EPTPatch 4.0 - StarCraft II is free to play - Page 10
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
| ||
|
Ansibled
United Kingdom9872 Posts
On November 16 2017 19:44 Agh wrote: You're incredibly naive. Hopefully blizzard just takes the initiative in just adding a client side toggle to disable skins. The alternative solution will be like what most people do in league, just patch and replace the files for the skins. Both sides win no matter the course. The people that want to see their 'cool' units get to do so, those that don't want their playing experience negatively impacted don't have to. 'What most people do in league' rofl Who is naive? | ||
|
Creager
Germany1962 Posts
On November 16 2017 19:49 ejozl wrote: The argument against the ' * Remove All Skins ' button is that it removes incentive to buy skins in the first place. Hopefully we're at a point where there is enough skins and that people enjoy the skins that they use themselves, in which case not everyone would utilize this button. Personally I would use the button. Well, that's how it should theoretically work in the first place. You buy something because YOU like it, not because you want to show off, provoke or are just doing it for appreciation of others. The point of the button would be that you don't see any potential skins of your opponent on your client only, he/she still can see his/her skins. I really wonder why people don't bitch about the alt-color feature (where you set your own color to green and your opponents' to red), because technically this is very similar - why pick a favorite color when my opponent can alter it on his machine and he cannot see anymore that I like purple? Of course noone is complaining about this, but now that microtransactions are a thing people could feel butthurt because they've spent money on something they potentially cannot rub into other people's faces? | ||
|
Loccstana
United States833 Posts
Lets examine each spell: 1. Repair drone: Not very useful since SCVs can already repair mech units and unlike SCVs they are static. Also 12 hps is pitiful compared to the high average hitpoints that mech units have. If the enemy has some semblence of micro, he will focus fire mech units, and completely negative any use of the repair drone in battle. 2. Interference Matrix: Interesting idea in concept, but its statics are just completely garbage. 6 seconds is too short consider it is single target and only 8 range. The counter to this spell could not any simpler: retreat, wait for 6 seconds, and move back in. Also, enemy casters can shutdown this spell very easily with range 12.5 fungals, range 9 feedbacks, range 11.5 EMP, and range 9 abducts. For comparison, lockdown, a similar spell in broodwar, lasted 10 times longer, yet was barely used in pro games. 3. Anti-armor missile: The splash damage done is pathetic for a 125 energy spell. It is literally 75% of the splash damage of a widow mine shot without the additional single target damage. Let that sink in for a moment. Except for un-upgraded banelings, there isnt a single unit in the game that it can kill. How about the anti-armor ability? It only synergizes well with only one other Terran unit, the marine and is only useful lategame since that is when units usually have at least 3 base armor. Unforunately, mass marines are simply not viable in lategame and get destroyed by the incredible amount of splash damage that is avaliable to 3 races. Marines will get destroyed so fast, they wont have time to take advantage of this spell. The final nail in the coffin is that simple micro like splitting your units or just running away will tremendously reduce its effectiveness. | ||
NonY
8751 Posts
On November 16 2017 16:35 papaz wrote: I cannot believe someone like you is still arguing about the skins. What is so hard to understand? For the casual playerbase skins mean a lot, they are tagerted here. That also includes showing your skin to the opponent. Read the last sentence a couple of times so you REALLY understand why paying for turning off skins will NEVER be an option. In almost all games on all levels the outcome of a game wont be decided because of the skin of the unit. Your ladder rank over time will DEFINETELY NOT depend on skins being on or off. And in tournaments skins are off so no game outcome is affected by skins. How on earth this subject is so difficult to understand from Blizzard and overall playerbase point of view and see someone like you argue over this for so long is beyond me. I don't think I've failed to understand anything. I'm posting ideas that some other people hadn't thought of and also facts that some people didn't know. I think I could argue both sides of this issue as well as anyone. But it's hard to know what I don't know so I can't say for sure. Blizzard has controlled skins for SC2 tournaments and for OW tournaments and I know that they will continue to do so. Will they ever exercise some control over skins for the ladder competition that feeds into these tournaments? I don't know. In the interest of fairness, they have different rules for matchmaking Masters and GM players. So there's already a precedent for having different rules for a part of the ladder when the integrity of the competition is at stake. There's a precedent for controlling skins in tournaments. It's not unreasonable to