|
On December 18 2014 01:39 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:29 Estancia wrote:
As for engagements, just take a look at how brutal protoss vs terran is at casual level, where people barely bother to micro. Protoss player just have to get 1-2 templars, and press t and click on the terran army. The terran will usually leave their bio ball and don't really move out of the storm, causing all their units to die. Or getting chained fungalled to death in ZvX. Not splitting vs banelings and losing your entire bioball to it. Single mistakes that can cost you the game. How would you feel if you took 30 minute to mass up an army of battlecruisers and lost all of them in an instant because you just got chain fungalled to death?
I heard this odd creaking sound as I read this, and realised it was the rarley used cogs in my brain trying to turn. Would having units do differing levels of damage on the low ladders be a viable option? If a storm didn't destroy bio instantly.. And less skilled had a chance to come back in the game.. It'd have more casual appeal? In the same way that at a pro level in snooker the pockets are very tight and narrow - little to no margin for error - but the pockets in snooker clubs for the mere mortals are a lot wider and more forgiving. So the damage units do could scale with your skill as you go up the ladder ranking system. The pro's would still have the same damage as units do now, it'd just be a lot more forgiving for new players etc.
Alternatively, or additionally, you could slow the game time down (as someone else suggested) but increase mining speed and production so the overall macro pace of the game remains the same (or even faster) while still giving new players a lot more time and space to manage their units in battles and respond to attacks on multiple fronts and whatnot.
This way you don't slow down macro so much that the early game becomes extremely boring and tedious and games should be more forgiving.
To be honest I would probably prefer this over the current pace of the game, as I have the most fun in Starcraft trying to get the most out of microing my units, but I'm not good enough to do this once armies get larger/it feels more effective to focus on macro early when I struggle to keep it up when trying to use micro intensive harassment units.
On December 18 2014 01:58 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:47 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 01:44 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:On December 18 2014 00:40 Chaggi wrote:
IMO Focus on Customs and Team Games as the main game modes. If you look at the way BW and WC3 has gained success, that's traditionally the game modes that are the most popular. Hell, I used to play a lot of team games in BW just 2-3 years ago with some coworkers in Korea. When I asked them if they played 1v1 or Fish server at all, they just laughed at me and told me they weren't serious gamers. Yup for sure. Was the same when I had small LANs with buddies. They all had a copy of WC3 and we would play 3-4 hours custom maps but I think none of them played more then 10 1v1 games in their whole life. Exactly. I think we're all on TL and have stuck around here for a reason, and I think that's cause we play this game cause we're naturally competitive, and the most competitive mode is the 1v1 mode. If the people on here are the only ones we talk to about SC2, we're gonna think that 1's is the mode that everyone wants to play and fix. But I really just don't think that's true. Yeah and I think there are conflicting interest as well. Most here on TL like that SC is fast and stressful and hectic and we love it when we see we have broken 250 APM in the last game etc. Most of my gamer friends really don't like stressful games, they play after work/university to relax with a beer or some weed on the side. I think it is impossible to balance this. You slow the gameplay down and maybe more casual people would play 1v1 but the esports fans will hate it.
In one of Destiny's posts he suggested different gameplay or mechanics for different leagues and I think this is actually a really interesting idea. It would also mean that your rank has additional meaning and it could really help ease newer players into laddering, while giving them something to aspire to that is more than a number (for example the privilege of being able to play ranked with less or no handicaps).
|
On December 18 2014 02:11 fruity. wrote:
Creager, sign of the times I guess, it would seem to be a more viable option to release games free than expect a one off of 50€ or whatever. I'm sure pirating is a big factor.
I dont play CS:GO, what do you mean by this gambling approach? In CS GO, at the end a game you get may recieve a "box". There is a list of items ordered by a nominal rarity which can be received by "opening" the box with a $1.5 "key" which has to be brought for from valve. When using the key on a box, a roulette or gambling wheel is animated and which item is given depends on the animation. Certain items can only be placed into the market by these boxes as they are not available otherwise, though you can buy them from the market, where they are cheaper if brought directly. Some people clearly enjoy the thrill of gambling by opening their boxes with keys, which is what valve is exploiting.
