|
Watch StarCraft II on Twitch to Support Esports in 2019
War Chest, StarCraft II’s seasonal program that gives players a way to unlock an arsenal of in-game extras while supporting StarCraft II esports, is back with all-new rewards with War Chest 4! Additionally, for the first time ever, War Chest will integrate directly with social video service Twitch to reward players for watching StarCraft II on the platform. Players who watch participating StarCraft II streams on Twitch during War Chest 4 will earn XP towards unlocking rewards, just as they do for playing the game.
War Chest 4 rewards are themed after Terran Special Forces, Simulant Zerg, and Forged Protoss, and they include in-game player portraits, sprays, emoticons, banners, and—for the first time—building skins.
Players can purchase access to War Chest 4 for €9.99 (EUR) per race or €24.99 (EUR) for all three races. 25% of the proceeds will fund 2019 StarCraft esports. War Chest 4 kicks off December 18, so stay tuned for more details!
War Chest 3 increased the prize pool for the 2018 WCS Global Finals at BlizzCon by $200,000, bringing the total prize pool to $700,000—tied with the highest prize pool ever for a StarCraft II esports event.
Source: StarCraft II BlizzCon 2018 Fact Sheet
Edit 2018-12-20: You can buy the Warchest through affiliate links to support your favourite streamer!
Here is a list https://www.twitch.tv/team/sc2warchest/
|
|
|
And still no option to disable skins, what a bummer.
|
Not gonna happen creager, its a source of money for them.
Same thing happened in dota, people ask for it but its their revenue stream so they have to keep it.
|
It doesn't feel right for a warchest where its the same price but is only building skins... They should've been bundled together in the first place.
|
On November 03 2018 07:15 zolocommander wrote:
Not gonna happen creager, its a source of money for them.
Same thing happened in dota, people ask for it but its their revenue stream so they have to keep it.
Well, just because other games do it, doesn't mean it has to be this way with all games, and SC2 didn't even start on a f2p business model.
I'm just not a person to get triggered to buy skins when forced to look at them and I just wish, they'd respect (apparently the minority of) players who just see skins in such a highly competitive game as annoying, I'd rather spend $5 or even $10 for an option like this (which actually also sounds kinda ridiculous, just let me play the game I've grown accustomed to over the years without all this new cosmetic bs they're cranking out).
|
Just bumping this because this is the most noteworthy thing that happened for sc2 at BlizzCon, besides the actual WCS tournament of course.
|
Bit offtopic but has anybody got the watching rewards?
I have watched everyday of WCS Global finals and I havent got anything. I got rare loot chest for Heroes of the Storm even tho I watched it for less than 1 minute.
|
is there any information about what tournaments are going to be supported with that?
because i don't have any interest in increasing the prizepool of the already biggest tournaments in sc2 instead of more grassroot stuff just for some superficial hype
|
No new misson pack announcement?
|
South Korea2105 Posts
On November 03 2018 21:01 romson87 wrote:
No new misson pack announcement?
There's a 'What's Next' panel later on today, something might get announced, who knows
|
On November 03 2018 21:50 Ziggy wrote:There's a 'What's Next' panel later on today, something might get announced, who knows
A mission pack would be pretty big news that even lapsed players could be interested in. I can't imagine it not being shown in the opening ceremony.
|
On November 03 2018 07:15 zolocommander wrote:
Not gonna happen creager, its a source of money for them.
Same thing happened in dota, people ask for it but its their revenue stream so they have to keep it.
what i'd like is.. i can customize my skins and my opponents skins based on the skins i've purchased. creating the exact experience i want.
imagine a Terran mirror that is....
Raynor's Raiders Versus Dominion Special Forces
|
Austria24422 Posts
|
Disruptor Portrait, wheres raven portrait...
|
United States33493 Posts
An extra large refinery to hide Widow Mines behind, please
|
This is great for people who mainly watch Starcraft and don't play much but want to support eSports by buying the warchest. This way they still get the unlocks even if they don't play enough to get the unlocks.
|
I'd do that, but I have no idea how the money is spent.
Adding 200k to Blizzcon price pool (which I know is the result of warchest funding) hardly seems worth it, to be honest.
Shoutcraft's were an awesome thing to fund this way (especially if they would be truly regular, as in every month), but with TB gone they seem to be gone as well.
|
If they could at least update the list of winners on the Warchest tab ffs...
|
More news, that is unexpected. Looking forward to get more out of my warchest buys 
I am one the buyers who doesn't play much anymore, so I like that I will get some rewards by watching twitch.
|
On November 04 2018 00:20 Waxangel wrote:
An extra large refinery to hide Widow Mines behind, please
I want my zerglings to look like mini-ultralisks and my Ultralisks to look like mega-zerglings.
|
On November 03 2018 20:27 TheBloodyDwarf wrote:
Bit offtopic but has anybody got the watching rewards?
I have watched everyday of WCS Global finals and I havent got anything. I got rare loot chest for Heroes of the Storm even tho I watched it for less than 1 minute.
I got two of the random drop banners (one Random and one Terran) and two of the portraits for SC2, and a rare loot chest for HotS. I watched almost all day on the Quarter finals.
I didn't get the Zerg or Protoss banners from the random drops.
|
I'm not buying it, Blizzard. Seriously, as I said previously, until they start putting money from warchest not in Blizzcon but in additional tournaments and code A.
|
<insert obligatory post whining about no option to disable skins>
|
On November 06 2018 13:00 litLikeBic wrote:
<insert obligatory post whining about no option to disable skins>
totes
they need XXXL zergling wings so they become actually impossible to count
Better yet just give the new mech ones the metal umbrellas from fortnite so you can't see anything under them
|
On November 06 2018 14:19 Agh wrote:
they need XXXL zergling wings so they become actually impossible to count
green wings from Diablo3 (completing set portals).
|
Russian Federation31 Posts
which streams are participating?
|
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected
|
give the ability to customize the skins of both me and my opponent.
so if i want my Terran opponent to look like "Dominion Special Forces" because I hate teh Mengsk family... i buy the "Dominion Special Forces" skin pack and make my opponent look how i want.
or if i just want all skins to be the default standard skins.. i can have that too.
customizing opponents skins gives the best of both worlds for skin lovers and for ultra competitive players.
