We’ve arrived at a point where we want to work with you guys to lock down changes regarding the ladder revamp and begin work on the implementation side. We have been discussing more based on you previous feedback in a similar post, and have been making improvements as we started implementing the feature little by little. Now we’re at the stage where the overall design looks very solid, and we want to focus on doing the implementation. So we’ll review where we are at now, collect your feedback, and finalize our direction.
GM League
Currently, we’re thinking that the best way to go is to update Grandmaster League with new players, promotions, and demotions each day at a specified time—all based strictly on skill. We see two main advantages to this approach. First, we can have an accurate, skill-based representation of the best 200 players on the server on any given day. Second, it also makes things clearer on the esports side, especially if tournaments pull from this list. As an added bonus, we also like that this could promote more intense competition during this period of the day (though mostly for just this specific group of top players).
This is an okay compromise. The current inactivity measure is pretty weak and prone to abuse, so that needed to go. Keeping consistency between the entry condition and the ejection condition is much better. I have some minor concerns about the arbitrary rollover time, but it's probably not that big a deal because they're already using a lock time for WCS qualifiers. That is, if players were already cramming last-minute games at 11:55PM on the day before the WCS cutoff, then it's probably fine that this happens every day at that same time.
Showing MMR
This is something we’ve received the most feedback on and we’ve been exploring the concept heavily internally. Currently, we’re leaning towards clearly displaying your MMR in the UI. The more we dug into the topic of making the ranks, divisions, and leagues as accurate as possible, the more we realized that there were other potential problems that we could have introduced. Since we have the MMR available already, we think it might be best to just show it as the most accurate measurement of a player’s skill.
I assume this means that points and bonus pool will be going away completely? That is tremendous news. When I was going over design proposals for the ladder that incorporated visible MMR, I also came up short when it came to adding in some of the more grind-friendly parts, like the bonus pool. I couldn't figure out how to add that in without muddying up the clear MMR value. Short of showing two values, points and MMR, which could be confusing, the only choice is to go down one road or the other. I'm glad they're taking a chance on transparency.
League & Tier
In developing the new League & Tier system, the main concern was that achieving a high-degree of accuracy required that we enable mid-season demotions. Although we know that there are many players out there who want to see demotions enabled, we believe this feedback mostly stems from the fact that there currently isn’t a reliable way to tell your skill right now. The downside of enabling demotions is that we could potentially take away from a players’ biggest accomplishment that season; this downside is magnified if it’s their first time getting to a specific league, which may make the person not want to play the game anymore due to the risk of losing this reward.
I want to elaborate a little more on this detail. Their previous plan was to create 51 subdivisions (10 per league Bronze-Diamond plus one mega Master/GM league). If they went through with this proposal, then based on the current MMR spectrum, a tier change would happen, on average, every 2-3 consecutive wins or losses. That's a pretty huge amount of volatility and therefore basically requires demotions. It's good that they've wargamed this and realized this probably wasn't a great way to go, because the leagues and tiers still need to have some weight and meaning behind them. Keeping them too fluid reduces a player's sense of belonging since they'd be constantly hovering across multiple tiers.
Because we will be showing MMR, we wonder if it’s best to have the ranking system display the highest League & Tier achieved during the current season. There’s really no need to show the same number two different ways, and we can show two cool numbers instead. This way, if I were to tell my friends that I’m in Master Tier 1, but my MMR is a solid Master Tier 2 (naming is not final), it clearly shows 1) the highest I’ve achieved this season and 2) where my skill is at the moment.
This is a fine option. It helps to identify players who intentionally tank their rating as well, and opens them up to public shaming (for better or for worse). It also gives players a permanent reward for that season and should, in theory, address any concerns about ladder anxiety in the specific case of rank loss aversion.
For the number of tiers, we’ve spent time analyzing and evaluating how the Heroes of the Storm system works because their 50 ranks would be very similar to our originally announced 10 tiers per league (we would have 60 tiers if we strip out the leagues). For StarCraft II, due to the amount of movement that would occur with having this many tiers, this system doesn’t look to be the way to go. So we debated on going with 5 tiers or 3 tiers, and we’re currently leaning towards 3 for a couple reasons.