Honestly speaking though, Valve has managed to give CS GO far more support and extra content for free than Blizzard has given SC2, and most people don't give a flying shit what skins compared to winning the game really except as something to say.
|
On December 18 2014 02:20 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 02:13 Chaggi wrote:
BW used to have 2v2 tournaments, is that something we could bring back?
I wonder if this was blizzards intentions with archon mode in lotv. Enabling (a sort of) 2v2 without having to address potential balance issues that might arise from a pure format 2v2. EDIT: Isn't this mode blizzards thoughts on trying to get casuals into sc2? You could play with your friend who might not understand SC2.. But still get them involved. The vertical learning curve wont be there. Maybe they'd end up sticking about.
Could be. I could see that being really fun.
|
On December 18 2014 02:27 Myrddraal wrote:
I heard this odd creaking sound as I read this, and realised it was the rarley used cogs in my brain trying to turn.
Would having units do differing levels of damage on the low ladders be a viable option?
If a storm didn't destroy bio instantly.. And less skilled had a chance to come back in the game.. It'd have more casual appeal?
In the same way that at a pro level in snooker the pockets are very tight and narrow - little to no margin for error - but the pockets in snooker clubs for the mere mortals are a lot wider and more forgiving.
So the damage units do could scale with your skill as you go up the ladder ranking system. The pro's would still have the same damage as units do now, it'd just be a lot more forgiving for new players etc.
I think this is the future of rts, but it's just a question of funding now.
|
On December 18 2014 00:42 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +While the activity is low, a lot of players has tried starcraft 2 in one way or the other, either the arcade or a few games of 1v1. The problem is not trying the game, the problem is motivation to play more as a casual gamer. Destiny´s point is that the only reason to play sc2 is to go for grandmaster league and being professional. The "fun" and "excitement" beyond that simply does not exist. If you ask me, 250.000 or 400.000 (more or less) active players going for professional play is actually A LOT of players, considering that the vast majority of for example lol players only play for fun and the excitement of the longevity in the gmae. I kinda agree here, and I actually agree with most of your post. My point is more that you cannot simply change this, and then expect alot of new players to give it a new chance. Rather, once a game is considered a has-been, it's very difficult to position it in a different way. It will definitely require a lot of investments, and from Blizzard's perspective, it makes more sense to invest those ressources in Heroes of the Storm or Overwatch. Show nested quote + If you ask me, 250.000 or 400.000 (more or less) active players going for professional play is actually A LOT of players That's not true though. Currently you have had 250,000 players playing the ladder in this seasons. It's tough to say how many of those are actually really dedicated.
This is why I think blizzard should make special announcements for all blizzard games for cross-game rewards to force other blizzard-game-players to try starcraft 2 again to get their special ultralisk mount in world of warcraft when playing 100 zerg games or what not. This is an indirect way to make it benefitial for players to play the "has-been" starcraft. Also, many of destinys suggestions including micro-transactions and just longevity in personalization would just infinitely make people at least try for various reasons, and if the game inevitably is improved in the fun because of this, they will continue to play.
I also vouch for user interface customization even for professional play, this will really make people want to experiemtn with different layouts and such and you could perhaps implement the "stream overlays" into the game. I would like to see various minimap positionings and sizes, resource/supply fonts and sizes etc and maybe even allow other info tabs onto the screen but all of theese are just options beyond imagination.
It is tough to say how many of the 250.000 are dedicated, but since the game is in the "harder aspect" on the "hold-on-to-motivation" spectrum, even a 100.000 players is a lot. I mean, if the casual side of starcraft both in skill (helping bronze-plat with various mechanics through computer assisted features as we see in other games) plus the vast majority of longeivity options, I promise not only will the casual count increase, - all those people playing ladder - they will also get the hunger for ladder and using these things for other than just winning - actually have fun with the game.
Also, something I note a lot when I play arcade, people really enjoy this fancy golden grandmaster "frame" around your avatar and they also enjoy seeing level 105 and stuff. Adding more visible stuff ingame in lobbies and stuff, mostly supported through 1v1 ranking - this includes your ladder rank, but let´s also say customizable things to your avatar depending on your activity in the game and other things. People like to display these things, apparently.
