| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
(assuming everything is balanced game-wise and map-wise) Poll: Should PL add 2v2 to their reg. season format? Yes (546) No (300) 846 total votes Your vote: Should PL add 2v2 to their reg. season format? in regards to the comments that talk about the quality of the preseason matches.. im sure that the skill level would improve over time, just like it did with 1v1's. its natural that the games look a bit messy at first | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
| ||
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
| ||
DARKING
Mexico675 Posts
| ||
|
lystier
China877 Posts
| ||
Waxangel
United States33559 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:35 Waxangel wrote: where's the GOD NO option? fuckin traditionalist, get with the times grandpa | ||
|
Undead1993
Germany17651 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:36 TT1 wrote: fuckin traditionalist, get with the times grandpa did you even watch today's 2v2s? they were horrible not even slightly worth watching. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
| ||
|
robert1005
Netherlands98 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:37 Undead1993 wrote: did you even watch today's 2v2s? they were horrible not even slightly worth watching. If 2v2-ers would get on the same level like 1v1 pro's the games should get a lot more interesting. There is not much multitasking and mechanics involved in 2v2's and I think that is why it's kinda boring to watch. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:37 Undead1993 wrote: did you even watch today's 2v2s? they were horrible not even slightly worth watching. well yea obviously, its still something new to them. the quality of matches would improve over time just like it did with 1v1's | ||
|
Waxangel
United States33559 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:36 TT1 wrote: fuckin traditionalist, get with the times grandpa i'd rather not pros waste their time playing 2v2's solely for PL when there's way more opportunities outside PL in SC2 compared to BW | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
|
Fuell
Netherlands3111 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:41 Waxangel wrote: i'd rather not pros waste their time playing 2v2's solely for PL when there's way more opportunities outside PL in SC2 compared to BW how so? only a small % of koreans play in foreign tourneys and theres only a few leagues in korea. also, i doubt it would have an effect on the higher tier kors seeing as teamplay matches usually involve 2nd tier pros. if anything it just gives lesser known players more exposure | ||
Heyoka
Katowice25012 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:36 TT1 wrote: fuckin traditionalist, get with the times grandpa I think if he was really a traditionalist he would be voting FOR 2v2 given Proleague's history. | ||
|
iloveav
Poland1481 Posts
2V2 might not be balaced and a bit wonky, but its many times more interesting and funnier than watching the same 1v1 builds over and over again. | ||
|
goody153
44238 Posts
But 2v2's are so damn interesting, crazy and hyper entertaining. Its so diverse. | ||
|
Magnifico
1958 Posts
| ||
Destructicon
4713 Posts
I feel like any form of team play would just ruin what SC2 stands form. If you feel SC2 is stale strategically then you should be doing everything in your power to get the message across to Blizzard to do some balance changes that will fix that, not ask for stupid shit like 2 vs 2, that also dilute and divide the community. And if you think team games provide variety, you're dead wrong, they only provide novelty right now. Team map making is not very well understood, but once it does develop you'd see not only the maps but also the metagame have to conform to a certain standard, because, no matter what you still have to have mains a certain position, with resources at a certain angle, with ramps in certain places and you can't have it too narrow or FF rape everything and you can't have them too open or zergs destroy everything, that's just how it is. | ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:50 Heyoka wrote: I think if he was really a traditionalist he would be voting FOR 2v2 given Proleague's history. no one liked PL 2v2's in bw to begin with  , i cant even remember any of the matches | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:53 goody153 wrote: i think that maps are the only problem presented in 2v2 aside from general balance of course. But 2v2's are so damn interesting, crazy and hyper entertaining. Its so diverse. Contrasting this with what I saw today in PL, it does not quite compute. | ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
| ||
|
Blargh
United States2103 Posts
I like the idea of having a team-match inside a team-league, but SC2 is not the game for that... In 3 months, everyone would realize that the matches are terrible (assuming they keep it?) | ||
|
ETisME
12683 Posts
| ||
|
AxionSteel
United States7754 Posts
| ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
| ||
|
Rokevo
Finland1033 Posts
| ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:10 Plexa wrote: Yes. Bringing more attention to 2v2 (and team play in general) is an extremely positive move. It is, but it kind of has to be done right. Playing some odd 2v2's on Altrezim baked into the series feels really strange, and the games were, well, not exactly astounding. We will need proper 2v2 maps for pro level play and give players enough incentive to actually rake it seriously and practice 2v2. Otherwise the novelty will fade fast and it will just be a rush-fest. | ||
|
Blargh