The Skin Customization Screen and associated software engineering requires substantial Blizzard resources so they can charge say... $25 for skin customization.
ATVI also has to pay someone to fold all the money Bobby Kotick makes so we'll have to add another $2 to that $25. so it'll be $27 total.
|
On November 10 2018 06:18 brickrd wrote:
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected
can we please stop with this already? when will you realize it's fruitless to even ponder the disabling of skins? every time there's a thread on skins, we get the same predictable posts whining about how they supposedly alter game balance. if they do alter balance, is it really so gamebreaking? is it the end of the world if you're rank 90 master instead of rank 70 master because jimmy's big ling wings obscured your view?
|
On November 10 2018 07:09 litLikeBic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2018 06:18 brickrd wrote:
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected can we please stop with this already? when will you realize it's fruitless to even ponder the disabling of skins? every time there's a thread on skins, we get the same predictable posts whining about how they supposedly alter game balance. if they do alter balance, is it really so gamebreaking? is it the end of the world if you're rank 90 master instead of rank 70 master because jimmy's big ling wings obscured your view?
maybe it's not about ladder rank but about fun. games are supposed to be fun, you know? And it reduces the fun for me if I have to put more attention than usual in differentiating the units.
|
On November 10 2018 07:15 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2018 07:09 litLikeBic wrote:On November 10 2018 06:18 brickrd wrote:
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected can we please stop with this already? when will you realize it's fruitless to even ponder the disabling of skins? every time there's a thread on skins, we get the same predictable posts whining about how they supposedly alter game balance. if they do alter balance, is it really so gamebreaking? is it the end of the world if you're rank 90 master instead of rank 70 master because jimmy's big ling wings obscured your view? maybe it's not about ladder rank but about fun. games are supposed to be fun, you know? And it reduces the fun for me if I have to put more attention than usual in differentiating the units.
But it increases the fun for me if I know you're putting more attention than usual in differentiating the units.
|
at least it's not a mobile game.
|
On November 05 2018 04:18 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2018 00:20 Waxangel wrote:
An extra large refinery to hide Widow Mines behind, please I want my zerglings to look like mini-ultralisks and my Ultralisks to look like mega-zerglings.
I´d like my zealots with a guitar instead of psiblades, so they look like making solo riff when charging.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On November 12 2018 07:18 Malongo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2018 04:18 KR_4EVR wrote:On November 04 2018 00:20 Waxangel wrote:
An extra large refinery to hide Widow Mines behind, please I want my zerglings to look like mini-ultralisks and my Ultralisks to look like mega-zerglings. I´d like my zealots with a guitar instead of psiblades, so they look like making solo riff when charging.
I would love all ranged protoss units do Pew! Pew! Pew! instead of their general attack sounds  Except for Colossus, where it would be a long Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
|
I wish that the skins for buildings corresponded with the last warchest. Umojan skins beat special forces any day.
|
Bisutopia19299 Posts
On November 06 2018 13:00 litLikeBic wrote:
insert obligatory post whining about no option to disable skins
What's wrong with that? I'm colorblind and certain skins can cause me trouble. Should it not be an option to disable them for the vision impaired? Being colorblind is really tough especially in StarCraft. I've had to deal with the pains it has caused me in SC1 for 20 years. SC2 has been much better at colors. Wouldn't it be wise to ask that disabling skins is an options while I still have the chance for developers to improve my predicament?
|
8751 Posts
On November 10 2018 07:09 litLikeBic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2018 06:18 brickrd wrote:
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected can we please stop with this already? when will you realize it's fruitless to even ponder the disabling of skins? every time there's a thread on skins, we get the same predictable posts whining about how they supposedly alter game balance. if they do alter balance, is it really so gamebreaking? is it the end of the world if you're rank 90 master instead of rank 70 master because jimmy's big ling wings obscured your view?
people who buy skins want to be able to set the skins they see, including opponents' units. it keeps coming up because it's a really obvious improvement that a lot of customers would enjoy and i think they might sell more of the 3-race packs if they did it. win-win
i know in every other game it's the same as sc2 is now (player sets his own skins and other people have to see his choices). but if someone with authority at blizzard would take 5 mins to think about it, it's pretty clear that sc2 should be an exception on how skins work.
it's gonna be brought up in every warchest thread until they implement this improvement
|
On November 15 2018 06:31 NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2018 07:09 litLikeBic wrote:On November 10 2018 06:18 brickrd wrote:
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected can we please stop with this already? when will you realize it's fruitless to even ponder the disabling of skins? every time there's a thread on skins, we get the same predictable posts whining about how they supposedly alter game balance. if they do alter balance, is it really so gamebreaking? is it the end of the world if you're rank 90 master instead of rank 70 master because jimmy's big ling wings obscured your view? people who buy skins want to be able to set the skins they see, including opponents' units. it keeps coming up because it's a really obvious improvement that a lot of customers would enjoy and i think they might sell more of the 3-race packs if they did it. win-win i know in every other game it's the same as sc2 is now (player sets his own skins and other people have to see his choices). but if someone with authority at blizzard would take 5 mins to think about it, it's pretty clear that sc2 should be an exception on how skins work. it's gonna be brought up in every warchest thread until they implement this improvement
I think many people buy skins because they want them to be seen though. So it's better as it is now. More money for SC2.
|
United Kingdom20322 Posts
Adding all of these skins without an option to disable or customize them for the opponent is sacrificing the competitive nature of the game for money and/or non-competitive fun. Given that the game is driven by competition i think that's a bad move.
