenty of action and interesting tactics. There are multiple battles/harassment going on around the map since the maps are HUGE. Games in general are just better in my opinion because of the bigger maps.
Now Blizz would be doing themselves a favor in trying to replicate the same type of experience that both the players and the audience gets in SC2 as they did in BW if they want to try and make their game last for a long time and draw a lot of the BW spectators from BW to SC2.
I think that by trying to recreate the same type of play style in SC2 as there is in BW it would boost the popularity of SC2 not only in Korea but everywhere.
|
If people had the choice to pick maps, they would pick the map that benefited their race the most: there would be a flood of "TvZ Steppes" or "ZvX Shakuras" etc.. and then the ladder would be even more messed up than it is now. Climbing ladder playing only a specific MU isn't going to help the ladder, and if you thought the ladder was broken anyway, then why not go play customs? You can pick any map you want, play vs any race you want..
|
The laddar isn't the problem - Brood War is simply a much better game. Games are decided by skill to a much greater extent. I feel that Sc2 games are much more often decided by imbalance, spawning positions and build orders. Not because the game is imbalanced (well, not JUST because the game is imbalanced) but because micro and macro in a lot of situations (early game) is too easy and advantages not related to skill are allowed to decide the game.
|
On February 12 2011 23:30 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2011 23:19 IamAnton wrote:
people constantly whine about things like no maps when right now the balance of the game is top priority. Putting out new maps dosn't solve anything right now being as custom games give you tons of maps to play anyways. Just typing iccup in the custom games will give you tons of maps. Right now let Blizzard worry about balance and then things like maps will come. SC1/Broodwar wasn't balanced in a day, yet people seem to expect SC2 to be released as such. The problem with this post is really that map design ties directly into game balance. If you're balancing the game around horrible maps, the game is not going to be balanced for good maps.
the game should be balanced around all variations of maps, not just python. and thats what the current map pool does.
|
No cross realm is literally the worst part about this new bnet,usually when someone is tired of 1v1ing on the same server due to whatever reasons(cheese/bad attitude/no competition), they can't try out another one to learn more or get interested in the game again, unless they want to fork out money for another copy, which is ridiculous. Even then foreigners have literally no chance of buying a Korean copy of the game unless they have some sort of Korea contact willing to let them use their ID number to buy the game.
This is going to be a big problem in for the community years after the last expansion, when there are fewer players dedicated to the competitive aspect of SC2, but for now Blizzard just won't care. This was what happened to BW and WC3 but they survived because those games allow international competitions across multiple ladder realms.
|
You're mad you have to.... learn to play on a myriad of maps against random opponents... As opposed to running the same map and same matchup over and over...
How is that not stagnant. SC2 has so many strategies that work, it's a lot of build order losses and slight economic gains.
People that complain, no offense here, all seem to be lower level players. It's silly. Check iccup page at top BW players. It's like 75% of games on 1 map. That's it.
Not to mention these new iccup maps that are HUGE with small chokes, massive middle grounds, and no towers aren't SC2 maps... they're bitchy zerg player maps that want to play BW2 not SC2. The new maps I've seen and played are so horrible to me.
Also -- it's not even been out a year... lol SC2 is very very new still.
I love everyone bitching for new maps. So you can cheese and not have to play SC2 the way it's meant to be played, and play it like broodwar? There's a myriad of maps, and each has specific builds and strategies you can run, and not run. The better you get, you learn that. And you stop trying to 15 hatch on delta quadrant, or 1-1-1 on scrap vs a 3 gate vr toss.
In short -- learn to play the game. Stop taking some 'friends' (fake) words for the reason the game is 'bad' The game is great. Get goood, and have practice partners, and play on those maps you want. Simple as that. Ladder can't institute new maps that haven't been played on massively, because all that does it cause new imbalances and people get mad that you can't win xxx on xxx map. Ladder is meant to be competitive. The map pool is just fine for how long the game is out.
People don't like backdoors. Or the cliffs and rocks on kulas. Or the towers to sight maps and rushes. It's the way to game is meant. Backdoors and cliffs add a dynamic to the game. Zergs hate LT because a thor drop? Play a good zerg. I thor drop, they roach drop my main and win in 9 minutes.
In short -- I think it's a low level player complaining problem. People that play professionally? Sure, I can see them getting tired of the maps as they've all played 5000+ games. For me, average 2800 master level joe with under 600 solo games -- I love it.
|
On February 12 2011 19:52 Zionner wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2011 19:45 Tedde93 wrote:
Last i checked BW didn't have ladder, so you played customs games, OH wait i just remembered something you can still do that. . . If you wanna practice against a certain race on a certain map play custom games with a friend. . . Right... and if you are a player in the masters league, and all your friends are in the gold league...how in any sense, would playing custom games with them be helpful?
Custom games is also retarded. If you host on a map that isnt popular no one can see it.
Basically yes, 2 worst things in sc2 is custom games by popularity (i mean...join should be joining someone's game...) and the ladder that doesn't tell how good you are...
|
The ladder does tell how good you are. Just hold it with a grain of salt. Looking for people around your level? There are threads for that. Or, ladder, and people you enjoy'ed games with, or the race you need practice with, you ask them to add you.