United States2103 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:14 Squat wrote: It is, but it kind of has to be done right. Playing some odd 2v2's on Altrezim baked into the series feels really strange, and the games were, well, not exactly astounding. We will need proper 2v2 maps for pro level play and give players enough incentive to actually rake it seriously and practice 2v2. Otherwise the novelty will fade fast and it will just be a rush-fest. Yeah, some well made (as in... someone who actually knows about 2v2 play at the highest level) maps would make it tolerable, but there will always be a lot more build-order wins than normal 1v1s. Also, I'm not sure I'd want people to be trying to practice 2v2s over 1v1s. Hell, I doubt any of the players even practiced 2v2s in that pre-season. Cheese is so incredibly common that it should be expected and some of those players played the match more like a 1v1. | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
| ||
|
MagnuMizer
Denmark384 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:31 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: I'm afraid this is something more appealing when put in a poll than it is in reality. I can't imagine this being good for Proleague. Me neither, but I would like to see more pro 2v2 games (that are proper). | ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
Perhaps if PL were a best of 7, we could do 1v1 1v1 2v2 2v2 1v1 1v1 Ace: 1v1 | ||
|
Nekovivie
United Kingdom2599 Posts
| ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
| ||
|
Cheren
United States2911 Posts
| ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:45 Nekovivie wrote: Game is very difficult to balance in a 1v1 format. To have to adjust the same units for 2v2 balance and risk throwing 1v1 off also would be risky, when the current 2v2 scene is...not there. That is actually the beauty of team leagues, the matchups do not need to be balanced. Obviously it would suck if all start playing a certain race combination, maybe one needs to find a solution then, but for now a little bit of imbalance does not hurt. | ||
|
Sepi
Finland231 Posts
Yeah, the players maybe didn't practice or give any toughts on 2v2, before they played but the teamgames just favor double rushes too much. Greatly planned double rush usually beats safe expand to macro game play. The maps should be specifically designed for 2v2 proleague play to make it work. so HELL NO! [EDIT] Well, now i saw that thread said, that in state where the map would be balanced etc. Still i think that they should have such large rush distance and big chokes to eliminate all kinds of powerful allins (which there are litterally hundreds of). FE. double proxy oracle, i mean would you really want to see that? It sound dumb, but it can be VERY effective. As in 2v2 ladder maps, you can just make it too EASILY to masters with just rushing. The players aren't so good skill vise, but it still tells you that something is out of place. It is REALLY hard to make a good functioning 2v2 map. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:43 lichter wrote: I really like 2v2 but I'm not sure how you'd implement it. It definitely shouldn't weigh as much as 1v1 in a match. But then if you only play one of it, where do you put it? If you put it in the first 3 spots, then it will definitely be played. If you put it 4th, there is a chance it might not be played often. For players that practice solely for 2v2 that might feel unfair. Play it first, and some will feel it matters too much (first map sets the pace). Play it second and it's in this weird almost irrelevant position. Play it third and it feels like a momentum breaker. Perhaps if PL were a best of 7, we could do 1v1 1v1 2v2 2v2 1v1 1v1 Ace: 1v1 2 2v2's is too much, 1 is more than enough (as the 3rd or 4th match) 1v1 1v1 1v1 or 2v2 1v1 or 2v2 1v1 1v1 ace 1v1 | ||
|
xuanzue
Colombia1747 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:43 lichter wrote: I really like 2v2 but I'm not sure how you'd implement it. It definitely shouldn't weigh as much as 1v1 in a match. But then if you only play one of it, where do you put it? If you put it in the first 3 spots, then it will definitely be played. If you put it 4th, there is a chance it might not be played often. For players that practice solely for 2v2 that might feel unfair. Play it first, and some will feel it matters too much (first map sets the pace). Play it second and it's in this weird almost irrelevant position. Play it third and it feels like a momentum breaker. Perhaps if PL were a best of 7, we could do 1v1 1v1 2v2 2v2 1v1 1v1 Ace: 1v1 I was going to write something like that. adding 2v2 can make proleague bo7 instead of the actual bo5 I prefer team games, but the interface must be changed, I dislike this pink/cyan v green/purple , maybe a option to make same team color to be observed. | ||
|
RookUK
United Kingdom283 Posts
Obviously we know that teams practise together and help each other prepare for specific matchups and all that, but I think that seeing cooperation and teamwork actually on screen is really exciting, personally. | ||
|
Ansinjunger
United States2451 Posts
| ||
|
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7524 Posts
I voted yes | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:00 TheBloodyDwarf wrote: TL is just so strange. Rules say no vote threads but this is still here?? :D I voted yes does it really? lol poll threads are really fun, they generate alot of debate.. which is what forums are all about o.O | ||
|
Ctesias
4595 Posts