|
On November 15 2018 06:31 NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2018 07:09 litLikeBic wrote:On November 10 2018 06:18 brickrd wrote:
on the skin debate, anyone ever suggest making skins unranked-only? like, if you queue unranked you see the skins, if you queue ranked you don't? seems like a somewhat reasonable compromise to me... that way the issue of game balance being altered is mitigated since people who are laddering seriously for rank are unaffected can we please stop with this already? when will you realize it's fruitless to even ponder the disabling of skins? every time there's a thread on skins, we get the same predictable posts whining about how they supposedly alter game balance. if they do alter balance, is it really so gamebreaking? is it the end of the world if you're rank 90 master instead of rank 70 master because jimmy's big ling wings obscured your view? people who buy skins want to be able to set the skins they see, including opponents' units. it keeps coming up because it's a really obvious improvement that a lot of customers would enjoy and i think they might sell more of the 3-race packs if they did it. win-win i know in every other game it's the same as sc2 is now (player sets his own skins and other people have to see his choices). but if someone with authority at blizzard would take 5 mins to think about it, it's pretty clear that sc2 should be an exception on how skins work. it's gonna be brought up in every warchest thread until they implement this improvement
That seems counter condusive to the point of skins. People use skin to show off, thats a giant part of the game for people. They drop money or grind in order to acquire skins to peacock.
If someone could just set my skin to default, then that whole aspect is gone for me. Thats why there are few, if any, games with that option.
|
Austria24422 Posts
I think there should be an option to turn skins off for players, but only for tournament play. Viewers should be able to see the skins in tournaments, but I can understand if players don't want them when it matters. On the ladder, though, you shouldn't be able to turn them off. lestye is right, a big point of skins is to show them off.
|
People should really not talk for the pro's, honestly they spend the majority of their days playing the game, they get used to the skins pretty fast, it's the person that plays 1h a week that has the bigger problems with skins, because things like total number of units or even unit differentiation in big clumps becomes a problem since experience is often the biggest factor in assessing the correct army size and composition at a glance.
For tournament use, it should just be the tournament organizer setting the rules, Just tell the players they can't use skins and if they do their desqualified.
It's not really a big deal. I do agree that some skins do loose some of the clarity for the game, but it's an extremely low price for keeping this game alive and growing.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
if I can't make my enemy suffer through seeing my anime wife zerglings why would I even buy them
|
Skins aren't a problem. Poorly designed skins that disrupt gameplay (roaches with spikes, black immortals+stalkers, hallu collossi, purple banes etc.) are.
|
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On November 15 2018 22:04 Ej_ wrote:
Skins aren't a problem. Poorly designed skins that disrupt gameplay (roaches with spikes, black immortals+stalkers, hallu collossi, purple banes etc.) are.
Exactly this. Right from the start there was that one zergling skin which made it much harder to tell how many zerglings there were in a pack, so it was a competitive advantage. Other skins make units look similar to other units in the base skin or the currently selected skin so that you can't tell them apart at a glance or in peripheral vision.
|
On November 15 2018 21:32 Bazik wrote:
People should really not talk for the pro's, honestly they spend the majority of their days playing the game, they get used to the skins pretty fast, it's the person that plays 1h a week that has the bigger problems with skins, because things like total number of units or even unit differentiation in big clumps becomes a problem since experience is often the biggest factor in assessing the correct army size and composition at a glance.
For tournament use, it should just be the tournament organizer setting the rules, Just tell the players they can't use skins and if they do their desqualified.
It's not really a big deal. I do agree that some skins do loose some of the clarity for the game, but it's an extremely low price for keeping this game alive and growing.
regarding tournaments, i think thats what is happening now.
i think olli is suggesting is that skins to be turned on for spectators, but not for competitors in the tournaments that disallow skins
|
On November 15 2018 21:17 Olli wrote:
I think there should be an option to turn skins off for players, but only for tournament play. Viewers should be able to see the skins in tournaments, but I can understand if players don't want them when it matters. On the ladder, though, you shouldn't be able to turn them off. lestye is right, a big point of skins is to show them off.
How about this being handled in discretion, then? Just let there be no option for players to check if their opponents can see skins and show-off's never will even know (kinda like ranked/unranked being in the same pool regarding matchmaking), win-win for everyone, posers think they "impress" others, abusers think they "disrupt/irritate" others, skin haters can just play the game and not give a single fuck, skin lovers can customize all the skins to their liking and throw more $$$ at Activision Blizzard.
Again, I really have to reiterate how beyond stupid this whole peacock-argument is to me, I mean, fine, I get it, people strive for recognition and acceptance within their social groups, or let's say, the majority of society, but aren't people first and foremost attracted to buy certain skins because of their aesthetic appeal?
I loved to grind ladder games back then to get my BC portrait and yeah, of course I took some pide into being able to show that to my opponent during the loading screen, but I'd like to argue that content you unlock by just playing the game, be it either pulling off extravagant things for achievements or delivering on the grindy side of things, like farming competitive wins for a portrait have a whole different meaning as opposed to this "buy yourself some 'sense of pride and accomplishment' for just $20" bullshit developers try to cash in on nowadays.
If people can't bear the thought that they could be the only ones in their matches seeing the skins they've bought and that would put them off from playing the game, they should really get their priorities straight or try to invest their money into other things.
I still would doubt heavily that skin sales would shrink substantially with a disable skin option implemented like I stated above and I'd also like to agree to the point others have made that SC2 should not have its skin policy dictated by other games that don't even come close to the visual clutter that StarCraft can be a lot of the time.
And since you can qualify for WCS via ladder placement, ranked ladder play should absolutely HAVE an option to disable skins altogether, there are plenty of game modes that could still have them (unranked, team games, co-op, campaign, customs).
|
I really wish we were able to disable these skins, I actually cant see the banelings very well in a lot of situations because of the skins which is ridiculous
|
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all.
|
On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all.
I guess some people just like to show off their skins and allowing players to disable skins may discourage these people from making purchase. Pretty sure Blizz wouldn't want anything like this to happen.
|
On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all.
Same reason you might wear certain clothes to be perceived a certain way; i.e., to control how you are perceived. I do not know why it is so hard for some people in this thread to get that. I thought that it is common knowledge that people are generally superficial and like to show off.
