EPT2. Yes, people hate the maps. I, personally, don't thumb down anything, because winning as zerg on steppes or delta makes me feel like a badass. But we've been hearing this for a while, from everyone. Sooner or later blizzard will give us awesome maps like Crevasse and Terminus
Is the Blizzard Ladder Hurting SC2? - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Ghost Prototype
United States20 Posts
2. Yes, people hate the maps. I, personally, don't thumb down anything, because winning as zerg on steppes or delta makes me feel like a badass. But we've been hearing this for a while, from everyone. Sooner or later blizzard will give us awesome maps like Crevasse and Terminus | ||
IntoTheWow
is awesome32269 Posts
On February 12 2011 19:51 Resolve wrote: I think the ladder is fine (except maybe the map-pool), it would be lame for it to be called a "ladder" if you can choose your match-up and map... people would just choose the match-up they're best at and the maps most advantageous to their race if they wanted to gain points in the ladder | ||
|
limonovich
England226 Posts
At the end of the day, no one is forcing you to ladder. If you hate the ladder system so much go create a league where you look for opponents yourself or just deal with it. | ||
|
101toss
3232 Posts
I will laugh when this game finally gets cracked and private servers can be used. DRM and closed sourcing hurt SC2, there's no denying it. It'll be like Spore, where the hacked versions will be more flexible and better compared to legitimate copies. Blizzard/Activision killed themselves trying to combat piracy. Also, just the sheer amount of apologists here on TL, wow. "Omg blizz is trying hard as they can" and "u cant build bnet 2.0 in a day". Companies get graded on results, not effort. And so far, they have failed to deliver. This shitty, memory-leak ridden interface is precisely why I will not purchase Diablo III. Alt-tabbing is glitchy. Maps encourage 1/2base all-ins. Blizz didn't include clan chats until overwhelming complaints. Even then, it's buggy as hell. When people say "shut up blizzard can't build this in a day, look at BW", well guess what? It's no longer 1997, when feedback is scarce and resources are limited. It is 2011, with feedback like this everywhere. Blizzard even has the previous interface in BW! Is it that hard to just recycle the old bnet? Blizzard even managed to fuck up custom maps! Issues with custom maps: -Popularity system is bugged (used to cap at 18 hours due to short integer mistake, noob programming by blizzard) -No search function: If I want to play nexus word wars, I have to scroll past 80 pages of "Lagless 1M zealots" and other trashy maps -"See more" function: If I want to go to a less "popular" map, I have to keep pressing this button, instead of just scrolling down, issue is compounded by lack of search feature -No titles (i.e. no NR20 anymore) -Autocountdown-What's worse is when you get trapped, when your opponent quits and the game starts up with only you in the lobby. Complemented by the inability to boot people in games you are hosting and start the game at your own volition -No LAN: random drops due to bnet's shitty server happen all the time. Issues with Ladder: -Region locked -MMR/Points system is confusing, you'll never know how truly skilled you are. I can mass games and have more points than idra while lacking his skill -Leagues are broken: Massive disparity between low and high masters (kinda like D to D+ lol) -Unreliable server=frequent drops for no reason -Poorly matched opponents -No customization, instead only play on blizzard's shitty 1/2base maps Issues with Blizzard: -Greedy -Noob programmers -Don't give a shit about feedback -Caters to casual players, not hardcore players. After all, casual players probably don't know much about clan chats and map issues anyways -Feedback on forums goes silenced, marked as "trolling" -No longer the same company I won't even go into gameplay/balance... If we want a change, I suppose we'll all have to boycott the expansion packs (but that's not going to happen, is it?) | ||
|
FrostOtter
United States537 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:06 Arisen wrote: I just feel that blizzard should have been building on the successes of iCCup, not the failures of Bnet 1.0. Why would Blizzard copy the model of something thousands of people played over the model of something millions of people played? | ||
|
HudsonK
China172 Posts
| ||
|
Arisen
United States2382 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:28 idonthinksobro wrote: 1. everyone avoided mirrors, everyone only played 1 of the featured maps. That was quite horrible in BW, it was so incredible hard to find someone willing to ZvZ on iccup. Also it was quite hard to get a game on monthy hall because noone like that map. I think its a good Idea that you cannot choose your matchup also its a good idea that you cant only play on specific maps/mu - just think about terrans only playing vs Z on steppes of war. 2. Another huge ass problem in BW were smurf accounts, think back if you ever player BW D tournaments were a lot harder than C-C+ tournaments were just because you could make an account within a minute. Yes i agree that there should be 3 different rankings for each race one (random counts to the race u spawned as) so you can easily offrace without your top position endangered. 3. Blizzard wont ever charge anything for lan latency or map packs - thats not like blizzard works. They rather charge horrific amounts for an expansion pack to give you 1 more units in multiplayer. 1. That's why I'm suggesting a dual system, where you could participate in one or the other, or either. As it is, though, it's very hard to get good practice on a specific map using custom games (no lobbies, named games, etc), and near impossible on the ladder, as you'll most certainly not get the same match/matchup multiple times in a row on ladder, where you can be sure you're playing someone on your general skill level and facing diverse play. 2. I'm not saying smurfs weren't a problem, but not being able to drop your level down to practice and perfect a new style of play is also a problem, as this is where allot of great strategies came from in BW. 3. Do you work for Blizzard, and can put that in writing? Have you seen some of the things they charge money for in World of Warcraft? Did you know there are allot of people who are already asking for a new copy of star2 with LAN latency and are willing to pay for it? | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:36 FrostOtter wrote: Why would Blizzard copy the model of something thousands of people played over the model of something millions of people played? Because popularity =/= quality. And the fact that most people who ever played BW never even heard of iccup and played nothing more then custom UMS on bnet 1.0 | ||