For showmatches and silly stuff, sure, but not as a main thing. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:00 TheBloodyDwarf wrote: TL is just so strange. Rules say no vote threads but this is still here?? :D I voted yes But Pro>Rules is another one of their rules!  I voted no. I didn't enjoy those games today, didn't enjoy other 2v2s I have dipped into (as a viewer) and I think 2v2s are inherently broken/cheesy and no map in the world can repair that. *Maybe* if the allies didn't share vision, couldn't share money and couldn't talk to each other during the game and the maps were really, really well designed for it (maybe with triggers etc) it could have potential. But as it is, it's just two guys ganking one, or the maps being designed in a way that two guys turtle together at first to try and gank one later on. | ||
|
Fjodorov
5007 Posts
If anything, give me more 1v1 with these amazing players o_O | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3301 Posts
Be designed for and balanced around it. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On December 16 2013 23:50 TT1 wrote: 2 2v2's is too much, 1 is more than enough (as the 3rd or 4th match) 1v1 1v1 1v1 or 2v2 1v1 or 2v2 1v1 1v1 ace 1v1 Problem here would be that in this system 2v2 would be completely marginalized, no one would bother practicing it or take time to develop builds. It would just be a cheese-fest with no real tangible connection to the tournament at large. | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
| ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:26 IntoTheheart wrote: Would maps and balance really work for 2v2 though? I find that there's enough balance whine already in 1v1 and calibrated/calculated maps. Also, I like watching 1v1 more, so that's a personal take. gamewise, i dont think theres a balance issue with 2v2. what i meant in my OP is that they might want to remove stuff like shared ressources. the balancing would have to be done around 2v2 specific maps | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:33 TT1 wrote: gamewise, i dont think theres a balance issue with 2v2. what i meant in my OP is that they might want to remove stuff like shared ressources. the balancing would have to be done around maps Shared resources makes scrub-level 2v2 kinda fun though, same with shared units. Would they remove that feature for pro-maps? | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:35 IntoTheheart wrote: Shared resources makes scrub-level 2v2 kinda fun though, same with shared units. Would they remove that feature for pro-maps? i guess, i mean it shouldnt be a big issue. having shared ressources favors teams like tz for example, t is a min heavy race so they can dump it all into bio and share their gas with z (for mutas and such) | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:39 StarStruck wrote: No, based off the games I watched in the preseason. I've seen very few interesting 2v2s and I used to play them all the time back in the beta with friends. The science of 2v2 just isn't really there. ;/ Those games were played on Alterzim, which is as terrible (if not more) in 2v2 as it is in 1v1. Any map in the regular 2v2 map pool would have produced better games. | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:49 TT1 wrote: how so? only a small % of koreans play in foreign tourneys and theres only a few leagues in korea. also, i doubt it would have an effect on the higher tier kors seeing as teamplay matches usually involve 2nd tier pros. if anything it just gives lesser known players more exposure Yes, but as long as you play and practice 1v1 there's a hope of eventually becoming that top tier player. Getting assigned to 2v2 is a fucking death sentence career-wise (except for ZergBong, I guess). | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:42 TheDwf wrote: Those games were played on Alterzim, which is as terrible (if not more) in 2v2 as it is in 1v1. Any map in the regular 2v2 map pool would have produced better games. Exactly, i don't understand why you would rate these 2vs2 games we saw so highly for your opinion. The teams probably didn't really train 2vs2 and the map wasn't that great for teamgames either. I think it is quite funny, on the one hand people don't like a stale meta, on the other hand they are extremely conservative if anything changes then, kinda ironic. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:48 hypercube wrote: Yes, but as long as you play and practice 1v1 there's a hope of eventually becoming that top tier player. Getting assigned to 2v2 is a fucking death sentence career-wise (except for ZergBong, I guess). well it wasnt as if only scrubs played 2v2 back in the day, i remember reach and yellow used to 2v2 for KT and they were pretty good. both were accomplished 1v1 players at the time aswell | ||
|
Big-t
Austria1350 Posts
 | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:53 TT1 wrote: well it wasnt as if only scrubs played 2v2 back in the day, i remember reach and yellow used to 2v2 for KT and they were pretty good. both were accomplished 1v1 players at the time aswell Different games though. We can't really compare the current state of SC2 with their state of BW. | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On December 17 2013 00:53 TT1 wrote: well it wasnt as if only scrubs played 2v2 back in the day, i remember reach and yellow used to 2v2 for KT and they were pretty good. both were accomplished 1v1 players at the time aswell Yet I don't see Flash or Stats getting into 2v2, except as a means to extend their career before retirement. It would be a few 2nd tier players or practice partners who would be made to practice 2v2 almost exclusively. | ||
|
BakedButters
United States748 Posts