First, talking about leagues in StarCraft II has naturally tended towards using 3 tiers. When players talk about where they are at within a league, perhaps the most common way to refer to the tiers currently is to say that he or she is in “High Diamond,” “Mid Diamond,” or “Low Diamond.” So colloquially, this fits well with how players already discuss the ladder. The second reason is that we can always increase the number of tiers available in the future if 3 is not enough. Going from 3 to 5 or 3 to 10 would be easier than doing the reverse, which means we don’t need to remove functionality from the system.
The first argument is fairly weak since the system will dictate the conversation rather than the community, but the second makes a lot of sense. It's smart. Better to add some later than take some away in a triage situation.
This is where we’re at currently, and as you can see we’ve narrowed in on the most critical components of Ladder Revamp. If you have thoughts on these areas, we’d ask that we get discussions going so that we can lock down the design. We’re currently aiming to finalize the design of this feature within the next couple weeks, and are potentially aiming for a mid- to late-summer release in order to have enough time to fully work through the implementation.
Overall, really good stuff. I still think there's an outside chance that this makes the ladder--which is the primary form of multiplayer gameplay in SC2--overly competitive. I'd like to see this approach balanced out a bit by grindable currency or loot boxes a la Overwatch, where just playing the game unlocks cosmetic rewards. A regular content cadence with a focus on encouraging Quick Match play could ensure that players could target the specific reward they want: a goal beyond getting to the next league or tier, and one that is gradually obtainable even if skill does not improve.
Separate MMR Per Race
We hear your feedback regarding this feature. We had originally set the priority for this to come after ladder revamp, but we’re currently exploring ways to potentially get started on this feature even sooner. Although we haven’t set an exact timeline, we just wanted to let you know that we agree that this feature is important to the game and we’re discussing ways to release it more quickly. We’ll be sure to keep everyone updated!
Cool. Interested to hear more. I have some minor concerns with this, too, in that I would always prefer your MMR to represent you as a player (since your offrace skill level won't deviate terribly far because your fundamentals will support you), but I could be mistaken. Let's see what happens. There's no real downside to doing it this way, in any event.
On March 25 2016 07:07 Avi-Love wrote: With PvZ being close to balanced and ZvT being in terrans favour in korea (both depending on maps, obviously) I really hope they don't go through with the ravager nerfs. Also, with the new turtle playstyles in both pvz and tvz on certain maps, I think that they should consider buffing zergs anti air, the corrupter has been a far below average unit for way too long.
With PvZ below 45% since launch, I don't call that close to balanced. And looking at the new maps for S2, I'm having a hard time believing this could change anytime soon without a Zerg nerf or a Protoss change on early game.
Right, Zerg has mostly terrible anti-air... except for the one Parasitic "lol please try to split units that like to stack" Bomb. Corruptors are still kinda lame but at least they get an use. I've seen a lot of games lately where pros use them to piss on buildings and it seems as effective as hilarious.
On March 25 2016 04:44 Terranist wrote: Really wish they would go back to discussing the tank. Flying tank is not fun for either player and it is still killing TvT.
This also. And also the Thor range being a major issue late game.
On March 25 2016 05:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote: also, Avilo did more than whine. he created his own test map. you have to respect people who put time and effort into improving the game.
Yes. And even though some may dislike Avilo he is right on most of what he puts out there and blizzard eventually gets to it 2 years later. (swarmhosts, warpins, blink all ins, parasitic bomb, and now the Thor and Cyclone sucking in LOTV).
So now we just wait 2 years for Avilo's call on Ovie drops, 4 supply tempest and tankivacs ruining the TvT? Diablo 3 became great after the community all quit demanding some redesign - I hope we can get some more initiative on more issues before too long. A year to finish design changes is way too long in 2016.
On March 25 2016 07:07 Avi-Love wrote: With PvZ being close to balanced and ZvT being in terrans favour in korea (both depending on maps, obviously) I really hope they don't go through with the ravager nerfs. Also, with the new turtle playstyles in both pvz and tvz on certain maps, I think that they should consider buffing zergs anti air, the corrupter has been a far below average unit for way too long.
With PvZ below 45% since launch, I don't call that close to balanced. And looking at the new maps for S2, I'm having a hard time believing this could change anytime soon without a Zerg nerf or a Protoss change on early game.
Right, Zerg has mostly terrible anti-air... except for the one Parasitic "lol please try to split units that like to stack" Bomb. Corruptors are still kinda lame but at least they get an use. I've seen a lot of games lately where pros use them to piss on buildings and it seems as effective as hilarious.