Blizz know this and that, consequently, they will make more money by not having a disable option, so you will NEVER get such an option.
|
On November 20 2018 14:52 litLikeBic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all. Same reason you might wear certain clothes to be perceived a certain way; i.e., to control how you are perceived. I do not know why it is so hard for some people in this thread to get that. I thought that it is common knowledge that people are generally superficial and like to show off. Blizz know this and that, consequently, they will make more money by not having a disable option, so you will NEVER get such an option.
What do they "know"? Have anyone done the calculations? And how could he if noone tested it? Having no "disable" button is just a consequence of blizzard being totally indifferent on the matter. The only good thing about skins is the higher you get the less skin abusers you actually encounter, as all "show-offers" dwell in 2s, 3s and leagues corresponding to their levels. Motivates to grind games.
|
On November 20 2018 18:07 insitelol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 14:52 litLikeBic wrote:On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all. Same reason you might wear certain clothes to be perceived a certain way; i.e., to control how you are perceived. I do not know why it is so hard for some people in this thread to get that. I thought that it is common knowledge that people are generally superficial and like to show off. Blizz know this and that, consequently, they will make more money by not having a disable option, so you will NEVER get such an option. What do they "know"? Have anyone done the calculations? And how could he if noone tested it? Having no "disable" button is just a consequence of blizzard being totally indifferent on the matter. The only good thing about skins is the higher you get the less skin abusers you actually encounter, as all "show-offers" dwell in 2s, 3s and leagues corresponding to their levels. Motivates to grind games.
It's not just Blizzard, it's EVERYONE I can think of. Hence why no game that offer skins offers that option, whether it to be Dota 2, Street Fighter V, League of Legends, Path of Exile, CS:GO, Warframe, Rainbow 6, Fortnite, etc.
|
On November 20 2018 20:07 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 18:07 insitelol wrote:On November 20 2018 14:52 litLikeBic wrote:On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all. Same reason you might wear certain clothes to be perceived a certain way; i.e., to control how you are perceived. I do not know why it is so hard for some people in this thread to get that. I thought that it is common knowledge that people are generally superficial and like to show off. Blizz know this and that, consequently, they will make more money by not having a disable option, so you will NEVER get such an option. What do they "know"? Have anyone done the calculations? And how could he if noone tested it? Having no "disable" button is just a consequence of blizzard being totally indifferent on the matter. The only good thing about skins is the higher you get the less skin abusers you actually encounter, as all "show-offers" dwell in 2s, 3s and leagues corresponding to their levels. Motivates to grind games. It's not just Blizzard, it's EVERYONE I can think of. Hence why no game that offer skins offers that option, whether it to be Dota 2, Street Fighter V, League of Legends, Path of Exile, CS:GO, Warframe, Rainbow 6, Fortnite, etc.
Well, you apparently fail to see the differing impact skins have in these games:
Dota 2/LoL - MOBA games with a lot less unit cluttering/makes it way easier to differentiate between 5 enemy heroes
Street Fighter - fighting game with only two characters on screen at a time, focus lies on learning animation frames to react accordingly
Path of Exile - really, such a shitty example to come up with in this regard, but ok. Co-op hack’n’slay game, literally nothing competitive about it
CS:GO - FPS with weapon skins/gloves(facepalm), literally 0 impact on competitive play, weird that valve didn’t implement a plethora of character skins, yet, maybe, because that would not sit that well with the competitive players?!
And all of these games except CS:GO are f2p and were designed to be from the start, I see SC2 in a separate category because of the nature of the game and it should be treated as such.
Oh, and SC:R has skins in it, but also an option to disable them/replace them with the standard sprite, just saying.
|
|
|
I don't get why people are still discussing this, let's see if I can help a bit more.
Having other players be forced to see the skin one player bought adds value to the purchase, hence the idea of players being able to disable that option devalues the whole sale. Hence what you guys are arguing for is devaluing the skins.
I understand you guys don't like it, but the reality is this is still a business and blizzard will always try to cram the highest amount of value in their products, specialy like in this case where it costs them nothing.
|
On November 20 2018 21:35 Bazik wrote:
I don't get why people are still discussing this, let's see if I can help a bit more.
Having other players be forced to see the skin one player bought adds value to the purchase, hence the idea of players being able to disable that option devalues the whole sale. Hence what you guys are arguing for is devaluing the skins.
I understand you guys don't like it, but the reality is this is still a business and blizzard will always try to cram the highest amount of value in their products, specialy like in this case where it costs them nothing.
So, according to your logic we should just accept this behaviour and give in/move on? I strongly disagree and will continue to voice my discontent with this situation on every relevant occasion possible.
Edit: I’d also like to add that “value” is such a subjective term, especially for a digital item, and what does it even mean in your context? Personal value for the buyer, because he thinks he has obtained an item of unbelievable scarcity? Or value for the seller since the forced display of such items has the potential of increasing sales?
From my personal experience I can tell you that people who dislike skins to begin with are not more likely to spend money on them just because they are forced to see them.
|
On November 20 2018 21:35 Bazik wrote:
I don't get why people are still discussing this, let's see if I can help a bit more.
Having other players be forced to see the skin one player bought adds value to the purchase, hence the idea of players being able to disable that option devalues the whole sale. Hence what you guys are arguing for is devaluing the skins.
I understand you guys don't like it, but the reality is this is still a business and blizzard will always try to cram the highest amount of value in their products, specialy like in this case where it costs them nothing.
