|
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said their weighting for actual balance should also be less than games from the top 1/2/3 of each race (deciding whether to mainly factor in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 for balance really depends on the strength/dominance of those players)
pretty simple concept but then incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters
|
On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters
I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced.
I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway.
|
On October 30 2024 04:35 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced. I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway.
viewers and players have a symbiotic relationship but if the game isn't balanced in a way (playability-wise) that attracts and retains top lvl players then the game will eventually fizzle and die out, so basically you'd be updating the game for 99.9% of a endlessly decreasing viewer base
ppl tune in to watch the highest skill players play the game, star power/elite lvl talent is a big draw, look at any real sport
if you balance for entertainment/viewability and top end players leave the game (top players play for competition so if the game isn't fair/balanced then they'll feel like things are out of their control and won't stick around) and if the game doesn't attract talented new players (unlikely to happen unless there's a sugar rush of new money but that's not a sustainable long term strategy anyways) then it'll just turn into lower lvl competition between the ppl who decided to stick around.. it just doesn't have the same appeal
for anyone who understands what real competition is that certainly isn't it, it would turn into placeholder competition more than real competition
|
On October 30 2024 04:35 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced. I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway.
I don't think those things are mutually exclusive at all, in fact I don't think balancing around the 99,9% of people is even a sensible thing.
First of all, matchmaking exists so the game below GM level will always be balanced because you will always have a 50% chance of winning. Second, the changes that are implemented to balance the top 0,1% won't even have any impact below pro level because as PiG said, at that level it makes no difference if Immortals for example are 25 minerals cheaper because they float 700 minerals anyway. Low-level players don't lose because of balance but because of skill.
At that level, to quote PiG again, it's just about a perception if the game is balanced or not, and not on actual balance because balance makes no difference there anyway. And the perception whether the game is balanced or not is based on pro play where the players make the least amount of mistakes.
|
On October 30 2024 05:17 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2024 04:35 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced. I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway. I don't think those things are mutually exclusive at all, in fact I don't think balancing around the 99,9% of people is even a sensible thing. First of all, matchmaking exists so the game below GM level will always be balanced because you will always have a 50% chance of winning. Second, the changes that are implemented to balance the top 0,1% won't even have any impact below pro level because as PiG said, at that level it makes no difference if Immortals for example are 25 minerals cheaper because they float 700 minerals anyway. Low-level players don't lose because of balance but because of skill. At that level, to quote PiG again, it's just about a perception if the game is balanced or not, and not on actual balance because balance makes no difference there anyway. And the perception whether the game is balanced or not is based on pro play where the players make the least amount of mistakes.
That isn't really true. Sure, everything is worse at low levels, as I already pointed out, but some things do affect balance at low levels. Disruptor radius is kinda important. Or Broodling duration. Or whatever the hell they want to do with cyclones on any day of the week. Or spore crawlers doing a bajillion damage.
Obviously pros are going to take advantage of that much more than a random diamond league player. But that doesn't mean the diamond league player won't hate it if they cannot possibly beat blink stalkers from their fellow diamond league players (or swarmhosts or whatever). Balance isn't irrelevant at lower levels just because play is not as refined.
|
On October 30 2024 08:00 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2024 05:17 Charoisaur wrote:On October 30 2024 04:35 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced. I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway. I don't think those things are mutually exclusive at all, in fact I don't think balancing around the 99,9% of people is even a sensible thing. First of all, matchmaking exists so the game below GM level will always be balanced because you will always have a 50% chance of winning. Second, the changes that are implemented to balance the top 0,1% won't even have any impact below pro level because as PiG said, at that level it makes no difference if Immortals for example are 25 minerals cheaper because they float 700 minerals anyway. Low-level players don't lose because of balance but because of skill. At that level, to quote PiG again, it's just about a perception if the game is balanced or not, and not on actual balance because balance makes no difference there anyway. And the perception whether the game is balanced or not is based on pro play where the players make the least amount of mistakes. That isn't really true. Sure, everything is worse at low levels, as I already pointed out, but some things do affect balance at low levels. Disruptor radius is kinda important. Or Broodling duration. Or whatever the hell they want to do with cyclones on any day of the week. Or spore crawlers doing a bajillion damage. Obviously pros are going to take advantage of that much more than a random diamond league player. But that doesn't mean the diamond league player won't hate it if they cannot possibly beat blink stalkers from their fellow diamond league players (or swarmhosts or whatever). Balance isn't irrelevant at lower levels just because play is not as refined.