I wrote pvz in korea, which is actually pretty balanced - beyond that, vipers are just not good enough lategame in their nerfed state, zerg cannot deal with turtling protoss or terran atm (which might be a map issue).
On March 25 2016 07:07 Avi-Love wrote: With PvZ being close to balanced and ZvT being in terrans favour in korea (both depending on maps, obviously) I really hope they don't go through with the ravager nerfs. Also, with the new turtle playstyles in both pvz and tvz on certain maps, I think that they should consider buffing zergs anti air, the corrupter has been a far below average unit for way too long.
With PvZ below 45% since launch, I don't call that close to balanced. And looking at the new maps for S2, I'm having a hard time believing this could change anytime soon without a Zerg nerf or a Protoss change on early game.
Right, Zerg has mostly terrible anti-air... except for the one Parasitic "lol please try to split units that like to stack" Bomb. Corruptors are still kinda lame but at least they get an use. I've seen a lot of games lately where pros use them to piss on buildings and it seems as effective as hilarious.
I wrote pvz in korea, which is actually pretty balanced - beyond that, vipers are just not good enough lategame in their nerfed state, zerg cannot deal with turtling protoss or terran atm (which might be a map issue).
Any VODs of terran "turtle" lategame vs Z? I would be interested. To me super lategame is clearly P>>Z>>T.
The cyclone could fit the AA role just right with a redesign. The thor will never be a reliable good unit because it's so big, clunky, slow and expensive. Nor is the widow mine reliable for obvious reasons.
This.
But if you focus on cyclone then thor will useless.Make cyclone good enough in early/mid game and thor becomes tier 3 air killer solve both.
On March 25 2016 07:07 Avi-Love wrote: With PvZ being close to balanced and ZvT being in terrans favour in korea (both depending on maps, obviously) I really hope they don't go through with the ravager nerfs. Also, with the new turtle playstyles in both pvz and tvz on certain maps, I think that they should consider buffing zergs anti air, the corrupter has been a far below average unit for way too long.
With PvZ below 45% since launch, I don't call that close to balanced. And looking at the new maps for S2, I'm having a hard time believing this could change anytime soon without a Zerg nerf or a Protoss change on early game.
Right, Zerg has mostly terrible anti-air... except for the one Parasitic "lol please try to split units that like to stack" Bomb. Corruptors are still kinda lame but at least they get an use. I've seen a lot of games lately where pros use them to piss on buildings and it seems as effective as hilarious.
I wrote pvz in korea, which is actually pretty balanced - beyond that, vipers are just not good enough lategame in their nerfed state, zerg cannot deal with turtling protoss or terran atm (which might be a map issue).
Too soon IMO.It's depend on how hard terran and protoss army snowball zerg army.Does it absurd like skyterran in HOTS and even when you remax 2-3 times,you still lose ? Too little game in pro level.
No more nerfs to the liberator. The unit has already been nerfed enough times since the beta. Also when is the warp prism going to be nerfed, that unit is pretty much impossible to stop right now.
the reason terrans don't use banshees is because you gave them ridiculously OP units like widow mines, liberators, tankivacs etc. etc. but blizzard's policy for Terran is ALWAYS "got to get them to use other units, have to buff these units to get them to use them, even though we know full well that we have given them OP units and the reason we KNOW they are OP is BECAUSE the terrans ALWAYS USE THEM. but even though we are well aware of this, and even though we have already made it crystal clear we are willing to nerf a ZERG unit (Swarmhosts) right out of the game because we think it gets used too much, even though it destroys zerg's lategame against Terran mech or Protoss Air, we will NEVER nerf a terran unit so that they don't use it any more, and we will ALWAYS look to buff other terran units to get terrans to use them more. this policy has NEVER been stated when dealing with zerg units. no zerg unit has ever been buffed to get them to use them more. muta heal: so they don't die quite as horribly to widow mines and can actually harass better. hydra speed: so they can actually attack and then retreat again without all dying. Blizzard, here is now you get terrans to use banshees more: NERF widow mines. NERF medivac dropping ability for tanks and widow mines. NERF Liberators. Buffing banshees will NOT cause terrans to use them more because no matter how strong you make banshees, Widow mine drops, tankivacs, liberators and a host of other things are still ridiculously OP and will still get used to death BECAUSE of that. Still dragging feet with necessary changes... and still downplaying necessary changes that have been publicly admitted as such. showcasing non-balance issues first to help distract players from the balance problems. Treat your 3 kids equally Blizzard, and stop