|
RevRich
United States218 Posts
| ||
|
sOAvoid
Canada206 Posts
| ||
|
Sein
United States1811 Posts
Stagnant/Imbalanced map pool and Blizzard's stubbornness over it - Agreed. "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 couldn't do the exact same thing ZvT on python as you could ZvT on Fighting Spirit. The way the ladder itself was structured led to more interesting plays based on maps. Do you know how hard it is to develop a specific style on a specific map in star2 without a lot of very good practice partners? You have to pray that map/match up comes up on the random ladder to get some practice." This one I disagree. The ladder system was constructed to rank people based on their overall abilities and although it has its flaws like the bonus pool and people just brute massing games their way to the top, it's a whole lot more reliable than if it lets you choose specifically which map you want to play on and which race you want to play against. Should I be able to choose to play every single ladder game on Steppes of War TvZ? On that note, I do think that they should allow which race you want to play against in random custom games. I don't like the current map popularity system. "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." Another good set of points, I thought. Allot of people would disagree with the last point, as the whole "smurfing problem" could get out of hand, but to be honest, I think that resetting your account to find these holes and timings you could abuse was such a good way to improve in BW (listen to Day9's old podcast named "Why You should play against worse players") for an overview of the concept. Just find a few practice partners. It's been much easier to do since the chat channels were implemented and things like 1v1 obs games became popular. I would indeed be concerned about the smurfing getting out of hand and I think the cons outweigh the pros if you allow for multiple accounts. One suggestion I have for Blizzard on this issue is maybe creating a separate "ladder" system where you don't gain or lose any points, but maintain a separate MMR, so that you get consistently matched up with people around your skill of whatever race you are practicing. "It seems," he concluded, "they're just trying to create a situation where they can ream the game for as much money as it's worth. People will clamor for LAN latency for months, then they'll come along and say 'good news, we'll be releasing a patch that implements LAN latency...for a fee'. They'll start selling map packs, or whatever they can get away with. I hope I'm wrong, but that just seems the direction things are going, and if that's the case, I'm fine with going back to BW." It is really too bad that there is no LAN, but I'm sure Blizzard will not budge an inch on this issue because Activision really wants an absolute control over their game and not allowing LAN is one way to reduce piracy. Notice I said reduce, not completely prevent. | ||
|
Arisen
United States2382 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:36 FrostOtter wrote: Why would Blizzard copy the model of something thousands of people played over the model of something millions of people played? Because that thing thousands of players played was what was left after 13 years of trial and error? Sure, more people played in bnet 1.0 because that's when the game was new/popular. When the actual fans of BW kept playing, the dumped Bnet as soon as possible. Why would they if bnet1.0 was a superior system to custom ladders? | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
I'm also heartbroken about the loss of players on iCCup. </3 | ||
|
DoubleReed
United States4130 Posts
Though I honestly don't expect major changes to bnet before HotS... | ||
|
Arisen
United States2382 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:43 Sein wrote: This one I disagree. The ladder system was constructed to rank people based on their overall abilities and although it has its flaws like the bonus pool and people just brute massing games their way to the top, it's a whole lot more reliable than if it lets you choose specifically which map you want to play on and which race you want to play against. Should I be able to choose to play every single ladder game on Steppes of War TvZ? Why not? If that's the map/match up you like to play, go for it. Good luck finding more than 2 or 3 zergs who will play you on steppes though. At the end of the day, things like maps of the week prevent someone who only plays one match up on a certain map from getting to the top, as well as the community. If that one guy is just godly at this match/match up, but that's all he does, you'll just see players not play him, and he'll be forced to diversify. | ||
|
nalgene
Canada2153 Posts
the irc format would be good for bnet 2.0 or one that looks like mirc the interface doesn't look pretty in bnet 2.0 there's no /w /f l /f m commands | ||
|
charlie420247
United States692 Posts
maps will come in time PLAY CUSTOM GAMES!!!!!!!!!!!!! | ||
|
charlie420247
United States692 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:50 IntoTheheart wrote: I don't know if any of you guys or gals (or both) have had the same problem, but my friend and I are in bronze 2v2 and somehow we get pitted against Plat/Diamond ranked players frequently. I only really feel that they should have a more balanced way of deciding teams for 2v2. I'm also heartbroken about the loss of players on iCCup. </3 your mmr is mostly likely equal to that of a plat/diamond player and you just havnt played enough 2v2 games to be propperly placed. i mean this is pretty obvious. also..... about iccup, maybe if you love it, you should just let it die peacefully. and if it comes back then cherish it, but if not. then that is that. | ||
|
charlie420247
United States692 Posts
On February 13 2011 03:31 Ghost Prototype wrote: 1. The game is super new, I'm quite certain there are countless things people aren't even trying yet because they're too stuck on copying the brutal korean builds (read as "14 expand", "gas pool for ling speed", "4gate", and "Marine expand") to try similarly brutal things like infestor ling drops (this kills mineral lines faaaaast). 2. Yes, people hate the maps. I, personally, don't thumb down anything, because winning as zerg on steppes or delta makes me feel like a badass. But we've been hearing this for a while, from everyone. Sooner or later blizzard will give us awesome maps like Crevasse and Terminus agreed, its just too bad crevasse and terminus arnt that badass lol well i guess well see what they have in store. | ||
|
101toss
3232 Posts
| ||
| ||