The great thing about 2v2 is obviously that it requires teamwork, but that's what gives Dota and LoL some of their appeal - it gives another layer of depth of strategy. Teamwork requires them to communicate effectively - and this allows them employ/execute their game plan well, as well as adapting on the fly if their plan goes down the tubes. Some examples of added layers of strategy for 2v2 in WC3: Since you can send money to your teammate, it allowed for variety of roles to be played. If your Orc or NE, you usually were the harasser since Blademaster and DH with hunts were fast and great at harrassing. Since your mainly harassing, you can give your money to your teammate. If you were UD, your teammate would pool you money and you would try to creep and get an unstoppable UD force due to the high dps and synergy of the UD heroes and units. If you were HU, you could most likely fast expand and give that money to teammate when needed. Like Dota, these different roles require a slightly different skillset that has to be practiced. Another obvious example is the synergy of units from different races allowing for crazy strategies. Ex: HU and NE can do a tower rush since HU can quick build their towers, and NE have towers that can move. Or Orc units supporting UD units since Orc have great caster support units to make UD units last longer to deal out their DPS. Another example that 2v2 allows is sharing units. This allows the micro ceiling potential to be higher. Ex: When Moon and Grubby played together on MYM, their beginning was harassing all over the place to tax the multi microing of their opponents. It was a great more chaotic then if 1v1. Another Ex: when you are chasing a unit or hero that is red health, your teammate (or you can use their unit) can use a nearby unit to block, as seen in Dota. Also, surrounds are more dangerous since you can use your teammates' units to surround a hero. Of course, 2v2 never took precedent over 1v1. 1v1 will always be the main attraction as such in tennis, but still it adds a layer of depth that requires teamwork and communication. The problem I see with SC2 for 2v2 is that since all-ins are so very powerful in 1v1, it could be impossible to stop all-ins in 2v2. In WC3, each race had a defense in their base to prevent quick rushes/all-in - orc had burrows (supply depot +bunkers), HU had militia, NE had buildings that attacked and moon wells that can heal, UD had supply depots that also act as towers when need. And all races can mass repair. I missed this preseason event, so I don't know what strategies were employed, but I think this is the main challenge to 2v2 in Sc2 - quick all-ins. | ||
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
| ||
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
| ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
| ||
|
PrAeToR.FeNiX
Canada361 Posts
| ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
| ||
|
WGT-Baal
France3444 Posts
But that would be a nice change! | ||
|
Ctone23
United States1839 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:41 Waxangel wrote: i'd rather not pros waste their time playing 2v2's solely for PL when there's way more opportunities outside PL in SC2 compared to BW Really? Way more opportunities? I think it would give many unknown Korean players a chance to contribute in a meaningful way. I'd really like to hear what opportunities you think these unknown players would have outside PL.... | ||
|
Crownlol
United States3726 Posts
On December 17 2013 02:26 LongShot27 wrote: If any of you watched the MLG 2v2 invites this spring/summer you'd see that pro level 2v2's are actually insanely fun and the strategies arent always rush rush rush Those were super fun! I personally love playing 2v2, just because there's something so lonely about winning and losing by yourself on ladder. No one to celebrate your victory with, no one to analyze defeat with and bounce ideas off of. A few simple tweaks could really make competitive 2v2 an easier pill to swallow; use the correct maps, no resource sharing, etc. | ||
|
FaCE_1
Canada6184 Posts
I had the must fun watching 2v2 during the BW PL then the 1v1 :< | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:42 FaCE_1 wrote: would really like to see 2v2 games in PL. I had the must fun watching 2v2 during the BW PL then the 1v1 :< blasphemy --a but ill let it slide this time | ||
|
Waxangel
United States33559 Posts
| ||
|
YourGoodFriend
United States2197 Posts
I am not sure if it would be that good for teams or players and after the one round of it I don't know if it would be that fun to watch. But I could be wrong which is why I voted yes | ||
|
Ctone23
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:43 Waxangel wrote: 2v2 in BW Proleague became the unofficial division for b-teamers and washouts, devaluing the competition and killing interest by its very nature How so? You can't just say something is devalued and killing interest without some sort of proof. EDIT: Well, I guess you can say whatever you want, doesn't make it very believable though. | ||
|
Waxangel
United States33559 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:46 Ctone23 wrote: How so? You can't just say something is devalued and killing interest without some sort of proof. EDIT: Well, I guess you can say whatever you want, doesn't make it very believable though. I don't have to cite a fucking academic paper to tell you what happened 10 years ago | ||
|
anessie
180 Posts
It will always come down to some cheesy strategy or timing since it's just not balanced. | ||
|
Ctone23
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:48 Waxangel wrote: I don't have to cite a fucking academic paper to tell you what happened 10 years ago I just think you're unnecessarily shitting on an idea that could actually help interest in the game, but whatever. | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
| ||
|
Swift118
United Kingdom335 Posts
| ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:39 Ctone23 wrote: Really? Way more opportunities? I think it would give many unknown Korean players a chance to contribute in a meaningful way. I'd really like to hear what opportunities you think these unknown players would have outside PL.... Look at Patience as an example. The fact that online qualifiers (often with paid trips) now exists in SC2 alongside the Korean leagues by definition means that there are more oppurtunities than there were for B-teamers in BW. Players like Solar who grind out online qualifiers and cups are bound to eventually get to play overseas - they don't need to play in a joke match-up. Look at Nestea (Zergbong) in BW for example. He wasn't exactly taken seriously. Edit: I'm not saying I'm completely opposed to the idea of 2v2. I'm just saying I don't think it's necessarily more beneficial for B-teamers. | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:51 Ctone23 wrote: I just think you're unnecessarily shitting on an idea that could actually help interest in the game, but whatever. It's Wax. His knowledge of StarCraft and its ways are infinite. If he says something's the case, he probably was there and watched it unfold. | ||
|
tili
United States1332 Posts
This is the crux, in my opinion. If the matches were balanced, people would love the hell out of 2v2. I adore playing it, but ZZ teams, for instance, are absolutely terribly past the mid-game. Blizzard would have to seriously think about its maps to make it even moderately fair, and balancing 1v1 would have another serious variable. Nonetheless, I think 2v2 would add a huge amount to the scene, should Blizzard take it more seriously. edit: I think the same logic applies to 'don't practice 2v2 because you're wasting time for only Proleague'. It's only a waste of time because the balance is so off. If it were balanced, more leagues would provide a 2v2 format. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:01 IntoTheheart wrote: It's Wax. His knowledge of StarCraft and its ways are infinite. If he says something's the case, he probably was there and watched it unfold. I was there too, as were many others. It was pretty much what happened, 2v2 was the corner where you put people who could not perform in the 1v1 scene. Zergbong was banished there for most of his BW career, against his will. It was mostly a kind of lighthearted intermission. 1v1 will always have the most prestige and glamour and 2v2 will always be seen as something of a spectacle to entertain fans rather than real competition. It can be a lot better than it is currently, but 1v1 is hard enough to balance as it is, teamgames will turn into a nightmare once strats are more figured out and players start abusing the shit out of broken combos. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
They need to get some good 2v2 map makers though. IMO the biggest issue is for teams that have 2 Zergs playing against a team that has 1 Zerg. Early ling allins are just so hard to deal with in that case because it's very difficult for the non-zerg to help. I don't think that the 1v1 balance needs to be changed necessarily in order for 2v2 to be viable. And I also don't think 2v2 will be played at the same level as 1s in terms of time dedicated to it.. it will just be something fun for the fans to watch. Ultimately that's all that counts anyway right? It's the reason all professional sports are played (viewership). | ||
|
Ctone23
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:01 IntoTheheart wrote: It's Wax. His knowledge of StarCraft and its ways are infinite. If he says something's the case, he probably was there and watched it unfold. In case he or anyone else hasn't noticed, the point is to help the game grow. Thanks @Zealousy for providing an example, makes sense to not have players like Nestea and Patience playing 2v2's. I wonder though, if some lowly practice partners at the team houses would be interested in something like this. If nothing else, something different and a chance to get a look at youngsters out there in the scene. | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:09 DinoMight wrote: I think 2v2s would be fun to watch. They need to get some good 2v2 map makers though. IMO the biggest issue is for teams that have 2 Zergs playing against a team that has 1 Zerg. Early ling allins are just so hard to deal with in that case because it's very difficult for the non-zerg to help. I don't think that the 1v1 balance needs to be changed necessarily in order for 2v2 to be viable. And I also don't think 2v2 will be played at the same level as 1s in terms of time dedicated to it.. it will just be something fun for the fans to watch. Ultimately that's all that counts anyway right? It's the reason all professional sports are played (viewership). I would actually say that competition's the most important thing, and that viewers come second. If these players don't wanna compete in this form, they wouldn't focus as much on 2v2. | ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:01 IntoTheheart wrote: It's Wax. His knowledge of StarCraft and its ways are infinite. If he says something's the case, he probably was there and watched it unfold. hero worship isnt healthy | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
He's not really my hero. Only BoxeR has that position. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:13 IntoTheheart wrote: I would actually say that competition's the most important thing, and that viewers come second. If these players don't wanna compete in this form, they wouldn't focus as much on 2v2. If viewers want to watch something, it will make money. Then people will want to be good at it to earn money. Viewership is everything. All pro sports are businesses, and those who bring money in are the viewers. | ||
|
HungrySC2
United States191 Posts
