|
On June 04 2012 18:05 Kid-Fox wrote:
I think they mixed up the units/buildings in the "build order" tab of previously played matches. Supply depots show up as engineering bays, and SCVs show up as reapers, and then I think orbital command comes up as warpgate. 10engineering bay, 12factory, 15warpgate all the way baby.
The build of gods.
|
The custom game system and UI is a vast improvement over what is currently in game. I still have some minor problems with it, but I think we should focus on getting ladder improved now. Specifically, win/loss ratios, statistics, and a global ladder (or at the least a ladder where it is possible to compare any 2 players).
Here's a post I wrote on the B.net forums:
The new B.net interface is a vast improvement over the current version, and now that the custom game system is good, it's time to fix the ladder system and make this a competitive game again. The problem is the following:The whole division and ladder system does everything possible to hide your true rank and to make it impossible to compare the ranks of players in different divisions. There are no win loss ratios, no global ladder rank, no way to compare the skill of any 2 players, no statistics, and now with patch 1.5 you can't even view the division ladder of other players. Look at how empty the profile page is. There's just the number of games played, and a meaningless division rank that cannot be compared to anything. It literally has no meaning. If I tell you that you're 9th, what does that mean? 9th out of what? 9th compared to who? No one will ever know. To fix this Blizzard needs to:Bring back statistics. Bring back a global ladder or at the very least reveal division tiers so that player ranks are meaningful and comparable. Currently there's no way to tell how good you are, the 5 lowest leagues are meant to contain 20% of the players, but this band is too large and it's not true that it contains 20% of players. An alternative is a percentile, even if it's in multiples of 5. Make ladder competitive and promote competition. Put it on the home page or link to it in the home page. It's the core Starcraft game. Stop removing everything because of "ladder anxiety" and hurt feelings:The removal of win/loss ratios necessarily implies that useful statistics can never be revealed. Reverse this. Blizzard's resolve to appease players with ladder anxiety, to not hurt their feelings, is turning SC2 into a non-competitive game. This is the opposite of what an RTS game should be. The unranked matchmaking that's in HotS will fix ladder anxiety. It's time to stop killing the competitive nature of this game and removing all the systems needed to support competition because of ladder anxiety and hurt feelings. To appeal to casuals, they can even make a system where you always gain another type of point for playing, which can be spent to unlock cosmetic rewards to customize units and even the B.net UI, such as extra backgrounds. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/5589544562
|
I really like the red HP bars for the ennemy. It helps a lot in deathball vs deathball engagements or marines vs marines where the outcome feels somewhat random and you can't predict if this will end in your favor until it's too late. Now you have a sense of losing or winning a fight a lot sooner and you can disengage if needed. Definitely a good option.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fXCPC.jpg)
|
I like this so far. Seems to be an improvement overall, though I'm not entirely happy with some of the graphics they chose for the layout.
|
one question, can you filter your customs game in only "1v1"? cause right now you enter custom game and find the same map like three times in three different speeds :s
|
On June 04 2012 10:49 Kambing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 10:40 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 08:53 Dingobloo wrote:On June 04 2012 07:15 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 04:26 [17]Purple wrote:
Beyond that however, I don't see any issue with why people would actually get peeved with the order of the quickmatches, they really show no significance. Had the game been released with that order instead, would people have gotten peeved about it? That's kinda the point. As you say, it's a completely meaningless change. So why change it? If it means nothing, one way or the other, why bother doing something that isn't making the interface objectively better in any way, shape, or form? The only thing it will do is force people who memorized it one way to do it backwards. Yeah, that annoyance will last for about a day, but still, why do something that will only cause annoyance? It's not something people need to harp on, but this is beta. And the most likely chance of getting it changed back is now. It's an annoyance at best for someone who wants to play 1v1, but it makes all the difference in the world for someone who's just starting out when the default is 4v4. They've never hidden the fact that they intend people to start with team games and work their way towards 1v1. It's an extremely low-impact change for current players, but with a potential benefit for new players, that's the kind of changes people should be happy about, but apparently the fact that new players exist and are affecting their game in any way makes them angry. Why now? They had to re-do a lot of the interface screens anyway so they all made use of their new UI editor tool because it allows them to iterate more quickly on the interface so they took the opportunity to swap the ordering, I don't think it represents a huge shift in their thought process surrounding the game. I've never bought into this notion that people are supposed to play team games and work towards 1v1. Blizzard may not be hiding this idea, but they're certainly not advertising it either. I don't recall them saying anything about suggesting that players play team games for a time. But yes, if that's what they're trying to say (and simply not communicating very well), then the UI change does have some positive benefit to it. That is the idea. Furthermore, your selection "sticks" so you don't have to keep selecting 1v1 to quick match. No change to current players. Encouragement for new players to jump into laddering in a friendlier environment than 1v1.