Lastly, if 1v1 activity could provide players with features in 2v2, 3v3, 4v4 or things in the arcade, maybe even the ability to customize UI or skins or other things, this would indeed provoke more causal play which alongside assistance leads to the hunger for professional play since these casual plays demands some understanding of the actual seriousness in the game.
If it is true that investments into Heroes or Ocverwatch is more benefital than sc2, why not make those investments lead toward starcraft now that this is a more or less fully developed game? If you buy Heroes or overwatch, you get starcraft 2 too etc. so you can play that for free including the campaign etc.
Or other bundle things.
An very lastly, I think ladder-rank rewards should do something to other games too. Make people "strive" to get diamond and master league on whatever server. This will indeed force skillful research into the game to unluck the "master amulet of swarmhosts" in world of warcraft or the "GSL" mount in heroes of the storm. ^^
|
On December 18 2014 03:08 robopork wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 02:27 Myrddraal wrote:
I heard this odd creaking sound as I read this, and realised it was the rarley used cogs in my brain trying to turn.
Would having units do differing levels of damage on the low ladders be a viable option?
If a storm didn't destroy bio instantly.. And less skilled had a chance to come back in the game.. It'd have more casual appeal?
In the same way that at a pro level in snooker the pockets are very tight and narrow - little to no margin for error - but the pockets in snooker clubs for the mere mortals are a lot wider and more forgiving.
So the damage units do could scale with your skill as you go up the ladder ranking system. The pro's would still have the same damage as units do now, it'd just be a lot more forgiving for new players etc. I think this is the future of rts, but it's just a question of funding now.
It's the past of RTS. In BW most people played less intensive game modes. In WC3 footie wars, battle scenarios and mobas were all very popular and those games are strongly derivative of WC3 melee, but are less intense. Team games were very playable in both BW & WC3. FFA was very fun to play in WC3.
These sort of alternatives to 1v1 are necessary and SC2 is a more punishing game than Blizzard's earlier RTS titles. It's faster-paced, mistakes are punished more, build orders are more decisive, defender's advantage is lower.
|
On December 18 2014 03:48 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 03:08 robopork wrote:On December 18 2014 02:27 Myrddraal wrote:
I heard this odd creaking sound as I read this, and realised it was the rarley used cogs in my brain trying to turn.
Would having units do differing levels of damage on the low ladders be a viable option?
If a storm didn't destroy bio instantly.. And less skilled had a chance to come back in the game.. It'd have more casual appeal?
In the same way that at a pro level in snooker the pockets are very tight and narrow - little to no margin for error - but the pockets in snooker clubs for the mere mortals are a lot wider and more forgiving.
So the damage units do could scale with your skill as you go up the ladder ranking system. The pro's would still have the same damage as units do now, it'd just be a lot more forgiving for new players etc. I think this is the future of rts, but it's just a question of funding now. It's the past of RTS. In BW most people played less intensive game modes. In WC3 footie wars, battle scenarios and mobas were all very popular and those games are strongly derivative of WC3 melee, but are less intense. Team games were very playable in both BW & WC3. FFA was very fun to play in WC3. These sort of alternatives to 1v1 are necessary and SC2 is a more punishing game than Blizzard's earlier RTS titles. It's faster-paced, mistakes are punished more, build orders are more decisive, defender's advantage is lower.
I don't know. SC2 team games can be insane. They are volatile and incredible cheesy but they have a certain charms to them. It's problem is that massing team games is not rewarding. The 1v1 style league structure sucks for team games especially 3v3 and 4v4.
|
Btw, this is one idea I had:
- automated unit production: you rightclick on the marine portrait and it will constantly build marines for you. There is, say, a two second delay between the queuing of the next marine to encourage manual production. Or alternatively, with automated production it will always seek to have at least a few units in the queue (i.e. it aims to keep like 60 seconds of wasted resources in queue), which is another waste of resources to encourage manual production.
The main problem is that it doesn't translate well to protoss / zerg. And it will force Blizzard to add some UI that gives like "resources drained per second - click to disable [X]" or something.
|
bring back big game hunters!
|
On December 18 2014 02:32 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 02:11 fruity. wrote:
Creager, sign of the times I guess, it would seem to be a more viable option to release games free than expect a one off of 50€ or whatever. I'm sure pirating is a big factor.