using this policy of buffing terran units to help them compete with the other OP units to get more use out of them when you never adopt this policy with zerg. (Ever notice zerg players at top levels not using swarmhosts? ever notice zerg players at top levels rarely using infestors? rarely using broodlords? ever consider buffing these units so zerg uses them more? NEVER in a million years will Blizzard do this with zerg even though if it was Terran they would do this FOR CERTAIN. It's time Blizzard admits to this gaping discrepancy and addresses it instead of pretending they are not doing this. in case this is not clear enough, we have it from Blizzard's own mouth that they buff terran units for NO OTHER REASON then to get them to use them more. Banshees are not a weak unit. they have good damage and quick shots and can cloak. they don't need a buff except that terran has other units that are so good there is no point in them making banshees, they can win way easier with other units. Swarmhosts do not get used because they were nerfed and now are clearly a weak unit with little point to make them. Blizzard's nerf of swarmhosts was way beyond the level of sensibility and they will never reconsider this even though it would be a very smart thing to admit they overdid this. Swarmhosts I'm sure get used LESS than Terrans use banshees. That means, if Blizzard treated its races in a fair manner, they would be discussing buff to swarmhosts to bring them back into the meta. But they aren't. This proves their bias. Unfortunately, no matter now obvious the bias is, they will not change their views on this. Nor would they even make mention of this issue, hoping it doesn't get noticed. but it is too hard not to notice it. How many zergs out there are still stuck with resorting to WoL style Muta ling bane even though now Terrans have widow mines AND liberators to take out half the zerg army before they even get close to the Marines? ravagers don't work long term against terran. zerg needs more mobility and can't really go with lurkers against a mobile bio army that can pick up and drop elsewhere. Protoss and terran both got HUGE buffs in harass capabilities in LoTV and zerg? most of the time when nydus is seen at high level it's a desperate all in that doesn't work and they are going to neft overlord drops which are at best a gimmicky and risky all in for the early game. Where is zerg's harass, Blizzard? what does zerg have that can harass like liberators or adepts? Hey, I know how you can even the odds there. Banelings with shade, which can be cancelled, just like adepts, or overlords which shoot banelings out of them automatically with range equal to liberators. both ridiculous, right? of course. but only as ridiculous as what protoss and terran already have in their possession.
I think a simple and elegance help to Protoss should help us against Zerg: increase the radius of the Pylon by 1 right now 2 Pylons don't even complete cover the mineral line, so an increase by 1 should be helpful enough right now also, please don't even think about buffing Bansee, it's bad enough right now
On March 25 2016 09:56 baabaa wrote: the reason terrans don't use banshees is because you gave them ridiculously OP units like widow mines, liberators, tankivacs etc. etc. but blizzard's policy for Terran is ALWAYS "got to get them to use other units, have to buff these units to get them to use them, even though we know full well that we have given them OP units and the reason we KNOW they are OP is BECAUSE the terrans ALWAYS USE THEM. but even though we are well aware of this, and even though we have already made it crystal clear we are willing to nerf a ZERG unit (Swarmhosts) right out of the game because we think it gets used too much, even though it destroys zerg's lategame against Terran mech or Protoss Air, we will NEVER nerf a terran unit so that they don't use it any more, and we will ALWAYS look to buff other terran units to get terrans to use them more. this policy has NEVER been stated when dealing with zerg units. no zerg unit has ever been buffed to get them to use them more. muta heal: so they don't die quite as horribly to widow mines and can actually harass better. hydra speed: so they can actually attack and then retreat again without all dying. Blizzard, here is now you get terrans to use banshees more: NERF widow mines. NERF medivac dropping ability for tanks and widow mines. NERF Liberators. Buffing banshees will NOT cause terrans to use them more because no matter how strong you make banshees, Widow mine drops, tankivacs, liberators and a host of other things are still ridiculously OP and will still get used to death BECAUSE of that. Still dragging feet with necessary changes... and still downplaying necessary changes that have been publicly admitted as such. showcasing non-balance issues first to help distract players from the balance problems. Treat your 3 kids equally Blizzard, and stop using this policy of buffing terran units to help them compete with the other OP units to get more use out of them when you never adopt this policy with zerg. (Ever notice zerg players at top levels not using swarmhosts? ever