EPTAlso terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
[CSL] Season 4 Official Thread - Page 21
| Forum Index > TL Community |
|
Phaint
Canada211 Posts
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll. | ||
|
NB
Netherlands12045 Posts
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast. Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll. weird when you consider Sat afternoon to be busy... Most of the club are on Friday nite and Sat afternoon (1-4 pm) is the period when we wake up  ... | ||
|
ReketSomething
United States6012 Posts
| ||
|
d3_crescentia
United States4053 Posts
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast. Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll. Please don't speak impersonally about the tournament organizers or your concerns. If you have a problem, I would appreciate it if you spoke directly about any problems instead of making vague references to "the creators" or "some of us." Currently it is possible to reschedule your matches on a match-by-match basis with the other teams you will be playing. I have found that most teams are very flexible about rescheduling if there are other commitments going on. The default time is there so that there will be a designated time if neither team can come to an agreement if a reschedule is desired. | ||
|
Phaint
Canada211 Posts
On October 06 2010 11:49 d3_crescentia wrote: Please don't speak impersonally about the tournament organizers or your concerns. If you have a problem, I would appreciate it if you spoke directly about any problems instead of making vague references to "the creators" or "some of us." Currently it is possible to reschedule your matches on a match-by-match basis with the other teams you will be playing. I have found that most teams are very flexible about rescheduling if there are other commitments going on. The default time is there so that there will be a designated time if neither team can come to an agreement if a reschedule is desired. I'm very much aware of all the mechanics of the league and I applaud you guys for what you've done. I'm just calling this to attention as I feel like this was entirely looked over. I guess I'll see the poll results and try it out before I judge further. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4170 Posts
| ||
|
mOnion
United States5651 Posts
On October 06 2010 12:00 Phaint wrote: I'm very much aware of all the mechanics of the league and I applaud you guys for what you've done. I'm just calling this to attention as I feel like this was entirely looked over. I guess I'll see the poll results and try it out before I judge further. it wasn't entirely looked over, there's a huge spread of teams and things were created as best they could be. aka most texas teams are playing each other. there has to be some time zone conflict because unfortunately there weren't evenly distributed teams across every timezone. also there is a very annoying bug on the website i submitted a bug report but I haven't gotten a confirmed reply and I know there was a bit of email switching around during earlier seasons, I just want to make sure it gets taken care of its a bug where in the management tab when you try to organize by name, email, ID, or status in descending or ascending order it doesn't work. | ||
|
hazelynut
United States2195 Posts
on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc. we knew time zone would be an issue, but having a standard default time is always an issue. fortunately, it's an issue it can be solved by negotiating with your opponent. also, i'm curious about the opinions on map pools - why are they terrible? granted, we weren't able to test them in depth with thousands of games, but we've spent a good 30+ games either playing on it ourselves or asking whatever top200 players we knew to get a general feel for a map. these two maps were also suggested by the iccup mapmakers when we made the map pool, so perhaps they're out of date, but i'm really not sure where you are getting this terrible factor. | ||
|
NB
Netherlands12045 Posts
On October 06 2010 12:27 hazelynut wrote: yo, we take sc2 seriously here. no social lives allowed. on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc. we knew time zone would be an issue, but having a standard default time is always an issue. fortunately, it's an issue it can be solved by negotiating with your opponent. also, i'm curious about the opinions on map pools - why are they terrible? granted, we weren't able to test them in depth with thousands of games, but we've spent a good 30+ games either playing on it ourselves or asking whatever top200 players we knew to get a general feel for a map. these two maps were also suggested by the iccup mapmakers when we made the map pool, so perhaps they're out of date, but i'm really not sure where you are getting this terrible factor. personally, i consider the map pool to be just fine Noticed how iccup maps and blizz maps are totally different: +iccup has +1 mineral patches which will increase your minerals income and have a safe nature opening => encourage FE build +blizz has open nat and wide main => 1 base heavy these a 2 TOTALLY OPPOSITE play styles that you would have to adapt to => good and yes, i have played more than 30 games on those maps... much more than 30... edit: those ideas do not apply on crossfire, i think that is a very WRONG PICK | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4170 Posts