We all know its going to be a horrible failure, but it will amaze us in ways we never expected in the process. I look forward to the ackward games, controversies, failed strategies, dual celebrations, the occasional inspiring brilliant moment (of pure win or pure fail), the inevitably horrible map pool, and the use of new players. We have no idea what is going to happen. I may even stay up late to watch starcraft again. And that. Is why I say. 2v2. Fuck Yes. | ||
|
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
| ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:19 DinoMight wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY If viewers want to watch something, it will make money. Then people will want to be good at it to earn money. Viewership is everything. All pro sports are businesses, and those who bring money in are the viewers. People are still gonna compete in StarCraft II with or without these sponsors. Sure we wouldn't get pro-level play, but to assume that we the viewers are the most important thing is really questionable. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:19 DinoMight wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY If viewers want to watch something, it will make money. Then people will want to be good at it to earn money. Viewership is everything. All pro sports are businesses, and those who bring money in are the viewers. dunno, i just wanted to post that vid edit: and this one | ||
|
ssxsilver
United States4409 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:43 Waxangel wrote: 2v2 in BW Proleague became the unofficial division for b-teamers and washouts, devaluing the competition and killing interest by its very nature But on the flipside, a lot of people will make the case that the stale 1v1 metagame in Sc2 is killing interest. | ||
|
TBone-
United States2309 Posts
| ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:20 IntoTheheart wrote: People are still gonna compete in StarCraft II with or without these sponsors. Sure we wouldn't get pro-level play, but to assume that we the viewers are the most important thing is really questionable. For professional Esports, yes, viewers are the most important thing. How do you pay your players if you have no viewers and no sponsors? It's the only reason pro sports exist... for people to watch them. Otherwise, everyone would be playing pickup games on the weekends. And they'd be really high level games.. but not a professional sport. | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:36 DinoMight wrote: For professional Esports, yes, viewers are the most important thing. How do you pay your players if you have no viewers and no sponsors? It's the only reason pro sports exist... for people to watch them. Otherwise, everyone would be playing pickup games on the weekends. And they'd be really high level games.. but not a professional sport. But we'd still have players competing. Without competition, there wouldn't even be a framework for an industry in the first place. If all our StarCraft pros got bored of SC (or hated the format, or whatever), we wouldn't even have competing StarCraft at all, let alone an industry. | ||
|
Bagration
United States18282 Posts
| ||
|
vrok
Sweden2541 Posts
| ||
|
Schelim
Austria11528 Posts
| ||
|
chOty
United Kingdom20 Posts
. So no | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:43 Schelim wrote: yes, i'd like to see it. but obviously it's too late for that now for this season. maybe next year. aaaah yes.. next year | ||
|
Rescawen
Finland1028 Posts
| ||
|
ACrow
Germany6583 Posts
a) this might change when someone actually tries to do it seriously, incentivized by a big tournament, so it is more legitimate and/or b) if there are people who enjoy it and a 2v2 portion of the tournament keeps them interested in the league then sure, it should definitely be done! | ||
|
ViperPL
Poland1775 Posts
| ||
|
grs
Germany2339 Posts
| ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
| ||
|
Schelim
Austria11528 Posts
heh, well played i meant 2015. | ||
|
MCXD
Australia2738 Posts
But it would be passable if they used actually half decent 2v2 maps, but SPL has had a pretty poor record with regards to picking logical with maps so far in SC2, so I wouldn't trust them with it for a second. Also I agree with wax who said earlier in the thread that it would only really force players to waste their time learning 2v2 when practically no other tourneys anywhere use it. That's not smart. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10014 Posts
nono, i just dont think PL will be around next year :D | ||
|
shid0x
Korea (South)5014 Posts
so i say yes for this one. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
| ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
They could do it only as a for fun thing with a small prize. But I think it would be fun to watch and it would attract more viewers. A lot of people who play SC2 only play team games. I think those people would watch it and you could use it as a gateway to get them into 1v1 pro scene. | ||
|
Valiver
Caldeum1977 Posts
| ||
|
BaneRiders
Sweden3630 Posts
 | ||
|
boxerfred
Germany8360 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:57 Destructicon wrote: I voted for no. The beauty of SC2 is that it is a individual game, its focus is on 1 vs 1, like it or not that's its strength its creating those moments of jaw droping awe when someone does something you never thought possible, micro, macro or multi-tasking all on his own. I feel like any form of team play would just ruin what SC2 stands form. If you feel SC2 is stale strategically then you should be doing everything in your power to get the message across to Blizzard to do some balance changes that will fix that, not ask for stupid shit like 2 vs 2, that also dilute and divide the community. And if you think team games provide variety, you're dead wrong, they only provide novelty right now. Team map making is not very well understood, but once it does develop you'd see not only the maps but also the metagame have to conform to a certain standard, because, no matter what you still have to have mains a certain position, with resources at a certain angle, with ramps in certain places and you can't have it too narrow or FF rape everything and you can't have them too open or zergs destroy everything, that's just how it is. Yeah, we all do love the elegance and skill of a fencer. But hey, doesn't everyone enjoy a good brawl from time to time? :D | ||