notice zerg players at top levels rarely using infestors? rarely using broodlords? ever consider buffing these units so zerg uses them more? NEVER in a million years will Blizzard do this with zerg even though if it was Terran they would do this FOR CERTAIN. It's time Blizzard admits to this gaping discrepancy and addresses it instead of pretending they are not doing this. in case this is not clear enough, we have it from Blizzard's own mouth that they buff terran units for NO OTHER REASON then to get them to use them more. Banshees are not a weak unit. they have good damage and quick shots and can cloak. they don't need a buff except that terran has other units that are so good there is no point in them making banshees, they can win way easier with other units. Swarmhosts do not get used because they were nerfed and now are clearly a weak unit with little point to make them. Blizzard's nerf of swarmhosts was way beyond the level of sensibility and they will never reconsider this even though it would be a very smart thing to admit they overdid this. Swarmhosts I'm sure get used LESS than Terrans use banshees. That means, if Blizzard treated its races in a fair manner, they would be discussing buff to swarmhosts to bring them back into the meta. But they aren't. This proves their bias. Unfortunately, no matter now obvious the bias is, they will not change their views on this. Nor would they even make mention of this issue, hoping it doesn't get noticed. but it is too hard not to notice it. How many zergs out there are still stuck with resorting to WoL style Muta ling bane even though now Terrans have widow mines AND liberators to take out half the zerg army before they even get close to the Marines? ravagers don't work long term against terran. zerg needs more mobility and can't really go with lurkers against a mobile bio army that can pick up and drop elsewhere. Protoss and terran both got HUGE buffs in harass capabilities in LoTV and zerg? most of the time when nydus is seen at high level it's a desperate all in that doesn't work and they are going to neft overlord drops which are at best a gimmicky and risky all in for the early game. Where is zerg's harass, Blizzard? what does zerg have that can harass like liberators or adepts? Hey, I know how you can even the odds there. Banelings with shade, which can be cancelled, just like adepts, or overlords which shoot banelings out of them automatically with range equal to liberators. both ridiculous, right? of course. but only as ridiculous as what protoss and terran already have in their possession.
Good fucking god, why would they compensate a liberator nerf with a banshee buff? The liberator's ground attack is far more interesting than the banshee ever will be. Why would you ever encourage players to use a less interesting unit over a more interesting one? The liberator rewards intelligent positioning on both sides far more than a banshee does.
The game needs less units that can turn games into coinflips.
If they decide to nerf the lib radius they hopefully put +1 radius into advanced ballistics upgrade. I think nerfing the radius is actually a huge deal, because honestly its quite not that hard to walk around liberation zones.
Blizzard should re-consider combining mech air and ground upgrades. Armories should go to brood war price (100/50).
Liberator is only unit keeping Terran playable atm. I think it's OP but there's no other good anti-air unit with splash that T has ever since raven/seeker was nerfed. With liberators sucking...and ravens being unusable it's not a good thing for T imo.
Mech viability? Mech is still pretty bad...thor change might help or it might be so negligible to do nothing and then mech still sucks for another 6+ months =/
Banshee change is nice...but to be honest...it's really, really arbitrary. Like no Terran is going to argue that they don't want that...it's just it's completely random. Why don't they address mech issues more focused like cyclones being garbage....thors vs capital ships...and air units in general being OP.
Imo...liberators should not be nerfed unless tempests, broods, bcs, and carriers are all also nerfed at the same time. You cannot nerf just one races OP air unit. All of those units imo deserve supply increases.
Think about this. If liberators were 4 supply, instead of 3, if tempests were 8 supply instead of 4...if ravens/vipers were 3/4 supply respectively, and broodlords 6 supply...there will be less of these OP air units on the map in a maxed 200/200 army, and the person that focuses on ground units will have an advantage and be able to force action.
Air units inherently are OP in HOTS/LOTV. And that is not how the game should be because air units have the inherent advantage of FLYING. Meaning a lot of the units in the game cannot shoot up and the game becomes "do i have enough anti-air units to kill those? If i don't, all of my ground units are negligible, i must mass air myself."
I think all air still needs a nerf in supply. I've made countless threads about it on TL...but yeah a liberator nerf without nerfing other races corresponding lategame bullshit air is a really, really bad idea imo.
EPT