Great point! And as mentioned before like a million times, you can save different screens to F1-5. So all you have to do is press F1 and click find match. Seems pretty simple to me.
|
On June 04 2012 23:18 TheSwamp wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 10:49 Kambing wrote:On June 04 2012 10:40 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 08:53 Dingobloo wrote:On June 04 2012 07:15 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 04:26 [17]Purple wrote:
Beyond that however, I don't see any issue with why people would actually get peeved with the order of the quickmatches, they really show no significance. Had the game been released with that order instead, would people have gotten peeved about it? That's kinda the point. As you say, it's a completely meaningless change. So why change it? If it means nothing, one way or the other, why bother doing something that isn't making the interface objectively better in any way, shape, or form? The only thing it will do is force people who memorized it one way to do it backwards. Yeah, that annoyance will last for about a day, but still, why do something that will only cause annoyance? It's not something people need to harp on, but this is beta. And the most likely chance of getting it changed back is now. It's an annoyance at best for someone who wants to play 1v1, but it makes all the difference in the world for someone who's just starting out when the default is 4v4. They've never hidden the fact that they intend people to start with team games and work their way towards 1v1. It's an extremely low-impact change for current players, but with a potential benefit for new players, that's the kind of changes people should be happy about, but apparently the fact that new players exist and are affecting their game in any way makes them angry. Why now? They had to re-do a lot of the interface screens anyway so they all made use of their new UI editor tool because it allows them to iterate more quickly on the interface so they took the opportunity to swap the ordering, I don't think it represents a huge shift in their thought process surrounding the game. I've never bought into this notion that people are supposed to play team games and work towards 1v1. Blizzard may not be hiding this idea, but they're certainly not advertising it either. I don't recall them saying anything about suggesting that players play team games for a time. But yes, if that's what they're trying to say (and simply not communicating very well), then the UI change does have some positive benefit to it. That is the idea. Furthermore, your selection "sticks" so you don't have to keep selecting 1v1 to quick match. No change to current players. Encouragement for new players to jump into laddering in a friendlier environment than 1v1. Great point! And as mentioned before like a million times, you can save different screens to F1-5. So all you have to do is press F1 and click find match. Seems pretty simple to me.
I don't like it.
From the perspective of a new player, the ladder games are hidden behind a few menus and there is nothing at all to suggest that "quick match" is the core game.
And given that they find quick match, why should they play 4v4? Team games often lead to frustration because of bad teammates, the game is also not balanced around 4v4.
It also doesn't look right that 1v1 is between 2v2 and FFA.
If they wanted to suggest that new players should start with 4v4, then they should simply add some sort of welcome tour where it guides the players through the menus and some voiceover says that new players should start with 4v4.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
HP bars sizes are still ugly. SC2 is a still game of health bars and counters, not real units. Units just are skins only, that are hidden by HP bar
|
On June 04 2012 08:31 MVega wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 04:26 [17]Purple wrote:On June 04 2012 03:39 Melwach wrote:
I feel a bit cranky when saying this..but I really hate the fact that they changed the order of quickmatch game modes.
Together with the arcade/starcraft partition it just shouts "Casual!" right into my face. WTH is wrong with people, why do people like to classify things into Casual and Hardcore or Competitive or whatever. You are all consumers of the same product called Starcraft and the intentions you have for the product doesn't really change the fact that you paid for it. Beyond that however, I don't see any issue with why people would actually get peeved with the order of the quickmatches, they really show no significance. Had the game been released with that order instead, would people have gotten peeved about it? I wondered about this too ... and the irony is that some of the people complaining about the "Casualness" of it all have LoL sigs - Which is the most casual of the Moba games.
Yes, people would have still complained if it was ordered like that since release.
4, 3, 2, 1 is not a natural ordering. Everything (except for countdowns) are ordered ascendingly, i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4.
|
United Kingdom1381 Posts
I play on low graphics (macbook pro) and its significantly different with the 1.5 update.