I dont play CS:GO, what do you mean by this gambling approach? In CS GO, at the end a game you get may recieve a "box". There is a list of items ordered by a nominal rarity which can be received by "opening" the box with a $1.5 "key" which has to be brought for from valve. When using the key on a box, a roulette or gambling wheel is animated and which item is given depends on the animation. Certain items can only be placed into the market by these boxes as they are not available otherwise, though you can buy them from the market, where they are cheaper if brought directly. Some people clearly enjoy the thrill of gambling by opening their boxes with keys, which is what valve is exploiting. Honestly speaking though, Valve has managed to give CS GO far more support and extra content for free than Blizzard has given SC2, and most people don't give a flying shit what skins compared to winning the game really except as something to say.
The gambling experience with CS:GO is no different than WoW or any mmo. Many games exploit the gambling experience. That could be a reason for such a large influx of gamers/viewers, along with the massive support and community interaction.
SC2 doesn't seem to fit into the gambling model. What items would be available in a SC2 box? Skins and voicepacks only?
There can't be ingame items, because that would easily throw off the entire balance of the game.
Imagine you won a match against a GM. You played terran, and your opponent was zerg. After the match you got an item from Blizzard. The item gives your stim pack more time or take away less health. It only works in one match, and you can only use one item per match.
Skins and voicepacks could work, but this could lead to complications. I believe Blizzard stated skins and voicepacks could cause complications on user agents, and would force them to raise the minimum requirements to run SC2.
So some guy's piece of shit computer that barely ran SC2 will no longer be able to play it in LotV because of skins and voicepacks. How many guys like the example above do you think are out there? Not everyone has highend $2k computers.
Skins and voicepacks could potentially alienate more than attract. We need to look at the approach from different angles.
Can Blizzard develop the skins and voicepacks efficiently enough that the minimum requirement stays the same? How much would it cost engineers the time and effort to test all the skins? Can some of them cause glitches?
I feel that Starcraft 2 cannot be free to play with micro transactions. It does not fit into this business model very well. However, a cheap to play with micro transactions could definitely work.
The cheapium (I didn't make up that word, google it and you will find it being coined in other websites) approach would probably fit better and buying skins would raise the PC requirements.
This would still turn a large profit on sales, and could still potential generate residual income. And to promote the skins, Blizzard can have skin making contests, and the winner chosen will have his skin rendered and optimized by Blizzard and put into the game. They also win some money, and maybe residual income from any sales of that skin. Slowly, skins are added by the community through contests only, and our purchase could directly put money into the winners pocket. There could be 2 contests per year, and Blizzard chooses the unit/building to be skinned.
If Blizzard really wanted to reduce the barrier to entry, the freemium version should be HotS, but those that purchased it would get something special.
|
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins.
|
On December 18 2014 04:08 phodacbiet wrote:
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins.
I don't think Blizzard wants SC2's focus on the arcade/custom. They don't want it to die, but as well they don't want the same experience as BW. I think its good they focus on the ladder players.
The current arcade isn't too bad though.
BW and WC3 was all about hitting that refresh list button until you found your map, or start your own map and patiently wait for people to come and start when you have the required number.
Now all we need to do is plug in some keywords to find our map.
|
On December 18 2014 04:16 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:08 phodacbiet wrote:
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins. I don't think Blizzard wants SC2's focus on the arcade/custom. They don't want it to die, but as well they don't want the same experience as BW. I think its good they focus on the ladder players. The current arcade isn't too bad though. BW and WC3 was all about hitting that refresh list button until you found your map, or start your own map and patiently wait for people to come and go until you have the required number. Now all we need to do is plug in some keywords to find our map.