Blizzard is still patching the game for balance. They are getting the data for patching based on the results they gather from ladder maps. The other maps seem fine imo. If anything, I think they'll favor Z a little more, because of how big they are and the designs of the natural expansions favor at least getting that first expansion. And, currently, thats a good thing, because Z is generally having problems right now. But what if a balance patch changes the dynamics of the game somehow? What if, for instance, they reverse the effect of creep so that it slows enemy units (including enemy Z) rather than speeds up Z units only, and give every Z the movement speed they have on creep permanently? And, hypothetically, this actually generates a nearly perfect balance between the races on the ladder maps? Suddenly, a massive map gives Z a huge speed advantage over the other races, because the patch was designed with smaller maps in mind..... And, all of a sudden, these maps are imbalanced, and we won't even realize it until after a couple of matches have been played..... There are other changes I can think of that could make a much bigger/different/unintended effect on larger maps than those used in the ladder. Don't get me wrong, I do like the maps. I love Crossfire. But because of how long the season is, it may cause some problems should a balance patch come out and make some kind of change that will affect these maps a lot more/differently than the current ladder maps. In a tournament like this, using non-ladder maps is a really bad thing imo. At least at the moment. At least thats my view on it. | ||
|
Phelix
1931 Posts
| ||
|
NB
Netherlands12045 Posts
On October 06 2010 12:50 Phelix wrote: I feel that 2v2 should be unique players, since most teams can field more than 5 players, and won't degenerate into top 3 players on a team, and hope that they all don't play the same race; or at least that's how I think most teams will handle the 2v2 situation. Honestly, teamwork isn't as important as skill in a match, and this allows more team spirit and cooperation in play. NO!!! 2v2 should not even be in the format in the beginning putting it in is already a huge handicap that universities who have strong "ace" giving for new teams. If you think the 2v2 will affect your university result, its your responsibility to practice and prepare for it. | ||
|
Impervious
Canada4170 Posts
Thoughts on that? | ||
Kinky
United States4126 Posts
On October 06 2010 12:44 NB wrote: edit: those ideas do not apply on crossfire, i think that is a very WRONG PICK Same here, I don't think I know anyone that likes the map even though it's a remake of baekdu. | ||
|
slained
Canada966 Posts
| ||
|
Kinky
United States4126 Posts
On October 06 2010 13:43 slained wrote: I strongly am against 2vs2 it simply just doesn't have the same entertainment value as a 1v1 vs really strong players. I feel like 80% of the games will just be who rushes better. | ||
|
ExO_
United States2316 Posts
| ||
|
DarthThienAn
United States2734 Posts
On October 06 2010 12:00 Phaint wrote: I'm very much aware of all the mechanics of the league and I applaud you guys for what you've done. I'm just calling this to attention as I feel like this was entirely looked over. I guess I'll see the poll results and try it out before I judge further. I'm not sure what the problem is, could you specify? At 8pm Saturday Night EST last season, there were always like, a dozen or two games going on. Which suggests this is a good time... How does Saturday night conflict with a social life or something? If you'd rather go out on Saturday night, go out... there's always Friday night too, of course. There's a reason why there are 3 times for both Saturday and Sunday... if you'd rather play in the afternoon, then vote for that time. This is also why we have a poll +_+. On October 06 2010 12:44 Impervious wrote: I think its a bad idea to use anything other than ladder maps. And I'll give my reasoning: Blizzard is still patching the game for balance. They are getting the data for patching based on the results they gather from ladder maps. The other maps seem fine imo. If anything, I think they'll favor Z a little more, because of how big they are and the designs of the natural expansions favor at least getting that first expansion. And, currently, thats a good thing, because Z is generally having problems right now. But what if a balance patch changes the dynamics of the game somehow? What if, for instance, they reverse the effect of creep so that it slows enemy units (including enemy Z) rather than speeds up Z units only, and give every Z the movement speed they have on creep permanently? And, hypothetically, this actually generates a nearly perfect balance between the races on the ladder maps? Suddenly, a massive map gives Z a huge speed advantage over the other races, because the patch was designed with smaller maps in mind..... And, all of a sudden, these maps are imbalanced, and we won't even realize it until after a couple of matches have been played..... There are other changes I can think of that could make a much bigger/different/unintended effect on larger maps than those used in the ladder. Don't get me wrong, I do like the maps. I love Crossfire. But because of how long the season is, it may cause some problems should a balance patch come out and make some kind of change that will affect these maps a lot more/differently than the current ladder maps. In a tournament like this, using non-ladder maps is a really bad thing imo. At least at the moment. At least thats my view on it. If Blizzard made a patch that huge, we'd switch the maps if we thought necessary. lol -_-. | ||
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
| ||
|
blabber
United States4448 Posts
On October 06 2010 16:54 T.O.P. wrote: map balance issues? Have you not seen the Blizzard ladder maps?My concern with Iccup maps is that there will be a general lack of familiarity with Iccup maps. Most of the new SC2 players have never even heard of Iccup. There'll will be confusion on how to get those iccup maps and how to play on it, since most players have never played on a Iccup map before. Plus there might be balance issues, since top players wouldn't waste their time practicing on a Iccup map. | ||
| ||