The ground textures are much sharper and detailed, which wouldn't be too bad except that I'm noticing significant lag between issuing commands and execution.
Also has anyone else noticed that you can expand a chat window further than what '/max' applies?
|
On June 04 2012 22:28 pimsc2 wrote:I really like the red HP bars for the ennemy. It helps a lot in deathball vs deathball engagements or marines vs marines where the outcome feels somewhat random and you can't predict if this will end in your favor until it's too late. Now you have a sense of losing or winning a fight a lot sooner and you can disengage if needed. Definitely a good option.
I really want the red/green team bars to have a gradient based on damage. For example, full health enemy units are orange and low health enemy units are red. That visual distinction has been very important for me in the past to micro hurt units out of the line of fire. But at the same time, I really like being able to tell my units from my opponents, e.g., ling/bane wars.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On June 04 2012 22:28 pimsc2 wrote:
Purple and other dark colors are still unreadable on minimap.
Also red-HP bars fully counter Changelings.
|
On June 04 2012 23:55 Existor wrote:Purple and other dark colors are still unreadable on minimap. Also red-HP bars fully counter Changelings.
Couldn't a changeling just have a green HP bar?!
|
On June 04 2012 23:31 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 23:18 TheSwamp wrote:On June 04 2012 10:49 Kambing wrote:On June 04 2012 10:40 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 08:53 Dingobloo wrote:On June 04 2012 07:15 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 04:26 [17]Purple wrote:
Beyond that however, I don't see any issue with why people would actually get peeved with the order of the quickmatches, they really show no significance. Had the game been released with that order instead, would people have gotten peeved about it? That's kinda the point. As you say, it's a completely meaningless change. So why change it? If it means nothing, one way or the other, why bother doing something that isn't making the interface objectively better in any way, shape, or form? The only thing it will do is force people who memorized it one way to do it backwards. Yeah, that annoyance will last for about a day, but still, why do something that will only cause annoyance? It's not something people need to harp on, but this is beta. And the most likely chance of getting it changed back is now. It's an annoyance at best for someone who wants to play 1v1, but it makes all the difference in the world for someone who's just starting out when the default is 4v4. They've never hidden the fact that they intend people to start with team games and work their way towards 1v1. It's an extremely low-impact change for current players, but with a potential benefit for new players, that's the kind of changes people should be happy about, but apparently the fact that new players exist and are affecting their game in any way makes them angry. Why now? They had to re-do a lot of the interface screens anyway so they all made use of their new UI editor tool because it allows them to iterate more quickly on the interface so they took the opportunity to swap the ordering, I don't think it represents a huge shift in their thought process surrounding the game. I've never bought into this notion that people are supposed to play team games and work towards 1v1. Blizzard may not be hiding this idea, but they're certainly not advertising it either. I don't recall them saying anything about suggesting that players play team games for a time. But yes, if that's what they're trying to say (and simply not communicating very well), then the UI change does have some positive benefit to it. That is the idea. Furthermore, your selection "sticks" so you don't have to keep selecting 1v1 to quick match. No change to current players. Encouragement for new players to jump into laddering in a friendlier environment than 1v1. Great point! And as mentioned before like a million times, you can save different screens to F1-5. So all you have to do is press F1 and click find match. Seems pretty simple to me. I don't like it. From the perspective of a new player, the ladder games are hidden behind a few menus and there is nothing at all to suggest that "quick match" is the core game. And given that they find quick match, why should they play 4v4? Team games often lead to frustration because of bad teammates, the game is also not balanced around 4v4. It also doesn't look right that 1v1 is between 2v2 and FFA. If they wanted to suggest that new players should start with 4v4, then they should simply add some sort of welcome tour where it guides the players through the menus and some voiceover says that new players should start with 4v4.
They could certainly be more overt about it. However, team games are less stressful for new players since (1) you have three other players to rely on and (2) it makes the game more social. Team games are only really frustrating for players that think they're better than their teammates (which may or may not be true), a trait that players new to the game will likely not possess.
|
On June 04 2012 23:57 JOJOsc2news wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 23:55 Existor wrote:On June 04 2012 22:28 pimsc2 wrote: Purple and other dark colors are still unreadable on minimap. Also red-HP bars fully counter Changelings. Couldn't a changeling just have a green HP bar?!
Impossible.