think that controlling skins in GM is the next step. While Blizzard does want to get their microtransactions going, they're also extremely focused on esports. Their success is tied to how well their games do as esports. Part of that success is prioritizing competitive players' needs and maintaining the integrity of the competition. Making special allowances to take care of the top 1% of players absolutely makes sense for their business. It is vital that competitive players view Blizzard as a good steward of esports. Edit: People thinking of collections as a necessary evil that doesn't care if it interferes with competition are thinking of it all wrong. The game as an esport is one of the main things to drive ongoing microtransactions. There will be synergy. Just because one set of unit skins was created that isn't good for competitive play doesn't mean that competitive integrity doesn't matter anymore. Competition will be protected and actually enhanced by these things. It's a simple mistake of inexperience that the artists designing the skins did not know what defining characteristics of units players had learned to use to recognize them at a glance. Esports and microtransaction synergy will march on. But maybe there should be an option for competitive players to disable these skins. It's not that big of a deal. People extrapolating my request to encompass far too many players and situations have the wrong idea. Handling situations like this properly is actually key to the continued success of both esports and microtransactions. | ||
|
DeadByDawn
United Kingdom476 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17805 Posts
from a strictly "fantasy" perspective i'd prefer to control the skins of both me and my opponent. Dominion-Special-Forces versus Standard-Skins in a Terran mirror match looks fucking awesome. Blizzard has a reason to cede "total skin control" to the client for both the serious player and the casual player. If the customization i'm requesting demands too many software engineering resources to create then a "default skins" checkbox could be placed in the OPTIONS menu some place. This at least helps the serious players with their valid concerns about skins. i think the serious players' concerns should be dealt with first.. after that if they can pull off what i'm requesting... that'd be super cool. | ||
|
Aegwynn
Italy460 Posts
On November 16 2017 22:49 DeadByDawn wrote: Is there a T counter build to the 3 min Oracle, that does not leave you dead moments later? I was thinking of starting to play again, but not sure that now is the time. Did they mention any timeline for a balance redress once they have data? No there isn't. They need to fix this problem asap. | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23580 Posts
On November 16 2017 22:26 NonY wrote: I don't think I've failed to understand anything. I'm posting ideas that some other people hadn't thought of and also facts that some people didn't know. I think I could argue both sides of this issue as well as anyone. But it's hard to know what I don't know so I can't say for sure. Blizzard has controlled skins for SC2 tournaments and for OW tournaments and I know that they will continue to do so. Will they ever exercise some control over skins for the ladder competition that feeds into these tournaments? I don't know. In the interest of fairness, they have different rules for matchmaking Masters and GM players. So there's already a precedent for having different rules for a part of the ladder when the integrity of the competition is at stake. There's a precedent for controlling skins in tournaments. It's not unreasonable to think that controlling skins in GM is the next step. While Blizzard does want to get their microtransactions going, they're also extremely focused on esports. Their success is tied to how well their games do as esports. Part of that success is prioritizing competitive players' needs and maintaining the integrity of the competition. Making special allowances to take care of the top 1% of players absolutely makes sense for their business. It is vital that competitive players view Blizzard as a good steward of esports. Edit: People thinking of collections as a necessary evil that doesn't care if it interferes with competition are thinking of it all wrong. The game as an esport is one of the main things to drive ongoing microtransactions. There will be synergy. Just because one set of unit skins was created that isn't good for competitive play doesn't mean that competitive integrity doesn't matter anymore. Competition will be protected and actually enhanced by these things. It's a simple mistake of inexperience that the artists designing the skins did not know what defining characteristics of units players had learned to use to recognize them at a glance. Esports and microtransaction synergy will march on. But maybe there should be an option for competitive players to disable these skins. It's not that big of a deal. People extrapolating my request to encompass far too many players and situations have the wrong idea. Handling situations like this properly is actually key to the continued success of both esports and microtransactions. I agree with so much that you said here. Also Blizzard could provide an option to disable skins and I would find it good, but I just