EPTStarCraft 2 Leveling system: your input needed! - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
AirbladeOrange
United States2573 Posts
| ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:09 Divergence wrote: One thing that distinguishes SC2 from WoW is that in WoW nearly every minute of time you put into grinding will reward you in some way. Even if you are really lazy, you will still gain XP if you kill mobs. In SC, merely putting in time is not enough to make you better. You have the put in quality time. I can see how this deters players from the game. Nobody wants to feel like their effort is resulting in nothing. To try and capture that essence of WoW in attempt draw players into SC2 would be nice, but I don't think its the right way to approach this game. Not everyone is "made" to play SC2; we shouldn't deceive players with "fancy" rewards if SC2 is not the game for them. After a while people will realize that these rewards are just a gimmick (like achievements) and Blizzard will be faced with the task of adding more new and exciting "content" (something I don't want them to spend their time on as I would prefer they devote that money towards improving balance). Don't get me wrong. I think this could draw some players into the game, but I think it would be only temporary. Once the "max level" is reached either the player will have developed an appreciation for the game (which would be great!), or they will just become bored that their grind is over and leave for another game (which I think is more likely). I think we just have to accept that RTS is not the most popular genre of game out there (although of course its the best!). As long as Blizzard keeps patching there will be a good enough player pool for competitive play. Very interesting and constructive feedback, I suppose you're right in a sense. Glad you've actually read the post, unlike most of the naysayers so far. The idea that this project and balance are mutually exclusive is arguable, the development team is rather very large. Is it a gimmick? Yeah. Just like achievements, and portraits, and even the precious metal-coded league system. I feel like it could be something that not only helps bring in players, but provides some amount of amusement to that hardcore GM player who has laddered for 5000 games in the past 2 seasons. It doesn't need to be a huge, game changing addition. Small, superficial rewards, provided over time. Not as a means of sustaining the game, but just a feature which makes the game better. It's not so much about providing shiny baubles for players to behold and enjoy. It's like an achievement itself. Something you get by playing, not something you play to get. And it would make the game feel more rewarding. Not in a "FUCK YEAH JUST GOT MY MARINE CUSTOMIZATION OPTIONS!" way, but in a "cool, I can do this now, just because I was playing already". | ||
|
drop271
New Zealand286 Posts
edit: also, why not just give us a ladder system based on our actual MMR so that laddering means something! My issue is that league promotion is the only reward based on MMR, and it changes very rarely (if at all once you reach your right skill plateau) | ||
|
han_han
United States205 Posts
Starcraft is a skill-based game. Unlike WoW, level cannot and should not dictate whether or not you win or lose in a fight. In WoW, a relatively new player who got his first character power leveld to 85 can steamroll an alt of a veteran player at level 40. In Starcraft, a relatively new player who made his way up to Diamond since release cannot hope to compete with the smurfs of pros. I agree that these nifty things should be provided upon having achieved something, but the truth is: that's how achievements are now. You win X amount of times, get this portrait. You win Y amount of times, get this decal. The only valid suggestions you made (backgrounds etc.) can easily be added into the achievement system somehow. We don't need experience points or anything like that because this is not an RPG. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:14 IcedBacon wrote: Yeah, no one should have any sort of advantage over another player simply because they play a lot. That includes things outside of the game such as an extra map veto. Unit customization is bad, units and buildings need to be as easily distinguishable as possible. Achievements are basically enough for anyone who cares enough to want some kind of reward. Not sure if your graphics are all the way down, but the decals you get for 50000000000 wins as x race are customizations. That's the kind of thing I'm referring to. Not something huge, like my Zealots look like shrubs. That my marines have a new symbol on their armor. | ||
|
MrDudeMan
Canada973 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12621 Posts
Personally I would say rewards like "able to change in-game music" would be awesome. I would love to play zerg with the terran music just for the lol sake. Problem is that I don't know if it would just lead to players going for mass games rather than improving themselves. 1000+games bronze is quite common, even at the small server of SEA. I would prefer Blizzard to include a different league for different race. using me as an example: I am plat in zerg but maybe silver/gold for protoss, but I don't want to drop from plat and so I keep on playing zerg. | ||