Agree to disagree then. Sure with increased Disruptor radius a diamond player loses a few more units here and there. But in the grand scheme of things, with how many mistakes they make and how many opportunities to play around Disruptors there are, I don't think it is something that determines the victor of games at all in lower leagues
|
Northern Ireland26924 Posts
On October 31 2024 00:55 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2024 08:00 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2024 05:17 Charoisaur wrote:On October 30 2024 04:35 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced. I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway. I don't think those things are mutually exclusive at all, in fact I don't think balancing around the 99,9% of people is even a sensible thing. First of all, matchmaking exists so the game below GM level will always be balanced because you will always have a 50% chance of winning. Second, the changes that are implemented to balance the top 0,1% won't even have any impact below pro level because as PiG said, at that level it makes no difference if Immortals for example are 25 minerals cheaper because they float 700 minerals anyway. Low-level players don't lose because of balance but because of skill. At that level, to quote PiG again, it's just about a perception if the game is balanced or not, and not on actual balance because balance makes no difference there anyway. And the perception whether the game is balanced or not is based on pro play where the players make the least amount of mistakes. That isn't really true. Sure, everything is worse at low levels, as I already pointed out, but some things do affect balance at low levels. Disruptor radius is kinda important. Or Broodling duration. Or whatever the hell they want to do with cyclones on any day of the week. Or spore crawlers doing a bajillion damage. Obviously pros are going to take advantage of that much more than a random diamond league player. But that doesn't mean the diamond league player won't hate it if they cannot possibly beat blink stalkers from their fellow diamond league players (or swarmhosts or whatever). Balance isn't irrelevant at lower levels just because play is not as refined. Agree to disagree then. Sure with increased Disruptor radius a diamond player loses a few more units here and there. But in the grand scheme of things, with how many mistakes they make and how many opportunities to play around Disruptors there are, I don't think it is something that determines the victor of games at all in lower leagues
They can also eat shots from disruptors from various units now that they couldn’t before
I’d 100% take the ability to actually kill the likes of Marauders, -1 shots to kill a tank etc etc than have that higher radius
|
good they have learned from this video and made some necessary adjustments
|
how are people still talking about "viewership" like thats a thing. the people who watch starcraft are just die hards who are crazy about starcraft. theres no new audience coming lol
|
Northern Ireland26924 Posts
On November 04 2024 00:37 shikadisoda wrote:
how are people still talking about "viewership" like thats a thing. the people who watch starcraft are just die hards who are crazy about starcraft. theres no new audience coming lol
If you lose your existing audience, well you gotta replace it somehow
I don’t think you have many new eyes coming in, so if that’s the case you gotta keep the existing cohort somewhat enthused
|
Hitting a pillow should place you in jail?, as far as I know Avilo doesn't know voodoo..
End of hots was both well balanced and it didn't have a troubling meta. There were some mech vs. zerg play, but it wasn't at all that bad. Sh's were patched out and zerg relied on tech switching to win the game, it was a super cool active style.