EDIT: It's a joke, btw. I don't really see the problem with just letting the changeling have a green HP bar...can't be that complicated to do. I mean it's already a unit that changes form, so making it have a different HP bar shouldn't be a challenge either.
|
On June 04 2012 23:58 Kambing wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 23:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 04 2012 23:18 TheSwamp wrote:On June 04 2012 10:49 Kambing wrote:On June 04 2012 10:40 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 08:53 Dingobloo wrote:On June 04 2012 07:15 NicolBolas wrote:On June 04 2012 04:26 [17]Purple wrote:
Beyond that however, I don't see any issue with why people would actually get peeved with the order of the quickmatches, they really show no significance. Had the game been released with that order instead, would people have gotten peeved about it? That's kinda the point. As you say, it's a completely meaningless change. So why change it? If it means nothing, one way or the other, why bother doing something that isn't making the interface objectively better in any way, shape, or form? The only thing it will do is force people who memorized it one way to do it backwards. Yeah, that annoyance will last for about a day, but still, why do something that will only cause annoyance? It's not something people need to harp on, but this is beta. And the most likely chance of getting it changed back is now. It's an annoyance at best for someone who wants to play 1v1, but it makes all the difference in the world for someone who's just starting out when the default is 4v4. They've never hidden the fact that they intend people to start with team games and work their way towards 1v1. It's an extremely low-impact change for current players, but with a potential benefit for new players, that's the kind of changes people should be happy about, but apparently the fact that new players exist and are affecting their game in any way makes them angry. Why now? They had to re-do a lot of the interface screens anyway so they all made use of their new UI editor tool because it allows them to iterate more quickly on the interface so they took the opportunity to swap the ordering, I don't think it represents a huge shift in their thought process surrounding the game. I've never bought into this notion that people are supposed to play team games and work towards 1v1. Blizzard may not be hiding this idea, but they're certainly not advertising it either. I don't recall them saying anything about suggesting that players play team games for a time. But yes, if that's what they're trying to say (and simply not communicating very well), then the UI change does have some positive benefit to it. That is the idea. Furthermore, your selection "sticks" so you don't have to keep selecting 1v1 to quick match. No change to current players. Encouragement for new players to jump into laddering in a friendlier environment than 1v1. Great point! And as mentioned before like a million times, you can save different screens to F1-5. So all you have to do is press F1 and click find match. Seems pretty simple to me. I don't like it. From the perspective of a new player, the ladder games are hidden behind a few menus and there is nothing at all to suggest that "quick match" is the core game. And given that they find quick match, why should they play 4v4? Team games often lead to frustration because of bad teammates, the game is also not balanced around 4v4. It also doesn't look right that 1v1 is between 2v2 and FFA. If they wanted to suggest that new players should start with 4v4, then they should simply add some sort of welcome tour where it guides the players through the menus and some voiceover says that new players should start with 4v4. They could certainly be more overt about it. However, team games are less stressful for new players since (1) you have three other players to rely on and (2) it makes the game more social. Team games are only really frustrating for players that think they're better than their teammates (which may or may not be true), a trait that players new to the game will likely not possess.
Yes, they can suggest new players play 4v4 without ordering the game types in an unnatural way.
|
United Kingdom1381 Posts
Is anyone else having problems remapping their hotkeys?
I tried to change my Patrol key to the ` key and no dice.
|
On June 04 2012 23:35 Existor wrote:
HP bars sizes are still ugly. SC2 is a still game of health bars and counters, not real units. Units just are skins only, that are hidden by HP bar
So?
Just remove the health bars if you don't like them.You'll obviously have to give up on the competitive aspect of the game, which should not be a big loss for you, you don't seem to like SC2 very much.
|
Here's hoping for Shattered Temple and Typhon Peaks returning to the pool. Those maps were awesome.
SC / Arcade buttons are ugly. They need icons of some sort, in addition to the text.
Burrow bug fix needed to be more clearly worded; I don't think that the ability to autocast unburrow is well known (I for one didn't), and if you don't know both that and the fact that Colossi fail to trigger it, then the change sounds very strange indeed.
|
On June 05 2012 00:18 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 23:35 Existor wrote:
HP bars sizes are still ugly. SC2 is a still game of health bars and counters, not real units. Units just are skins only, that are hidden by HP bar So? Just remove the health bars if you don't like them.You'll obviously have to give up on the competitive aspect of the game, which should not be a big loss for you, you don't seem to like SC2 very much.
he is obviously bitter about sc2 and wishes we were all still playing BW on a DSL connection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