Most of my practice partners are from 2.3-3.2k masters, and I'm only 2.8. Stop being whiney, and make an attempt to find people at your level to play with. Simple as that.
No cross realm is literally the worst part about this new bnet,usually when someone is tired of 1v1ing on the same server due to whatever reasons(cheese/bad attitude/no competition), they can't try out another one to learn more or get interested in the game again, unless they want to fork out money for another copy, which is ridiculous. Even then foreigners have literally no chance of buying a Korean copy of the game unless they have some sort of Korea contact willing to let them use their ID number to buy the game.
Again... How many times in a row do you really lose to cheese? If you're any good, it's a sliding scale. Unless you play the SAME person over and over, no two people run the same game the same way. Again, I fall back to, in my mind, low level players that take no strides to learn. They copy builds they see, the greedy greedy econ builds we all run at higher levels (usually) and can't seem to understand why they lose to a mm rush, or a 4 gate, or a 7RR into slings. Well, duh. You have no leg to stand on with game play. You're a copy cat, and you have no mechanics to make you able to over come a build order loss like going 1 rax fe vs a 4 gate.
What you want is to be able to smurf, and dominate low level players to make yourself feel good that you can beat a platinum player with mass reapers. This 1 name per account is golden. It forces people to stick to one name or buy another (only reason is for another realm, otherwise you're kinda sad IMO) I was the KING of smurfs in TFT. Never had a 150 win icon, ever. Now, this system changed it all for me. Started in gold, about 20 games I'm diamond. Learn to play the game and not base off replays or tournaments and professional players for your own opinions. If you suck, admit you suck. Don't say it's the game or the maps or the imbalance.
Also -- fucking cheese. What is cheese? Something you lose to is ALWAYS cheese to people. Cheese is a 6 pool. A proxy 4 gate. Proxy VRs. Proxy barracks marine scv all in. It's a game winning or losing strat with no way out if it's countered or scouted. That's cheese.
A plain cut and dry 4 gate is by no means cheese. It's a stong strategy that with scouting, is even still hard to hold off. The 3 roach -> sling rush vs toss isn't cheese, it's a well timed and executed all in attack that wins because you try to play greedy and they make you pay for it.
RANT RANT RANT
Sorry.
|
I agree with almost everything your friends said, I dont ladder cause its... well, i just dont feel like doing it. Its like doing homework... i have to, but i dont want to. I cannot play against an specific race cause in the chat everyone is quiet (which is scary) and you are forced to play against random races in random maps all the time.
|
On February 12 2011 19:26 Arisen wrote:
"Maps," my friend continued on "aren't even the only problem. Why can't I choose to play on metalopolis, instead of getting a random map? Why Can't I choose to play vs. Terran instead of vs a random race? In Brood War, I'd spend entire practice sessions on specific maps on a specific matchup I was having trouble with, and it lead to interesting play.
You can. It's called "go into a chat room and call out for practice partners". Maybe Blizzard can consider an option for custom games which allows you to filter potential opponents by rating and race. Elsewise, it's fine. The ladder is about rating the player base under equal conditions. Cherrypicking individual matchups doesn't allow the ladder to do that.
On February 12 2011 19:26 Arisen wrote:
"Why," he exclaimed "can I only have one account per game? If I'm a competitive player vying for top 200 and I want to play around with protoss on the ladder, I'm risking allot of points. Why can't I just have a separate account? What if I'm having allot of problems with a specific map, and I'm really struggling with zvp on one of these new maps that blizz puts out, what am I going to do? Suck it up and get my ass handed to me a bunch? In BW I'd reset my account, play against some D players and really find some timings that I could abuse at those higher levels without being worried all the time about all the stuff those better players could do to me."
The lack of more than one account is an issue on its own that needs to be resolved. And no, I don't really consider "allowing players to buy a second 'account' for their Blizzard game account" that answer.
|
Keeping in line with tournament maps I can get behind, but being able to pick map+match up in a ladder match would be a terrible idea and should be stuck with custom games.
|
I feel like allot of people are just ignoring the basic premise behind the specific map/race point. The point isn't to play only metalopolis all the time because it's my best map, the point is to create unique styles of play based on a map and perfect it through the ladder, as well as to provide specific practice in a competitive setting. It's almost impossible to do this with practice partners as developing a build that is effective requires you to play against multiple stratagies to see if the build can handle them in a competitive setting betwixt a large range in skills (create against worse players, perfect among strong players).
As to the people saying that you'd end up with a ton of ZvX on Shakuras/Scrap, PvX on steppes, etc, how is that any different from now? Esentially the map pool atm is Metal, Shakuras (maybe). LT (maybe) blistering sands, and xel'naga. Why? Because those are the only maps not completely thumbed down by a race (and in the case of LT and Shakuras, many do). I don't know a zerg who doesn't have Steppes and Delta thumbed down, and as a result, you don't see games v zerg there almost at all.
|
I must be misreading some of these posts because it looks like you guys want to pick what matchup you play on ladder... which obviously defeats the whole purpose of ladder.
Edit: to the post above me, doesn't it really lower the integrity of the ladder if you allow people to choose what map and what race they play against?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