I am fine with skins but there are a few exceptions. lings with wings should never happened. Ultralisk simulant skin is far better than the CE version.
|
On November 20 2018 21:13 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 20:07 lestye wrote:On November 20 2018 18:07 insitelol wrote:On November 20 2018 14:52 litLikeBic wrote:On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all. Same reason you might wear certain clothes to be perceived a certain way; i.e., to control how you are perceived. I do not know why it is so hard for some people in this thread to get that. I thought that it is common knowledge that people are generally superficial and like to show off. Blizz know this and that, consequently, they will make more money by not having a disable option, so you will NEVER get such an option. What do they "know"? Have anyone done the calculations? And how could he if noone tested it? Having no "disable" button is just a consequence of blizzard being totally indifferent on the matter. The only good thing about skins is the higher you get the less skin abusers you actually encounter, as all "show-offers" dwell in 2s, 3s and leagues corresponding to their levels. Motivates to grind games. It's not just Blizzard, it's EVERYONE I can think of. Hence why no game that offer skins offers that option, whether it to be Dota 2, Street Fighter V, League of Legends, Path of Exile, CS:GO, Warframe, Rainbow 6, Fortnite, etc. Well, you apparently fail to see the differing impact skins have in these games: Dota 2/LoL - MOBA games with a lot less unit cluttering/makes it way easier to differentiate between 5 enemy heroes Street Fighter - fighting game with only two characters on screen at a time, focus lies on learning animation frames to react accordingly Path of Exile - really, such a shitty example to come up with in this regard, but ok. Co-op hack’n’slay game, literally nothing competitive about it CS:GO - FPS with weapon skins/gloves(facepalm), literally 0 impact on competitive play, weird that valve didn’t implement a plethora of character skins, yet, maybe, because that would not sit that well with the competitive players?! And all of these games except CS:GO are f2p and were designed to be from the start, I see SC2 in a separate category because of the nature of the game and it should be treated as such. Oh, and SC:R has skins in it, but also an option to disable them/replace them with the standard sprite, just saying.
Actually, as you mentioned it. Almost all of the competetive games include MTX as a part on their monetization system because the games are free. I payed for my copy of SC2 3 times. Now they are adding chests and skins to keep the game alive and im all for that, but can't at least those who purchased the game have such an option? I can even pay a 4rth time for this. The sole fact BW has it and SC2 does not doesn't make any sense.
|
On November 20 2018 22:56 insitelol wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 21:13 Creager wrote:On November 20 2018 20:07 lestye wrote:On November 20 2018 18:07 insitelol wrote:On November 20 2018 14:52 litLikeBic wrote:On November 20 2018 10:47 brickrd wrote:
i have a couple of counterpoints to the "i want people to see when i have skins" argument
1) why? you're bragging that you spent money? i don't really get what you're "showing off"? do you think buying skins is "impressive" in some way?
2) theoretically, if they COULD be disabled, how would it even affect your experience? you're still sitting there playing the same game and everything looks the same for you. you're literally having less fun because your opponent sees normal units? what?
i mean, i KIND of get it... but on a deeper level i do not get it at all. Same reason you might wear certain clothes to be perceived a certain way; i.e., to control how you are perceived. I do not know why it is so hard for some people in this thread to get that. I thought that it is common knowledge that people are generally superficial and like to show off. Blizz know this and that, consequently, they will make more money by not having a disable option, so you will NEVER get such an option. What do they "know"? Have anyone done the calculations? And how could he if noone tested it? Having no "disable" button is just a consequence of blizzard being totally indifferent on the matter. The only good thing about skins is the higher you get the less skin abusers you actually encounter, as all "show-offers" dwell in 2s, 3s and leagues corresponding to their levels. Motivates to grind games. It's not just Blizzard, it's EVERYONE I can think of. Hence why no game that offer skins offers that option, whether it to be Dota 2, Street Fighter V, League of Legends, Path of Exile, CS:GO, Warframe, Rainbow 6, Fortnite, etc. Well, you apparently fail to see the differing impact skins have in these games: Dota 2/LoL - MOBA games with a lot less unit cluttering/makes it way easier to differentiate between 5 enemy heroes Street Fighter - fighting game with only two characters on screen at a time, focus lies on learning animation frames to react accordingly Path of Exile - really, such a shitty example to come up with in this regard, but ok. Co-op hack’n’slay game, literally nothing competitive about it CS:GO - FPS with weapon skins/gloves(facepalm), literally 0 impact on competitive play, weird that valve didn’t implement a plethora of character skins, yet, maybe, because that would not sit that well with the competitive players?! And all of these games except CS:GO are f2p and were designed to be from the start, I see SC2 in a separate category because of the nature of the game and it should be treated as such. Oh, and SC:R has skins in it, but also an option to disable them/replace them with the standard sprite, just saying. Actually, as you mentioned it. Almost all of the competetive games include MTs as a part on their monetization system because the games are free. I payed for my copy of SC2 3 times. Now they are adding chests and skins to keep the game alive and im all for that, but can't at least those who purchased the game have such an option? I can even pay a 4rth time for this. The sole fact BW has it and SC2 does not doesn't make any sense.
Thank you, that’s what I’ve been trying to convey, it’s not like I hate them monetizing the game by altering the business model around it to sustain tournament funding etc.(another topic), I’d even rather pay a ‘fee’ to turn MTX stuff off entirely, but they really should give it to players, just because.
|
So, according to your logic we should just accept this behaviour and give in/move on? I strongly disagree and will continue to voice my discontent with this situation on every relevant occasion possible.
Edit: I’d also like to add that “value” is such a subjective term, especially for a digital item, and what does it even mean in your context? Personal value for the buyer, because he thinks he has obtained an item of unbelievable scarcity? Or value for the seller since the forced display of such items has the potential of increasing sales?
From my personal experience I can tell you that people who dislike skins to begin with are not more likely to spend money on them just because they are forced to see them.
What I meant is pretty simple really, as long as there are people who will only spend money if the skins are forcibly visible than that aspect has value, even if the vast majority doesn't value it.
For blizzard the equation becomes really simple, if they showed it only to the player who bought it, their loosing revenue, and the choice for them becomes obvious, this is not a starcraft problem.
It's just standard economics, at the end of the day Blizzard makes more money showing the skins than the other way around. And the proof is Blizzard implements it the way it is now.
If it was not profitable they would've changed it instead of doubling down, which is what they are doing by making the next sets of skins the buildings.
|
On November 20 2018 21:54 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2018 21:35 Bazik wrote:
I don't get why people are still discussing this, let's see if I can help a bit more.