I think there's enough evidence that if they focus on the ladder players, this game will never rise above the steadily smaller niche that we have right now. I love 1v1 but it's simply one of the most stressful competitive games you can play right now. It's not fun.
|
On December 18 2014 04:29 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:16 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 18 2014 04:08 phodacbiet wrote:
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins. I don't think Blizzard wants SC2's focus on the arcade/custom. They don't want it to die, but as well they don't want the same experience as BW. I think its good they focus on the ladder players. The current arcade isn't too bad though. BW and WC3 was all about hitting that refresh list button until you found your map, or start your own map and patiently wait for people to come and go until you have the required number. Now all we need to do is plug in some keywords to find our map. I think there's enough evidence that if they focus on the ladder players, this game will never rise above the steadily smaller niche that we have right now. I love 1v1 but it's simply one of the most stressful competitive games you can play right now. It's not fun.
Its possible, and to an extent I agree. 1v1 is incredibly stressful, and not for a lot of people, but don't think its going to cannibalize the game if more focus was on ladder. As well, Blizzard doesn't completely ignore the arcade. They frequently promote maps on the SC2's website.
There has to be a balance of what SC2 should be about. Is it the ladder/campaign/tournaments? Or is it about the custom/arcade? They are both intrinsically valuable, but which gives more value.
|
On December 18 2014 04:36 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:29 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 04:16 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 18 2014 04:08 phodacbiet wrote:
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins. I don't think Blizzard wants SC2's focus on the arcade/custom. They don't want it to die, but as well they don't want the same experience as BW. I think its good they focus on the ladder players. The current arcade isn't too bad though. BW and WC3 was all about hitting that refresh list button until you found your map, or start your own map and patiently wait for people to come and go until you have the required number. Now all we need to do is plug in some keywords to find our map. I think there's enough evidence that if they focus on the ladder players, this game will never rise above the steadily smaller niche that we have right now. I love 1v1 but it's simply one of the most stressful competitive games you can play right now. It's not fun. Its possible, and to an extent I agree. 1v1 is incredibly stressful, and not for a lot of people, but don't think its going to cannibalize the game if more focus was on ladder. As well, Blizzard doesn't completely ignore the arcade. They frequently promote maps on the SC2's website. There has to be a balance of what SC2 should be about. Is it the ladder/campaign/tournaments? Or is it about the custom/arcade? They are both intrinsically valuable, but which gives more value.
I agree. I think that's for their internal team to really take a hard look and see what they want out of SC2.
BLIZZARD IF YOU'RE READING I'LL WORK PRO BONO PLS JUST FLY ME TO HQ
|
On December 18 2014 02:27 Myrddraal wrote:
In one of Destiny's posts he suggested different gameplay or mechanics for different leagues and I think this is actually a really interesting idea. It would also mean that your rank has additional meaning and it could really help ease newer players into laddering, while giving them something to aspire to that is more than a number (for example the privilege of being able to play ranked with less or no handicaps).
The problem with that is balance. If we change gameplay for different leagues, then will each league have to be well balanced? Its not possible to adjust all numbers by a certain percent, and expect everything to be well balanced. Does Blizzard support balance at all leagues with this system? Will they decide tweaks need to be made at the silver league? Development time and cost needs to be invested in all these league patches.
|
On December 18 2014 02:11 fruity. wrote:
Creager, sign of the times I guess, it would seem to be a more viable option to release games free than expect a one off of 50€ or whatever. I'm sure pirating is a big factor.
I dont play CS:GO, what do you mean by this gambling approach?
In CS:GO you get occasional rewards when playing the game (just when the match is finished and everyone gets to see the scoreboard) which can be weapon skins (with a rarity system like in mmo's) and/or crates.
In order to open crates you need to buy a more or less specific key for that type of crate. During the last year the price per key has gone up to 1.99€ (from 1.69€).
But the fun doesn't stop there, each type of crate can contain a rather wide variety of weapons (15-20 or so) which you can only get by opening those crates and the outcome will be random (probability to get garbage that's worth nothing is pretty high, comparable to drop rates in mmo's again), so it encourages you to buy more and more... you get the concept.
