EPTOn February 15 2012 03:15 Existor wrote:
1v1 is boring and repititive. Team games contains more action and fun
1v1 is boring and repititive. Team games contains more action and fun
This is a strange opinion my friend. I would reverse this.
Nobody Plays 1v1 Ladder Anymore? - Page 37
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
This is a strange opinion my friend. I would reverse this. | ||
|
Adron
Netherlands839 Posts
 ( | ||
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
In team games there are some small random factor, that makes game more fun. Look at SC2;WoL. ZvZ - roach battles. Is it interesting to see? Mutalisk? Queens and spores and roaches win again. ultralisks? Roaches outnumber them! Etc. Games now are divided to 2 groups long macro or fast-paced rush-harass-pressure_to_cancel_expand-games. There mus tbe more variety in gameplay, more strategies, and every must be weak and strong in some terms. Currently there are not that much strategies. | ||
|
TheRealPaciFist
United States1049 Posts
And I know Blizzard wants to encourage or incentivize people to ladder, and I urge them to find more such incentives. However, laddering will always be stressful, because it will always be competitive. That's why we have team games and FFA's (and why I wish we had 2v2v2v2's as well)... but I think they screwed up. Right now we have a ladder with these features: > a hidden MMR that determines who you get matched against, so you have approximately 50% win rate > an outside indicator of your MMR through what league you're in, and a rough indicator through your points The idea behind this? Not showing your exact MMR is supposed to make laddering less stressful, but the outside indicators retains the competitive aspect. But again I say: competition will always make the game more stressful than it is casual, so trying to compromise achieves nothing. Instead, they should have just had two ladders, one competitive and one casual: Ladder #1 > an MMR that determines who you get matched against > outside indicator of your MMR through leagues, points, or even the MMR itself not hidden Ladder #2 > a hidden MMR that determines who you get matched against (not the same MMR as Ladder #1's MMR) > no outside indicator of the MMR at all Ladder #2 would still be able to retain an approximate 50% win rate, but people wouldn't care how well they played on it... and they wouldn't have to wade through the bullshit that comes with joining custom games. | ||
|
YouControlBad
Poland46 Posts
| ||
|
[N3O]r3d33m3r
Germany673 Posts
the statistics are just terrible and after you've won a game you are welcoomed by a tiny window saying "VICTORY". i dunno, make it more fancy looking | ||
|
EtherealDeath
United States8366 Posts
On February 15 2012 05:56 Existor wrote: Yes, always, it'a hard to agree with my opinion after 1-2k of ladder games in 1v1. But you must agree, that there can be more differences in gameplay in RA3, C&C3 (those 2 great RTS games are ruined by developer) other great games, but not in SC2, where start and BO always same in specific match-up. Currently there are 1-2 most effective build orders for each race, and that makes game a bit boring many times. Many games are similar, maybe with some nice action or fast-paced moments, but not that offen. In team games there are some small random factor, that makes game more fun. Look at SC2;WoL. ZvZ - roach battles. Is it interesting to see? Mutalisk? Queens and spores and roaches win again. ultralisks? Roaches outnumber them! Etc. Games now are divided to 2 groups long macro or fast-paced rush-harass-pressure_to_cancel_expand-games. There mus tbe more variety in gameplay, more strategies, and every must be weak and strong in some terms. Currently there are not that much strategies. lol I have so many builds each with many subtle variations, some of which ate reactive and some of which force shit down the other guy. Variation does tend to take more skill in execution in order to work than the average casual has though. | ||
|
bigdbag
3 Posts