don't think they will and nobody should get angry about that. However I don't agree with the implication that skins are pay to win, provide an unfair advantage over other players and that players who use skins are abusive. Someone even called it legal cheating lol. Skins are acceptable microtransactions, exactly because they do not affect gameplay. If a sc2 skin affects gameplay because of a mistake from an artist, then we should just give them feedback and it should get fixed. I agree with you and think, in the long run, skins will even enhance the viewer and player experience, by making it more easy to differentiate units in a mirror matchup. So I think the disable skins option would be fine, but it would simply be used by players who do not like skins (for whatever reason), not by competitive players, since skins have or will have no impact on the competitiveness. Lots of high level players like to play with skins. At HSC we saw skins in pretty much every game and I think we can agree on the fact the HSC players are competitive. Obviously encountering a new skin for the first time after release can be confusing (although personally I never had this experience in sc2, just in other games where heroes look completely different), but learning that there is a new skin is just part of the game. Every pro should be able to adapt after a few games. | ||
|
Penev
28536 Posts
And yeah I know that's not likely to happen. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17805 Posts
On November 17 2017 01:44 Penev wrote: Instead of just a disable skins option I would like to have the option to have full control of what the game on my end looks like. So I'd be able to enable a certain skin for my opponent, provided I own it of course. And yeah I know that's not likely to happen. i'd pay for that option. make it part of the Warchest #2 maybe? | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23580 Posts
On November 17 2017 01:44 Penev wrote: Instead of just a disable skins option I would like to have the option to have full control of what the game on my end looks like. So I'd be able to enable a certain skin for my opponent, provided I own it of course. And yeah I know that's not likely to happen. That would indeed be a sick feature! Equip your own skins on enemy units, holy hell. On the other hand it takes away power from the opponent, not sure now  . Maybe it gets too complicated. | ||
|
DeadByDawn
United Kingdom476 Posts
On November 17 2017 00:55 Aegwynn wrote: No there isn't. They need to fix this problem asap. Great. Not a good time to expect a patch soon then, what with Thanksgiving and Christmas coming up. Watched Ryung earlier playing against someone with what looked like 6 shield batteries outside the ramp of his natural - LOL. As for skins, even though I haven't played in quite some time, I buy these things for myself (announcer packs too). I don't care if anyone else sees them. | ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
| ||
|
Aegwynn
Italy460 Posts
On November 17 2017 03:01 washikie wrote: After testing some builds with a budy we found it is possible with rax,reactor,expo,rax and a bunker on low ground to hold the oracle timing you can have 7 marines by the time it reaches your main, one in the bunker 6 in base the bunker denies the sheild batteries at your ramp, from there you can tech to medivacs and hit a delayed 16 marine drop timing. this build proxy rax, proxy ghost rush, and fast engi bay appear to be the only Terran builds that even have a chance vs oracle shield battery rushes. Problamaticly if Protoss scouts your blind counter they can proxy double robo instead, without air units off a 1-1-1 double robo is very challenging to hold immortals chew up marines like it's nothing.. Are you sure you test the 12pylon version of the build? Because with 12 pylon proxy oracle arrives terran base at 3:00. According to Special only way not to die is building super early ebay which puts you behind anyways and doesn't help with the shield battery contain at all. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12133 Posts
 After a long time considering buying something. This is really something that hit me.Thanks, Blizzard(I hope they read it here ) | ||
|
Lazare1969
United States318 Posts
| ||
|
grizzlybear
19 Posts
On November 17 2017 00:55 Aegwynn wrote: No there isn't. They need to fix this problem asap. CC first into 3 rax and rax -> gas -> reactor -> CC build enough marines in time. Not perfect solutions by any means but they'll get you started on the ladder. For the top level, IMHO the former is too greedy to develop into a standard opener and the latter lacks a reaper for scouting and creating space. My guess is either people will figure out other builds or Blizzard will need to patch it. | ||
|
Spect8rCraft
649 Posts
| ||
|
Odowan Paleolithic
United States232 Posts
On November 17 2017 08:36 grizzlybear wrote: CC first into 3 rax and rax -> gas -> reactor -> CC build enough marines in time. Not perfect solutions by any means but they'll get you started on the ladder. For the top level, IMHO the former is too greedy to develop into a standard opener and the latter lacks a reaper for scouting and creating space. My guess is either people will figure out other builds or Blizzard will need to patch it. How much does SCV scout cost? | ||
| ||