Having other players be forced to see the skin one player bought adds value to the purchase, hence the idea of players being able to disable that option devalues the whole sale. Hence what you guys are arguing for is devaluing the skins.
I understand you guys don't like it, but the reality is this is still a business and blizzard will always try to cram the highest amount of value in their products, specialy like in this case where it costs them nothing. So, according to your logic we should just accept this behaviour and give in/move on? I strongly disagree and will continue to voice my discontent with this situation on every relevant occasion possible. [...]
Yes. Accept it and get on with your life.
|
Just one quick question since I havent played in 4 years. Does buying warchest unlocks ranked ladder? If I purchase it for new account. Thx.
|
On December 17 2018 00:53 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
Just one quick question since I havent played in 4 years. Does buying warchest unlocks ranked ladder? If I purchase it for new account. Thx.
Yes it does! Probably the best way to unlock ranked if you are only interested in multiplayer and don't want to wait for 10 days.
|
On December 17 2018 01:04 Musicus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2018 00:53 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
Just one quick question since I havent played in 4 years. Does buying warchest unlocks ranked ladder? If I purchase it for new account. Thx. Yes it does! Probably the best way to unlock ranked if you are only interested in multiplayer and don't want to wait for 10 days.
Yes, thats exactly why I am asking. Thanks!
|
|
|
I can't get the building skins, wasn't it supposed to be yesterday with 4.8.0?
|
I dont see warchest4 at blizz shop at all
|
the skins are ingame but you still don't see at shop.
edit: consoles look sick. terran special forces, zerg simulant and protoss forged
|
Because of this bullshit with the skins I'll never start SC2 again. Not until they add a feature to disable them ingame.
Fuck off Blizzard!
|
Wow, BlueStar, that is definitely an overreaction. The skins are fine, honestly. I for one - as a on/off player, admittedly - enjoy the fresh look.
|
I would mind having skines which others cannot see. Also, for tournaments, caster should be able to turn them off.
I see them ingame but it was told it will be 9,99e per race and you can buy now like 4 units for that money. I guess we have to wait War Chest 4 to be on shop site.
|
8751 Posts
On November 21 2018 00:15 Bazik wrote:Show nested quote +So, according to your logic we should just accept this behaviour and give in/move on? I strongly disagree and will continue to voice my discontent with this situation on every relevant occasion possible.
Edit: I’d also like to add that “value” is such a subjective term, especially for a digital item, and what does it even mean in your context? Personal value for the buyer, because he thinks he has obtained an item of unbelievable scarcity? Or value for the seller since the forced display of such items has the potential of increasing sales?
From my personal experience I can tell you that people who dislike skins to begin with are not more likely to spend money on them just because they are forced to see them. What I meant is pretty simple really, as long as there are people who will only spend money if the skins are forcibly visible than that aspect has value, even if the vast majority doesn't value it. For blizzard the equation becomes really simple, if they showed it only to the player who bought it, their loosing revenue, and the choice for them becomes obvious, this is not a starcraft problem. It's just standard economics, at the end of the day Blizzard makes more money showing the skins than the other way around. And the proof is Blizzard implements it the way it is now. If it was not profitable they would've changed it instead of doubling down, which is what they are doing by making the next sets of skins the buildings.
People make this argument all the time: corporations exist to make money therefore if they could be doing something differently to make more money, they would be. It is nonsense. Not everything with a purpose is perfect at achieving that purpose. Just having a purpose doesn't mean that you are behaving in perfect alignment with it. No human endeavor is perfect like that.
Blizzard doesn't know if they'd make more money, about the same amount of money, or less money by changing the way skins work. They haven't tried it.
I can only speak for myself. When I buy the warchest, I only ever buy the protoss warchest. Like most players, I only play one race, so buying skins for other races is completely useless to me. If my skin preferences applied to both my units and my opponents' units, I'd shop for terran and zerg skins.
In addition to that, again only speaking for myself, skins have discouraged me from playing. I only play here and there and when I do play, I cannot recognize units at a glance. I simply don't play enough to have learned all of the skins. This makes me play the game even less. If my skin preferences applied to both my units and my opponents' units, I'd play the game more.
Blizzard would prefer it if I shopped for zerg and terran skins and if I played the game more. It'd make their corporation more valuable.
|
If they're worried about losing money they should just lock the option to disable skins behind a paywall.
|
On December 20 2018 01:40 NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2018 00:15 Bazik wrote:So, according to your logic we should just accept this behaviour and give in/move on? I strongly disagree and will continue to voice my discontent with this situation on every relevant occasion possible.
Edit: I’d also like to add that “value” is such a subjective term, especially for a digital item, and what does it even mean in your context? Personal value for the buyer, because he thinks he has obtained an item of unbelievable scarcity? Or value for the seller since the forced display of such items has the potential of increasing sales?
From my personal experience I can tell you that people who dislike skins to begin with are not more likely to spend money on them just because they are forced to see them. What I meant is pretty simple really, as long as there are people who will only spend money if the skins are forcibly visible than that aspect has value, even if the vast majority doesn't value it. For blizzard the equation becomes really simple, if they showed it only to the player who bought it, their loosing revenue, and the choice for them becomes obvious, this is not a starcraft problem. It's just standard economics, at the end of the day Blizzard makes more money showing the skins than the other way around. And the proof is Blizzard implements it the way it is now. If it was not profitable they would've changed it instead of doubling down, which is what they are doing by making the next sets of skins the buildings. People make this argument all the time: corporations exist to make money therefore if they could be doing something differently to make more money, they would be. It is nonsense. Not everything with a purpose is perfect at achieving that purpose. Just having a purpose doesn't mean that you are behaving in perfect alignment with it. No human endeavor is perfect like that. Blizzard doesn't know if they'd make more money, about the same amount of money, or less money by changing the way skins work. They haven't tried it. I can only speak for myself. When I buy the warchest, I only ever buy the protoss warchest. Like most players, I only play one race, so buying skins for other races is completely useless to me. If my skin preferences applied to both my units and my opponents' units, I'd shop for terran and zerg skins. In addition to that, again only speaking for myself, skins have discouraged me from playing. I only play here and there and when I do play, I cannot recognize units at a glance. I simply don't play enough to have learned all of the skins. This makes me play the game even less. If my skin preferences applied to both my units and my opponents' units, I'd play the game more. Blizzard would prefer it if I shopped for zerg and terran skins and if I played the game more. It'd make their corporation more valuable.