Yeah, you can sell all stuff you get on the Steam Market, but money you gained is automatically added to your steam wallet (which essentially means Valve isn't to be held accountable for gambling, because they simply offer you other Steam games instead of paying you real money).
|
On December 18 2014 04:41 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:36 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 18 2014 04:29 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 04:16 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 18 2014 04:08 phodacbiet wrote:
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins. I don't think Blizzard wants SC2's focus on the arcade/custom. They don't want it to die, but as well they don't want the same experience as BW. I think its good they focus on the ladder players. The current arcade isn't too bad though. BW and WC3 was all about hitting that refresh list button until you found your map, or start your own map and patiently wait for people to come and go until you have the required number. Now all we need to do is plug in some keywords to find our map. I think there's enough evidence that if they focus on the ladder players, this game will never rise above the steadily smaller niche that we have right now. I love 1v1 but it's simply one of the most stressful competitive games you can play right now. It's not fun. Its possible, and to an extent I agree. 1v1 is incredibly stressful, and not for a lot of people, but don't think its going to cannibalize the game if more focus was on ladder. As well, Blizzard doesn't completely ignore the arcade. They frequently promote maps on the SC2's website. There has to be a balance of what SC2 should be about. Is it the ladder/campaign/tournaments? Or is it about the custom/arcade? They are both intrinsically valuable, but which gives more value. I agree. I think that's for their internal team to really take a hard look and see what they want out of SC2. BLIZZARD IF YOU'RE READING I'LL WORK PRO BONO PLS JUST FLY ME TO HQ
Me too Blizzard. And maybe buy me a meal.
|
On December 18 2014 04:44 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 04:41 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 04:36 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 18 2014 04:29 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 04:16 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 18 2014 04:08 phodacbiet wrote:
Why don't they just fix the custom game/arcade system. BW was very hard and let's be honest, most people didn't play 1v1. The majority played fastest map possible, BGH, and UMS maps. Battle net currently has a terrible arcade system and although blizzard meant well, their idea flopped. If they redesigned the way the arcade works, possibly put heroes of the storm into the arcade itself, and then add like cool skins for playing arcade games. Have these skins be specific to arcade games only so that it won't disturb the 1v1 players. This way, they can add and monetize as much skins as they want without disturbing the ladder as much. There will still be skins for ladders of course, but give the players the options of turning them off, but when youre in the arcade system you cant turn off your skins. I don't think Blizzard wants SC2's focus on the arcade/custom. They don't want it to die, but as well they don't want the same experience as BW. I think its good they focus on the ladder players. The current arcade isn't too bad though. BW and WC3 was all about hitting that refresh list button until you found your map, or start your own map and patiently wait for people to come and go until you have the required number. Now all we need to do is plug in some keywords to find our map. I think there's enough evidence that if they focus on the ladder players, this game will never rise above the steadily smaller niche that we have right now. I love 1v1 but it's simply one of the most stressful competitive games you can play right now. It's not fun. Its possible, and to an extent I agree. 1v1 is incredibly stressful, and not for a lot of people, but don't think its going to cannibalize the game if more focus was on ladder. As well, Blizzard doesn't completely ignore the arcade. They frequently promote maps on the SC2's website. There has to be a balance of what SC2 should be about. Is it the ladder/campaign/tournaments? Or is it about the custom/arcade? They are both intrinsically valuable, but which gives more value. I agree. I think that's for their internal team to really take a hard look and see what they want out of SC2. BLIZZARD IF YOU'RE READING I'LL WORK PRO BONO PLS JUST FLY ME TO HQ Me too Blizzard. And maybe buy me a meal.
I think almost anyone on TL will work for blizz to save SC2 for the price of a ticket to Irvine and a burrito. Good deal 
|
On December 18 2014 04:42 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
The problem with that is balance. If we change gameplay for different leagues, then will each league have to be well balanced? Its not possible to adjust all numbers by a certain percent, and expect everything to be well balanced. Does Blizzard support balance at all leagues with this system? Will they decide tweaks need to be made at the silver league? Development time and cost needs to be invested in all these league patches.
The more I think on this, the more I feel it's unreasonable to expecxt casual players to play under the same rule set as pro players. Team games are different, before someone heads off down that road).
Also, balance should be the goal for the top x% of the scene. It must be as balanced as reasonably possible for this target. But it doesn't mean it has to be balanced in bronze or silver.
Screw it! 50% less damage to storm and fungals. Seeker missiles too. Just as an example, don't lynch me here. It doesn't matter at these low levels, what's far more important is the player has fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