|
Pontius Pirate
United States1557 Posts
| ||
|
SChlafmann
France725 Posts
| ||
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:37 Undead1993 wrote: did you even watch today's 2v2s? they were horrible not even slightly worth watching. No shit, there's no 2v2 pro scene and the maps suck so obviously we're not going to see good games right off the bat if they decide to implement it. Personally, I'm all for it as long as the restrictions on resource sharing are increased. Whether that's by instituting a limit of minerals and gas per minute or simply increasing the time before you can share, or something else entirely, I'm not sure. What I do know however is that feed strategies are lame as fuck and I don't want to see them. | ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
On December 17 2013 06:02 Pontius Pirate wrote: Hell yes, but we need actual 2v2 KeSPA-quality maps. The preseason 2v2s were so fucking miserable. Also, they need to make resource transfer only possible after reaching a certain tech level, to prevent low-tier feed strategies. If they actually did do 2v2, they wouldn't use a map like alterzim, that was just to show 2v2's for fun in the preseason, and resource transfer is fine after a certain time limit, the 5 minutes in standard should be extended to 10 or 15 minutes in a professional match | ||
|
hansonslee
United States2027 Posts
| ||
|
JuNQkiE
United States11 Posts
| ||
|
j4vz
Canada976 Posts
| ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
| ||
|
Yakikorosu
1203 Posts
| ||
|
Metalcore1993
New Zealand92 Posts
| ||
|
Darkhorse
United States23455 Posts
If they did that, I would potentially enjoy 2v2 coming full time into Proleague. Although it would be hard to balance. | ||
|
JuNQkiE
United States11 Posts
On December 17 2013 07:47 j4vz wrote: I didnt vote but its true that SC2 meta is becoming a bit redundant, but thats because the ultimate goal is balancing the game... the more its balanced the less meta shift we will see... i kinda like that its shifting every time , unless you mean when it gets balanced we will see an abundance of strategies working?if not , then if it gets "balanced" then wouldnt we see the same redundant strats ? | ||
|
j4vz
Canada976 Posts
On December 17 2013 08:21 JunQkie wrote: i kinda like that its shifting every time , unless you mean when it gets balanced we will see an abundance of strategies working?if not , then if it gets "balanced" then wouldnt we see the same redundant strats ? i meant if it gets "balanced" then wouldnt we see the same redundant strats | ||
|
sage_francis
France1823 Posts
PvZ ZvZ shitty 2v2 ZvP PvP Can't wait ! | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
Feeding should be removed I think since it's just silly (wc3 at least had upkeep to balance that for example) and the maps would need to be thought out very well. Since it's never really been played competively I can't really say what is good for it, separate bases probably makes it a complete rush fest but bases too easily shared could make it a camp fest too much, generally 2v2 tends to be rushfests too much though because the defenders advantage get's so low. Still there can be real beauty in it and I wouldn't mind having it looked into. I always thought it was a cool part in wc3 albeit never really taken serious either (many teams just had separate 2v2 players which kinda sucked in solo). There were the problems of just massing tier 1 units and attacking being too good but sc2 lacks aura's so it could actually work. There are a ton of interesting combinations that could really make for novel play, ranging from simple cute stuff like fungal + storm into really novel combinations. I still think it's bound to have something broken if pro's really look into it, either some sort of nearly unstoppable aggressive strat like 1-1-1 + 4 gate or whatever or some broken unit combination. | ||
|
spalding
95 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On December 16 2013 22:35 Waxangel wrote: where's the GOD NO option? I am in the same boat. Pray to god they don't ever add it :D | ||
|
Holdenintherye
Canada1441 Posts
Just imagine how hard it would be to balance the game for 2v2s.... | ||
|
foxmeep
Australia2337 Posts
And the novelty of speedling rush/proxy every game is going to grow old very very quickly. | ||
|
Gfire
United States1699 Posts
On December 17 2013 10:31 foxmeep wrote: 2v2 can never be balanced without breaking 1v1 balance. And the novelty of speedling rush/proxy every game is going to grow old very very quickly. Well blizz has proven to be pretty good at balancing stuff... Maybe that's debatable, but they've definitely gotten a lot better at the process compared to a few years back, so based on that information I can only guess they will eventually be good enough at it to be able to balance two modes. Apart from that, we've barely even started developing good 2v2 maps. The real problem is we just haven't tried much of anything with 2v2. It looks bad just like 1v1 looked bad back in 2010. I'm pretty confident in the possibility of creating a good (balanced or whatever and interesting) 2v2. I think the question is more about whether or not it's worth it. Any effort towards 2v2 balance, maps, etc, is taking away from 1v1. Funding, too. I'd say 2v2 in proleague would probably help out the lower tier players in the teams more than another 1v1 match, though, so it might be good for the stability in this case. It could also be a long time before it's anywhere near 1v1 as far as entertainment value goes. IDK about this season, but it would be cool to see them try out some more developed maps and try in another preseason later to see if it improves. | ||