|
Ruscour
5233 Posts
| ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:25 Ruscour wrote: Blizzard does not care if casuals stop playing the game until Heart of the Swarm comes out, I'm sure Dustin Browder and Mark Morhaime agree. On July 28 2011 14:25 MrDudeMan wrote: I think a small change like adding a stupid decal to your marine would not be worth it. If people were truly motivated by just that then they would be playing all those games to unlock the pretty portraits. However I agree with you that SC2 is not a rewarding game (unless you are competitive), you get absolutely nothing for losing. I think that possible rewards could be like a in game currency for their upcoming custom game marketplace. I think the rewards would work like if you win a game you get +4 blizzard bucks, but if you lose a game you get -2 blizzard bucks. This way even though people might lose, they get more of a reward for winning so its worth the risk. It also punishes people who demote themselves solely for the purpose of gaining blizzard bucks. That'd be cool. Maybe costly? Hm. | ||
|
Divergence
Canada363 Posts
Quake-like sound effects: When you do certain things in game, like when winning a huge battle, or even something simple like killing a scouting worker the game could play an "epic" sounding sound effect that gets you all pumped up. For example upon killing a scouting worker, some voice goes "SCOUTING DENIED!". Of course your opponent should be able to disable the sound effects. I admit this is kind of tacky, but tbh this whole system is  . It could be problematic to determine when a moment is "sufficiently epic".End game victory music: Song plays when opponent leaves game so you can get up and dance when your one base all-in works. Custom unit voices: Self explanatory. They'd have to be cool sounding. Maybe the option to replace them with BW voices (for appropriate units). Call it "Retro Mode". | ||
|
Le BucheRON
Canada619 Posts
Customizable appearance and special options would be a sweet carrot in front of my donkey cart.  | ||
|
ShatterStorm
Australia146 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:10 bamman1108 wrote: I'd rather not earn rewards in this way. All that does is make you play the game for reasons other than personal enjoyment, and that's never a good thing. The portraits we unlock now are extremely minor rewards, and I don't think unlocks really need to go any further than that. Plus, with an exp system like that, you're going to run into even more of this than you do now: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SD61U.jpg) If a game gets boring, it doesn't mean it needs a shiny new level up system with rewards to keep people playing, because then people will just play it for the rewards even though the game isn't fun. Portrait farmers (and therefore experience farmers) should actually be quite simple to deal with IMO. Simply require that a player see through the whole game to get the reward. If someone joins a team game and quits out, yet his team wins the match anyway, they get their reward but the quitter gets nothing if he quits. In team games it does happen, where one player is hammered with nothing left, but his team goes on to win the game 20 minutes later. I don't expect it reasonable for him to have to sit and wait out the 20 minutes, but if he is in a situation where he has NO buildings left (loss condition normally) then he should be able to quit safely and still see his reward points as normal. It should also be easy enough to register if he is killing his own buildings so that he can quit quickly. Yes, this would "unfairly" punish those who drop due to bad internet, faulty computers or Battle.Net issues... but that should simply be considered an "unfortunate" additional effect of having a bad connection (in addition to actually missing out on being able to play that game) | ||
|
Werk
United States294 Posts
| ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:34 ShatterStorm wrote: Portrait farmers (and therefore experience farmers) should actually be quite simple to deal with IMO. Simply require that a player see through the whole game to get the reward. If someone joins a team game and quits out, yet his team wins the match anyway, they get their reward but the quitter gets nothing if he quits. In team games it does happen, where one player is hammered with nothing left, but his team goes on to win the game 20 minutes later. I don't expect it reasonable for him to have to sit and wait out the 20 minutes, but if he is in a situation where he has NO buildings left (loss condition normally) then he should be able to quit safely and still see his reward points as normal. It should also be easy enough to register if he is killing his own buildings so that he can quit quickly. Yes, this would "unfairly" punish those who drop due to bad internet, faulty computers or Battle.Net issues... but that should simply be considered an "unfortunate" additional effect of having a bad connection (in addition to actually missing out on being able to play that game) :D very well said. | ||
|
Disquiet
Australia628 Posts
| ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:20 Chargelot wrote: Not sure if your graphics are all the way down, but the decals you get for 50000000000 wins as x race are customizations. That's the kind of thing I'm referring to. Not something huge, like my Zealots look like shrubs. That my marines have a new symbol on their armor. I would have to agree with this. Models are not changing. Only a texture is changing. It can be like CSS, the game still has a large playerbase, and modding weapons is allowed in most pugs. It is only disallowed in the competitive scene. In starcraft's case, it could be as simple as having a protoss icon on a zealots chestplate, or a zerg icon on a drone. I don't think anything beyond a texture change is a good idea though. Obviously it's a bit late to add to WoL most likely, however it'd be a fun addition to HoTS. | ||
|
Emporio
United States3069 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:34 ShatterStorm wrote: Portrait farmers (and therefore experience farmers) should actually be quite simple to deal with IMO. Simply require that a player see through the whole game to get the reward. If someone joins a team game and quits out, yet his team wins the match anyway, they get their reward but the quitter gets nothing if he quits. In team games it does happen, where one player is hammered with nothing left, but his team goes on to win the game 20 minutes later. I don't expect it reasonable for him to have to sit and wait out the 20 minutes, but if he is in a situation where he has NO buildings left (loss condition normally) then he should be able to quit safely and still see his reward points as normal. It should also be easy enough to register if he is killing his own buildings so that he can quit quickly. Yes, this would "unfairly" punish those who drop due to bad internet, faulty computers or Battle.Net issues... but that should simply be considered an "unfortunate" additional effect of having a bad connection (in addition to actually missing out on being able to play that game) I don't know if that's a very good example. After all, in a normal team game, everyone leaves before they are eliminated, so technically, everyone except the last person left prematurely. So maybe the solution is to not allow leaving if you leave before the halfway point of however long the game actually takes? But then what if a player legitimately sucks and gets killed right in the beginning? Or in a 3v3 where killing one player quickly is a common strategy? Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with portrait farmers. Really, it doesn't affect other people except when they are on your team and leave, setting you at a disadvantage in the long run. I think the best solution is to just replace a dropped or prematurely leaving player with a computer AI that is ranked according to the MMR of the person it is replacing. So a really bad player would be replaced with an Easy Comp, all the way up to Very Hard (since Insane is cheating). | ||
|
tuestresfat
2555 Posts
in terms of fairness though, it doesn't make sense because a player who plays more isn't necessarily more skilled than someone who plays half the games as him. thats how 3000 bronze players exist. it still sounds kinda cool though, especially since a lot of people don't care too much for portraits, so that approach isn't working. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On July 28 2011 14:36 Amui wrote: I would have to agree with this. Models are not changing. Only a texture is changing. It can be like CSS, the game still has a large playerbase, and modding weapons is allowed in most pugs. It is only disallowed in the competitive scene. In starcraft's case, it could be as simple as having a protoss icon on a zealots chestplate, or a zerg icon on a drone. I don't think anything beyond a texture change is a good idea though. Obviously it's a bit late to add to WoL most likely, however it'd be a fun addition to HoTS. A person who understands. Thanks for finding the words I couldnt. It is just a small little addition. Something the GSL obs guy can zoom in on in the beginning of the game and let Tastosis say "Look at the crazy symbol he chose!" | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
Seriously though, this is a good idea. TL is full of haters of any kind of change. They even seem to think that vetoes ACTUALLY give people an advantage and make a sizable difference in their ladder ranking. Also, I have never heard of a player/spectator confused by CE thors against regular thors. Overall, there's nothing wrong with adding extra incentive to play. Stuff like being able to choose ladder color and add vetoes could do a lot in getting people more involed in ladder and calming some jitters. Right now, if you lose a game, you don't gain a thing. At least XP might push people to overcome that fear to get another veto or get Vikings that shoot fireworks. After the cap out, maybe they'll overcome that overall fear and be good at the same time. It happens a lot in COD. My only change would be to the rate based on league and an addition of points through customs. Bronze should get hardly any points compared to the rest. Custom maps should give a capped daily reward for playing one with 4+ randoms. | ||
| ||