We really need a dkim like figure that mix things up and do actual change. The way it works now, you gain influence as you gain in rank and thereby the system is inclined to keep the status quo. Instead of nerfing zerg to allow toss and terran to shine, they keep it so that serral keeps winning, and then we act surprised when other zergs are stomping as well. The same is now happening with terran with clem at the helm.
|
Zerg should be buffed at ladder play and in team games, while Protoss is to be buffed at the top lvl. There isn't anything in this patch that actually deals with this, instead protoss will continue to have 20% of earnings, it is absolutely disgusting.
|
Northern Ireland26924 Posts
On November 04 2024 20:09 ejozl wrote:
Hitting a pillow should place you in jail?, as far as I know Avilo doesn't know voodoo..
End of hots was both well balanced and it didn't have a troubling meta. There were some mech vs. zerg play, but it wasn't at all that bad. Sh's were patched out and zerg relied on tech switching to win the game, it was a super cool active style.
We really need a dkim like figure that mix things up and do actual change. The way it works now, you gain influence as you gain in rank and thereby the system is inclined to keep the status quo. Instead of nerfing zerg to allow toss and terran to shine, they keep it so that serral keeps winning, and then we act surprised when other zergs are stomping as well. The same is now happening with terran with clem at the helm.
Perhaps not but actually stalking women should
|
On November 04 2024 20:09 ejozl wrote:
Hitting a pillow should place you in jail?, as far as I know Avilo doesn't know voodoo..
Try it with any recognized person as the stuffed animal that includes a play on words as the name of the toy. Depending on who the person is youtube might contact the law enforcement. Try it with Benjamin Netanyahu and do it 100 times. Anyone can make a youtube channel. Do it every day for 3.5 months and post it here. Let's see if you are contacted by law enforcement.
When Avilo claims the pillow is David Kim and continued to "joke" about it dozens, if not hundreds of times and make it a regular part of your public show; yes, he should spend a weekend in jail. The message Avilo propagates is that David Kim deserves to be beat to death because he made a bad video game mode for a couple of years out of a product's 10+ year existence. And, if Avilo can not understand why the behaviour is a problem he should remain in jail or in a mental institution.
These are communications of a violent nature. Furthermore, the circus atmosphere Avilo creates winds up providing cover for a few of the anarchists in his circle.
I think once Avilo got banned from Twitch he stopped with the "comedy" act of pretending to beat David Kim. I suspect youtube will ban him. Suddenly, Avilo has "seen the light" and quit with the BS.
|
Dkim isn't designing the game anymore, so of course he stopped. Avilo would do absolutely nothing to dkim if he stood next to him, it was just stupid play as far as I can tell. Maybe there is some clip that I didn't know though.
|
Northern Ireland26924 Posts
On November 05 2024 03:44 ejozl wrote:
Dkim isn't designing the game anymore, so of course he stopped. Avilo would do absolutely nothing to dkim if he stood next to him, it was just stupid play as far as I can tell. Maybe there is some clip that I didn't know though.
I don’t think David Kim was ever in particular danger from this behaviour, but he sure as fuck got a ton of abuse back in the day, partly because of idiots like Avilo.
Also players he erroneously accused of maphacking would frequently get the same treatment from his fans.
I wouldn’t go as far as Jimmy and say he should be jailed for that specifically, although being banned from various platforms, fair enough in my book.
Also aside from that, and why he is banned from various platforms is, as I said was actually stalking and harassing women.
He’s one of those deranged fellows where I’m not sure if he got his ass kicked too much growing up, or not enough
Good fucking riddance, hey if he gets his act together, great.
|
On November 05 2024 03:44 ejozl wrote:
Dkim isn't designing the game anymore, so of course he stopped. Avilo would do absolutely nothing to dkim if he stood next to him, it was just stupid play as far as I can tell. Maybe there is some clip that I didn't know though.
There are plenty of reasons specific people are just best kept far away from computers with internet connection - both for the collective's and their own good. Avilo clearly belongs to this demographic.
|
Much of this is done by artosis currently, how many protoss players in bw don't you think get verbal abuse online because of artosis succesful stream?