You can argue all you want but it's imo a fact (again: imo) that people want their skins to be seen by the opponent. That's the ONLY reason for many players: to show off.
If the opponent can disable skins people could just modify their client to show the skins they want without paying money. Like in the old days.
Do you really have such a big problem recognizing a unit when it's using a skin? I play SC2 since release (so no skins) and never ever had a problem recognizing a unit with another skin.
Plus I never heard a pro even mention this. Nobody seems to have problems with skins except for a few players who vent in forums like this.
I don't use skins and still want no option to disable skins. I like the little variety the skins offer and like mentioned above strongly believe SC2 makes more money like it is now. Your argument is legit but just holds on for a little fraction of players I think.
|
To me Twitch drops are just gonna reinforce even more the "E-sport as marketing" kind of immature way that western game companies handle e-sport by dragging games on top of trending.
|
Warchest Katowice 2019 will be available on (your phone) Dec. 21.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 20 2018 04:23 Doink wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 01:40 NonY wrote:On November 21 2018 00:15 Bazik wrote:So, according to your logic we should just accept this behaviour and give in/move on? I strongly disagree and will continue to voice my discontent with this situation on every relevant occasion possible.
Edit: I’d also like to add that “value” is such a subjective term, especially for a digital item, and what does it even mean in your context? Personal value for the buyer, because he thinks he has obtained an item of unbelievable scarcity? Or value for the seller since the forced display of such items has the potential of increasing sales?
From my personal experience I can tell you that people who dislike skins to begin with are not more likely to spend money on them just because they are forced to see them. What I meant is pretty simple really, as long as there are people who will only spend money if the skins are forcibly visible than that aspect has value, even if the vast majority doesn't value it. For blizzard the equation becomes really simple, if they showed it only to the player who bought it, their loosing revenue, and the choice for them becomes obvious, this is not a starcraft problem. It's just standard economics, at the end of the day Blizzard makes more money showing the skins than the other way around. And the proof is Blizzard implements it the way it is now. If it was not profitable they would've changed it instead of doubling down, which is what they are doing by making the next sets of skins the buildings. People make this argument all the time: corporations exist to make money therefore if they could be doing something differently to make more money, they would be. It is nonsense. Not everything with a purpose is perfect at achieving that purpose. Just having a purpose doesn't mean that you are behaving in perfect alignment with it. No human endeavor is perfect like that. Blizzard doesn't know if they'd make more money, about the same amount of money, or less money by changing the way skins work. They haven't tried it. I can only speak for myself. When I buy the warchest, I only ever buy the protoss warchest. Like most players, I only play one race, so buying skins for other races is completely useless to me. If my skin preferences applied to both my units and my opponents' units, I'd shop for terran and zerg skins. In addition to that, again only speaking for myself, skins have discouraged me from playing. I only play here and there and when I do play, I cannot recognize units at a glance. I simply don't play enough to have learned all of the skins. This makes me play the game even less. If my skin preferences applied to both my units and my opponents' units, I'd play the game more. Blizzard would prefer it if I shopped for zerg and terran skins and if I played the game more. It'd make their corporation more valuable. You can argue all you want but it's imo a fact (again: imo) that people want their skins to be seen by the opponent. That's the ONLY reason for many players: to show off. If the opponent can disable skins people could just modify their client to show the skins they want without paying money. Like in the old days. Do you really have such a big problem recognizing a unit when it's using a skin? I play SC2 since release (so no skins) and never ever had a problem recognizing a unit with another skin. Plus I never heard a pro even mention this. Nobody seems to have problems with skins except for a few players who vent in forums like this. I don't use skins and still want no option to disable skins. I like the little variety the skins offer and like mentioned above strongly believe SC2 makes more money like it is now. Your argument is legit but just holds on for a little fraction of players I think.
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuure, it's not like Scarlett didn't request a reset because skins are banned at tournaments
|
i honestly don't get why you can't disable them.
is there really a such big amount of players that only buy skins for others to see?
i for example use only 2-3 because i honestly like their look, but i don't care if my opponent sees them. people keep on bringing the "people would stop buying" argument, but from the fraction i can read here on TL, its not that many i think.
plus, with the option of custom skins for both sides, would that not be an even greater reason to buy all skins, so that i could have my very own look for my opponents as well, which means i would possibly buy skins for all races?
as mentioned above, you could even make the option a purcase in itself, so again more money is made.
for me, there are more points pro custom skins on both sides than cons (if any), but i still wouldn't buy to much (i don't like the money beeing used to blow up the already biggest tournaments), so maybe my opinon isn't the one to follow here
|
On December 19 2018 20:13 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
I dont see warchest4 at blizz shop at all
Same problem.
Where can I buy them?
|
On December 20 2018 18:36 Asturas wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2018 20:13 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
I dont see warchest4 at blizz shop at all Same problem. Where can I buy them?
You have to wait for it to appear in shop. Thats what I was told at support.
|
On December 20 2018 20:01 ZeRoX_TV wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 18:36 Asturas wrote:On December 19 2018 20:13 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
I dont see warchest4 at blizz shop at all Same problem. Where can I buy them? You have to wait for it to appear in shop. Thats what I was told at support.
ok, thanks for the info!
