EPTAs long as blizzard doesnt balance around team games or FFA i feel they should have the same "rights" as 1v1 and be ranked, and not spawn 3 players on an 8 player map etc.
10 thoughts before my 700th FFA - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Deadlyfish
Denmark1980 Posts
As long as blizzard doesnt balance around team games or FFA i feel they should have the same "rights" as 1v1 and be ranked, and not spawn 3 players on an 8 player map etc. | ||
|
Liveon
Netherlands1083 Posts
On March 16 2011 03:44 Chill wrote: Really interesting. Thank you for writing this up. I'm always interested in hearing about different aspects of the game that I don't myself experience. I agree that FFA should be ranked. There's no reason (except maybe not being able to get a consistent algorithm?) for it not to be ranked. random 4v4 is ranked too, I don't think FFA is very different (well, it is very different ofc, but not in the way you play with random players). So indeed, it should be ranked. | ||
|
Sockpuppet
119 Posts
| ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
| ||
|
Mioraka
Canada1353 Posts
You rarely hit a strong opponent, and winning against cannoning protoss going to carriers just aint that rewarding. However, I agree with most of the things the OP says, especially rush and killing your close spawn opponent-- this is how I win most of my games as zerg. Kill him, then immediately mass expand. Also, i found as a zerg, the only sure way to push your economic advantage is early drone up, and mass banelings, hit terren in the mid game with your banelings to all his buildings, and immediately max out with other units. However, like I said, most of the opponent i get matched with are low tier players. Where this strategy works because they let me mass expand as zerg. And in this case, the diplomatic-- best part about any FFA, just doesn't come to play as much, because the raw skill difference between each players, and you just can't seem to know how good one opponent is until mid game. Allying with a bronze player just aint going to give you that much of an edge. I really miss the ranked FFA too, at least they can match us with more competent players, and then diplomacy will really come into play. | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
I agree with you on the ranked FFA sentiment, I play FFAs when I'm bored and want some casual/epic games. Because it's not ranked though, you routinely get a huge range of player skill in one game, making only one in four or so FFA games actually a good game. I am very surprised terran hasn't started using ravens vs zerg more in 1v1, it's something I've been glad for as a zerg so far, but I fear that it's just that terran isn't being forced to innovate as much in that matchup, as they have a number of strats that already do them well. It may just be the initial build-up-time required to get that raven force mobilized, when they can spend the gas on tanks/medivacs instead. With ranked FFA, you would need to accept you will be losing 75% of your games though, and they would need to make a modified point system to accommodate for that 25% win-rate. | ||
|
oOOoOphidian
United States1402 Posts
| ||
|
Ouga
Finland645 Posts
I played first 400 wins as random with 70% win, then mostly terran and ended up having 80% @ 800win, aka 90% the last 400. This was purely because of zerg, I don't think I had much more than 50-60% win with it and finally realized it was no worth the trouble. There are just too many problems with it - even maxed corruptor armies can't beat all air compositions, and even if you get resources and chance to do that army, you'll die if anyone else hits you once. Well, pretty much as it's in any gametype: zerg only does good if it has 200pop while opponents don't. In FFA everyone are bound to get 200pop. About terran and ravens... well sure they're damn annoying, but definately not the way to play if you want to grind ffa wins  As mentioned I got 90% win% as T, but my avg game length was 20min and it was almost always pure mmm, sometimes tanks/vikings if bio just couldn't cut it. Going ravens means you have to ecowhore way more. Anyway, playing bio feels like you actually do something instead of randomly clicking around with 20apm like with many other ball-compositionsI also noted the neighbour rushing to be good option often. It's very common to always have to be killed your closepos neighbour, thus if you rush yours, you drop a bit in eco compared to others if they expand, but they're forced to fight each others most of the time before they get to you, allowing you to expand freely without making any units after the rushforce. It didn't seem like anyone else understood this when I played in fall :p Diplomacy = crap. You don't need such if you're the better player. If I know someone else rushed someone, I feel it's common courtesy to let him show he can beat me fair by not going after him instantly  The best "backstabbing" I did was catching 6pool lings running around my scout around my base - well 6poolers are often pretty bad players in FFA so they just follow the scout. I take the probe to some opponent's base and 6 lings become his prob  Grudgeholding definately loses games. Afterwards thinking, I'm still happy I sometimes lost games "on purpose" when there were complete egoistic retards who played lame abuse every game. 1basing them down often made me lose the whole game, but it's still worth it because I hate if I lose to these lamers in lategame thinking I could've done different. Typical example of lamers are ppl who mass cannon and did pure speed VRs, that couldn't be caught. They just killed your base if you tried to attack anywhere, which really made the playing idiotic. Good think speed VR got removed | ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