When you have a platform and a big one you should try to behave as a role model, this is obvious.
|
On October 30 2024 05:01 TT1 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2024 04:35 Acrofales wrote:On October 30 2024 03:06 TT1 wrote:
btw even ~90-95% of GM lvl play is nowhere close to highest lvl play (up until you reach top 5 or top 10 GM where the top players are at), balance decisions should always be based around highest lvl play because that's where the game is played with the least amount of error so it's the most accurate reflection of what the game really looks like
you can even make this argument for the top 1~3 of each race vs the rest of the pro field but at a certain range i think it's fine to factor in midd/lower pro lvl games (to evaluate stuff like ease of execution vs strength of builds/units), that said the weighting on balance should also be less than games from top 1/2/3 of each race (factoring in play from top 1 or top 3 or top 5 really depends on the strength/dominance of the top players)
pretty simple concept but then bad incentives/human nature comes into play so u end up losing sight of what really matters I guess this boils down to whether you balance for the best possible viewing experience or the best possible playing experience. If the latter, those 3 players per race can get fucked. If the former, those 3 possible players are the only ones that matter. And not in the sense that their playing experience has to be ez breezy, but that they have to be balanced. I'd much prefer they balance the play of the 99.9%, and the 0.1% will sort themselves out. The casters and viewers will make up their own narrative anyway. viewers and players have a symbiotic relationship but if the game isn't balanced in a way (playability-wise) that attracts and retains top lvl players then the game will eventually fizzle and die out, so basically you'd be updating the game for 99.9% of a endlessly decreasing viewer base ppl tune in to watch the highest skill players play the game, star power/elite lvl talent is a big draw, look at any real sport if you balance for entertainment/viewability and top end players leave the game (top players play for competition so if the game isn't fair/balanced then they'll feel like things are out of their control and won't stick around) and if the game doesn't attract talented new players (unlikely to happen unless there's a sugar rush of new money but that's not a sustainable long term strategy anyways) then it'll just turn into lower lvl competition between the ppl who decided to stick around.. it just doesn't have the same appeal for anyone who understands what real competition is that certainly isn't it, it would turn into placeholder competition more than real competition
valid points,
but the truth is (clearly reflected in the numbers over the past few years) without a casual playerbase you have no viewers or pro scene.
imo, you simply can't balance the game around the highest level of play because then what makes the pro scene what it is (viewers and money) won't be there.
|
Northern Ireland26924 Posts
On November 05 2024 22:01 ejozl wrote:
Much of this is done by artosis currently, how many protoss players in bw don't you think get verbal abuse online because of artosis succesful stream?
When you have a platform and a big one you should try to behave as a role model, this is obvious.
Protoss players have got abuse for 20+ years for well, playing Protoss.
I’d agree that Artosis’ behaviour would be unacceptable, if he didn’t behave totally differently in other environments. The auld duality of man!
People take his stream with a pinch of salt (joke intended), it’s ridiculous. But hey he’s otherwise a pretty level-headed, good guy who’s done a fucking ton for these games over the years. Given people spam him with Mario erotica, I think most of his viewers are sorta in on the OTT rage being something of a joke.
I mean, maybe the very first time when I was a youngling, I never thought say, the Angry Videogame Nerd was that angry in real life.
I’ve never heard of a player ever being banned from all ESL competition for non-cheating reasons, Avilo was and for good reason. It wasn’t an act, he’s just a piece of shit.
Even aside from the whole stalking farrago, he’d BM constantly. ‘Hey that maphacker I just played is also streaming, go harass him viewers’.
Aside from the obvious of well, broadcasting it, Artosis’ rage is actually pretty self-contained. It’s very much the ‘Protoss’ part of ‘Protoss player’ he’s usually ranting about, he’s not really shitting on the actual person. He also doesn’t really BM that much. Not never, but actually not that often. Like sure he’ll be ranting to his stream about how a fingerless monkey could get to S tier with Protoss for about 5 minutes prior, but more often than not he just gives the GG
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