|
Caladan
Germany1238 Posts
Giving SC2 more the feel like real team battles. Also BW also had 2v2 as a common format. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On December 17 2013 10:49 Caladan wrote: 2v2 would be great! Giving SC2 more the feel like real team battles. Also BW also had 2v2 as a common format. People who keep saying this about BW really need to study the history of 2v2 in BW a bit more closely. | ||
|
EpicDemente
Chile202 Posts
| ||
|
ssg
United States1777 Posts
| ||
|
Kihshra
178 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
They really need to make some maps that are balanced and promote entertaining games though, but that tuning cannot be done without really good (2v2) players play on them frequently. So gogogo, but bear with them first season when they are tuning the maps. I feel that 2v2 maps are still at steps of war level. :/ | ||
|
Caladan
Germany1238 Posts
This would also fix Prime's player problems and still make Bo7 possible. I think it's a good idea, giving the circumstances and SC2's lack of teamplay, also Proleague's history. | ||
|
sCuMBaG
United Kingdom1144 Posts
On December 17 2013 11:08 Squat wrote: People who keep saying this about BW really need to study the history of 2v2 in BW a bit more closely. BW had 2v2 until the 2008/09 season if I remember correctly. so you should maybe study your 2v2 history a bit more although you could say both sides are kind of right here. | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
On December 17 2013 19:50 Kihshra wrote: I feel like 3v3 would be way more interesting than 2v2. Highlander style. One of each race. There can only be one! | ||
|
capu
Finland224 Posts
| ||
|
Kiwan
Australia36 Posts
| ||
|
Phanekim
United States777 Posts
| ||
|
TAMinator
Australia2706 Posts
On December 17 2013 21:18 -Celestial- wrote: Highlander style. One of each race. There can only be one! Interesting! It may even balance out due to no racial advantage on either side too! Would be very hard to obs/commentate/analyse amongst the chaos though | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
I think it could be awesome. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Ctone23
United States1839 Posts
On December 17 2013 21:18 -Celestial- wrote: Highlander style. One of each race. There can only be one! Yea just have fun with it! Doesn't always have to be about balance, BLAH! SC2 needs a little spice I think! | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On December 17 2013 20:45 sCuMBaG wrote: BW had 2v2 until the 2008/09 season if I remember correctly. so you should maybe study your 2v2 history a bit more although you could say both sides are kind of right here. What has that got to do with anything? The issue was the relative level of prestige and prevalence of 2v2 as opposed to 1v1, it had nothing to do with the chronology of the formats. | ||
|
Fliparoni
205 Posts
Simply put, it's not always about the creme de la creme skilled players or the top 1% of the elite. 2v2, if done correctly with proper dedicated 2v2 maps, could be a breath of fresh air and a fun addition to the professional sc2 scene. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45291 Posts
I don't expect Blizzard to be able to balance all the 2v2 match-ups too, but if they put in better maps, then maybe it'd be a nice breath of fresh air (if everyone is okay with only 2-3 match-ups the whole time). On December 19 2013 08:55 Fliparoni wrote: In tennis, singles aka 1v1, has by far the most prestige in terms of viewership and prize money. This, however, does not stop a large amount of people from enjoying and watching professional level doubles aka 2v2 tennis matches at the largest tennis tournaments worldwide (the grand slams and masters level events). It's fun and offers a different viewing experience than your typical tennis singles matches nowadays. Simply put, it's not always about the creme de la creme skilled players or the top 1% of the elite. 2v2, if done correctly with proper dedicated 2v2 maps, could be a breath of fresh air and a fun addition to the professional sc2 scene. Tennis is balanced though, and the ~4 maps aren't absurd | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On December 19 2013 09:18 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: 2v2 is horribly imbalanced at the very top levels Can you back that up a bit? Not saying you are wrong, just that some say that it is not that bad if you veto the worst maps. For example this guy argues (also check OP) that 2v2 can be perfectly competitive on highest level. Are you coming from "lol speedling hellion imba", or even "everyone knows 2v2 isn't balanced"? If you have more to back it up, I am curious to know about it. I do agree that the maps will need a lot of work, but that will come after a season or two. By making proper maps, I definitely think 2on2 can be made decently balanced, without affected 1on1 at all. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Other Games summit1g7271 Grubby4211 FrodaN2831 shahzam511 ToD246 Liquid`Hasu215 C9.Mang0157 KnowMe152 Livibee62 Trikslyr53 ZombieGrub47 |
|
OSC
WardiTV Winter Champion…
Replay Cast
WardiTV Winter Champion…
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
SC Evo Complete
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/k4jQvN3.png)