The fact of the matter is that in an RTS, there isn't much that you can change on a regular basis. This is why I think suggestions for a faster rotating map pool would be good for the SC2 scene. I would even go as far as to suggest that we have a 2 ladder system like The RealPacifist suggested above me, but on the casual ladder you would have many more units available to you, from single player, as well as constantly introducing new units and abilities from the community custom scene. It would also be a great arena for Blizzard to see if they can implement/tweak/remove abilities in the competitive ladder, based on what they see being done on this casual ladder. I would personally be incredibly excited to play on a casual server when I'm frustrated or on a losing streak, where I can build hydraroaches while my enemy comes at me with firebats, all of this done on a match-making basis based loosely on your skill-level. | ||
|
Spieltor
327 Posts
On February 13 2012 23:05 Silentenigma wrote: Because it is not fun to play against abusers BM ers alliners. Last time I played 99 percent of my games were 1 or 2 base allins(was mid masters).It is almost impossible to play a standard game...I would much rather to play custom games against similar skilled people. thats stupid. Why does "standard game" = macro 200/200 game. Go back to NR20 games in brood war. On the other hand, people all in ALL THE TIME ON KOREA SERVER. People play to win, and choose a strategy they believe will best achieve that. if you learn to defend those all ins, YOU win. | ||
|
Mr Showtime
United States1353 Posts
| ||
|
RageCommodore
Germany912 Posts
| ||
|
Mr Showtime
United States1353 Posts
On February 15 2012 05:47 IPA wrote: This is a strange opinion my friend. I would reverse this. No. That's why it's an opinion. I disagree like you do, but that's why it's his opinion and neither mine nor yours. | ||
|
DreamChaser
1649 Posts
On February 15 2012 05:47 IPA wrote: This is a strange opinion my friend. I would reverse this. Nah i agree, in team games i can do some absurd fuckin builds like Nuke rushes, or go pure infestor. Whats amazing is i might actually win! on top of that playing with people you know is wayyy more fun than playing by yourself and having others look over your shoulder Meanwhile in 1v1 if i tried to do some nuke rush (Main toss) besides not knowing terran very well i would die very quickly to some protoss 2 base collosus timing. | ||
|
Daray
6006 Posts
On February 15 2012 07:04 Spieltor wrote: thats stupid. Why does "standard game" = macro 200/200 game. Go back to NR20 games in brood war. On the other hand, people all in ALL THE TIME ON KOREA SERVER. People play to win, and choose a strategy they believe will best achieve that. if you learn to defend those all ins, YOU win. This is stupid. People can't have wrong opinions on this... you can't tell them 'No you're wrong do this and you'll have fun (or WIN in this case??)!' People play to have fun and if they're not having fun they'll stop playing and apparently the majority has stopped playing 1v1 atleast. | ||
|
thurst0n
United States611 Posts
I am platinum s5 haven't played s6 yet. But have only been playing diamonds the last 15+ games. Winning more than I lose still. I was talking to my friend about this. I feel like overall the system works but I feel like there are diamonds that do this too. I think the system is overall too sticky. My solution was to have a minimum # of games per seasons. maybe 25? Or force 3-5 games at start of each season to get placed again. As others have said its just a pic and #. The system will match | ||
|
KicKDoG
Sweden765 Posts
| ||
OPman
United States131 Posts
Replays are good enough if you really want to go back and look at what you did wrong. Plus there are places like TL and people like Day[9] to help you also. | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
I stopped because the game isn't actually fun to play when it's so massively dominated by that kind of play (I'm mid to high diamond) | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
On February 15 2012 07:16 Daray wrote: This is stupid. People can't have wrong opinions on this... you can't tell them 'No you're wrong do this and you'll have fun (or WIN in this case??)!' People play to have fun and if they're not having fun they'll stop playing and apparently the majority has stopped playing 1v1 atleast. Exactly, I'm not playing to win, I'm playing to have fun. I tried playing to win for a while, did cheese builds for a while and won 75% of the time. Hell, there's the guy that documented his way to GM by doing nothing but 6-pool all-ins (with workers pulled and everything) so it's not an issue of winning. I'll come back once the game isn't entirely dominated by these kind of strats, whether through patches/xpacs or meta-game shifts. | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
| ||
| ||