I think blizzard would be able to make a FFA ladder (they had one for War3), I dont really see why they haven't yet. | ||
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
| ||
|
magha
Netherlands427 Posts
On March 16 2011 03:44 Chill wrote: Really interesting. Thank you for writing this up. I'm always interested in hearing about different aspects of the game that I don't myself experience. I agree that FFA should be ranked. There's no reason (except maybe not being able to get a consistent algorithm?) for it not to be ranked. Iirc it was ranked in WC3, but people kept abusing it by teaming up etc. So then Blizzard made it so you couldn't see peoples names, just "Player1" through 4, but that didnt help anything. | ||
|
Darren1337
Ireland73 Posts
| ||
|
Rotodyne
United States2263 Posts
When I play FFAs I try to do insane stuff, I can relate to your view that Ravens are amazing because I played a game where I only made ravens. I almost took out an entire massive fleet of BCCs with only hunter seeker missiles O_O | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
| ||
|
NikonTC
United Kingdom418 Posts
| ||
|
ChaseR
Norway1004 Posts
I do agree with you that only 4P on 5-8P maps suck and tbh it doesn't really feel like a true FFA unless you play on small maps like quicksand which can be pretty fun. I'd still like the option of choosing between 4P or 8P FFA's, I guess it would be harder to find players but 8P would be like utter madness that crashes your computer!!! | ||
|
_Darwin_
United States2374 Posts
On March 16 2011 04:23 emythrel wrote: interesting read, and btw 348 wins in 698 games is EXACTLY 50% not about 50% ;p 348/698 = ?? | ||
|
Ncinerate
172 Posts
On March 16 2011 04:12 Ouga wrote: I think I have to write something here, being likely the first 800win ffa player in the world. I'm glad you posted Ouga - I hadn't run into anyone with more FFA's than myself, so I am impressed to see someone with 800 wins .Zerg is -absolutely- the reason my win percentage is only 50% - many of those games from back when the void ray had STUPID STUPID STUPID damage capacity and super high speed. Hard to beat that as zerg. I've pretty much given up on playing as zerg lately, which has pulled my win rate back up strong (I'd say my win-rates are similar to yours nowadays when playing as T or P, looking at my last 25-30 I'm above 80%). You're just absolutely right here - zerg air can't compete, zerg ground can't compete, and there's a few units out there that totally screw you (thors, ravens, properly used voids, etc). Hearing your average game length is 20 minutes is pretty surprising though. MMM with tanks/vikings if bio doesn't cut it is a fine strategy, but I usually find going for this sort of straight aggression usually lets one person get to a wreck-face unit composition that beats it. I suppose I didn't take it as strongly as I could have (I tend to play longer FFA games) so I'll take your judgement at face value. If you -do- go into lategame, ravens are stupid powerful. I usually handle my midgame with harassments to keep me busy/entertained (blue flame hellion drops are a personal favorite - last game I had 4 hellions in a dropship at the end of the game that EACH had 30+ kills, over 120 kills in that dropship, lol). I also noted the neighbour rushing to be good option often..... It didn't seem like anyone else understood this when I played in fall :p Yeah, plenty of people don't understand FFA mechanics. You see this when they attack a cross-map opponent early, or don't focus on the guy who just killed his neighbor - who is clearly in the lead. This would be more commonly known if we had a ranked ladder system letting better players compete (or giving them reason -to- compete). Diplomacy = crap. You don't need such if you're the better player. If I know someone else rushed someone, I feel it's common courtesy to let him show he can beat me fair by not going after him instantly The best "backstabbing" I did was catching 6pool lings running around my scout around my base - well 6poolers are often pretty bad players in FFA so they just follow the scout. I take the probe to some opponent's base and 6 lings become his prob Eh, I still say diplomacy is worth utilizing. I'm not saying you need to team up every game, but I've had plenty of games where a few words at the right moment changed the whole course of events . It's silly, but the occasional beg for mercy, or directive to attack someone else, or mentioning an opponents gold expansion, can make or break a win. Also, when I mention diplomacy I didn't mean it in an always verbal way. Sometimes you directly help an opponent even without a verbal agreement, simply because it helps you in the long run. I've saved opponents from BIG attacks because they were a buffer between me and the enemy I really wanted dead. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as it were.Grudgeholding definately loses games. Afterwards thinking, I'm still happy I sometimes lost games "on purpose" when there were complete egoistic retards who played lame abuse every game. 1basing them down often made me lose the whole game, but it's still worth it... Yeah, I know, I've lost my fair share of games where I spent my dying breaths completely screwing someone over that pissed me off. It's not the best way to win, but it can be satisfying . | ||
|
QuothTheRaven
United States5524 Posts
0.498567335 | ||
|
LetoAtreides82
United States1188 Posts
On March 16 2011 03:10 Ponyo wrote: wow thats crazy, didn't know so much was in FFA. I've never played a game of FFA. You should, it's a nice break from 1v1 because FFA is so different. | ||
| ||