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 20 2018 18:22 uummpaa wrote:
i honestly don't get why you can't disable them.
is there really a such big amount of players that only buy skins for others to see?
i for example use only 2-3 because i honestly like their look, but i don't care if my opponent sees them. people keep on bringing the "people would stop buying" argument, but from the fraction i can read here on TL, its not that many i think.
plus, with the option of custom skins for both sides, would that not be an even greater reason to buy all skins, so that i could have my very own look for my opponents as well, which means i would possibly buy skins for all races?
as mentioned above, you could even make the option a purcase in itself, so again more money is made.
for me, there are more points pro custom skins on both sides than cons (if any), but i still wouldn't buy to much (i don't like the money beeing used to blow up the already biggest tournaments), so maybe my opinon isn't the one to follow here
I don't get it either, because they're banned in WCS. You cannot use them in the official tournament of Blizzard and yet you have to see them on the ladder. Logic.
|
On December 20 2018 18:22 uummpaa wrote:
i honestly don't get why you can't disable them.
is there really a such big amount of players that only buy skins for others to see?
i for example use only 2-3 because i honestly like their look, but i don't care if my opponent sees them. people keep on bringing the "people would stop buying" argument, but from the fraction i can read here on TL, its not that many i think.
plus, with the option of custom skins for both sides, would that not be an even greater reason to buy all skins, so that i could have my very own look for my opponents as well, which means i would possibly buy skins for all races?
as mentioned above, you could even make the option a purcase in itself, so again more money is made.
for me, there are more points pro custom skins on both sides than cons (if any), but i still wouldn't buy to much (i don't like the money beeing used to blow up the already biggest tournaments), so maybe my opinon isn't the one to follow here
Why do you think people buy fancy clothes? There's your answer.
|
On December 21 2018 01:14 sunnyshine wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2018 18:22 uummpaa wrote:
i honestly don't get why you can't disable them.
is there really a such big amount of players that only buy skins for others to see?
i for example use only 2-3 because i honestly like their look, but i don't care if my opponent sees them. people keep on bringing the "people would stop buying" argument, but from the fraction i can read here on TL, its not that many i think.
plus, with the option of custom skins for both sides, would that not be an even greater reason to buy all skins, so that i could have my very own look for my opponents as well, which means i would possibly buy skins for all races?
as mentioned above, you could even make the option a purcase in itself, so again more money is made.
for me, there are more points pro custom skins on both sides than cons (if any), but i still wouldn't buy to much (i don't like the money beeing used to blow up the already biggest tournaments), so maybe my opinon isn't the one to follow here Why do you think people buy fancy clothes? There's your answer.
I don't see any connection between buying clothes and buying skins
|
The building skins are way epic, anyway that we can support SC2 Esports we must come together and do so!
|
|
|
Reminder, if you don't unlock everything during the Warchest event time, you have to buy it full price again. I was unaware of this when I bought the last one, and I only got like 3 skins from it, I basically payed way over full price.
Yes I learned this today and have requested refunds on it, still pending.
|
Can someone explain me what I get by, for example, Forged protoss and what for Protoss pass? Is one for building and one for army? Or?
|
On December 21 2018 04:28 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Reminder, if you don't unlock everything during the Warchest event time, you have to buy it full price again. I was unaware of this when I bought the last one, and I only got like 3 skins from it, I basically payed way over full price.
Yes I learned this today and have requested refunds on it, still pending.
Lol, good luck on that refund... Not going to happen
|
On December 21 2018 05:12 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2018 04:28 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Reminder, if you don't unlock everything during the Warchest event time, you have to buy it full price again. I was unaware of this when I bought the last one, and I only got like 3 skins from it, I basically payed way over full price.
Yes I learned this today and have requested refunds on it, still pending. Lol, good luck on that refund... Not going to happen
I'm fucking livid about this. I feel like I've been robbed by Blizzard, what a fucking awful system, keeps you away from the thing you purchased and puts it on a time limit. I'm refunding the new one too now because of this.
|
On December 21 2018 05:29 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2018 05:12 Pr0wler wrote:On December 21 2018 04:28 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Reminder, if you don't unlock everything during the Warchest event time, you have to buy it full price again. I was unaware of this when I bought the last one, and I only got like 3 skins from it, I basically payed way over full price.
Yes I learned this today and have requested refunds on it, still pending. Lol, good luck on that refund... Not going to happen I'm fucking livid about this. I feel like I've been robbed by Blizzard, what a fucking awful system, keeps you away from the thing you purchased and puts it on a time limit. I'm refunding the new one too now because of this.
I mean to be fair, did you read how the Warchest worked before you bought it?
I haven't bought a single one of them because I don't like how they operate.
|
On December 21 2018 06:02 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2018 05:29 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:On December 21 2018 05:12 Pr0wler wrote:On December 21 2018 04:28 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Reminder, if you don't unlock everything during the Warchest event time, you have to buy it full price again. I was unaware of this when I bought the last one, and I only got like 3 skins from it, I basically payed way over full price.
Yes I learned this today and have requested refunds on it, still pending. Lol, good luck on that refund... Not going to happen I'm fucking livid about this. I feel like I've been robbed by Blizzard, what a fucking awful system, keeps you away from the thing you purchased and puts it on a time limit. I'm refunding the new one too now because of this. I mean to be fair, did you read how the Warchest worked before you bought it? I haven't bought a single one of them because I don't like how they operate.
I already how they operated when I thought it was just an unlock system. Now I learn it's a limited time unlock system. I thought I knew how it worked when I purchased it, I would have grinded had I realized. Now I just want my money back, because I paid like $14 for 4 skins.
|
While these skins look great, I find that there's little incentives to buy them if you play 3s and 4s exclusively since you can only have 4 skins equipped at a time.
|
The war chest XP extension for twitch iOS app is really glitchy and almost never loads or let’s me claim XP.
Great idea though! I watch twitch way more than I play SC2
|
I claimed ~10 times that xp chest. I think it's 50k xp per claim. I already unlocked the first 3 steps of 5, because I mainly watch sc2 streams. You can claim all ~30min a xp boost. From step to step you need to collect 300k xp.
Scarlett stream doesn't work for me, otherwise I would unlocked the 4th step.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
