|
I think the consesus is that SC:BW is a very, maybe even too demanding a game for a noob to dive in. This is partly because practically everyone who plays it understands the basic mechanics of the game, most of the advanced mechanics, has an apm triple or quadruple that of someone with no online or competitive rts background and a basic understanding of the build orders and timings.
So if there was a way to make the game easier for new players without limiting the usefulness of mastering any of the skills useful for playing the game currently, would that be the way forward?
I can think of two things that might or might not make the game easier for new players even when facing better players.
What would happen if you had a separate league for 0-1000 mmr players in the ladder, where the players would see the whole map black sheep wall-style (without any fog of war) or alternatively C&C-style, where the only fog of war that exists is the kind you have never uncovered? The reason this might work is because scouting what your enemy is doing, understanding what is happening and reacting to that (and watching replays or video guides of various sorts) is so important, so if you are shown what is happening constantly and you have been beaten by other players for reasons you don't understand, it is an obvious realisation that you have to watch what your opponent is doing. Since it is so easy without having to manually scout, you will do it a lot more and thus learn much quicker about some timings. If you lost, you will have a better understanding of what went wrong and what you could do to try to counter the opponent maybe even in real time as it happens if you have learned some basic skills.
The other way that you could help noobs in the noob league is by having maps that are balanced race-wise but very simple in the sense that they allow for very little strategic variety in those specific maps, potentially making the learning curve less steep. An example of how to make more simple maps might be just to have smaller maps in the noob league maybe something along the lines of 64-96 x 64-96 sized maps.
Lemme know what you think and if you have other solutions thx.
|
Or just make the map pool different for lower MMR players with maps like Boxer, where moving units from base A to B takes forever.
Basically make the defenders advantage super big.
|
On June 17 2019 07:41 Bonyth wrote: Or just make the map pool different for lower MMR players with maps like Boxer, where moving units from base A to B takes forever.
Basically make the defenders advantage super big. Yea I've always thought that Boxer seems like a pretty good map for noobs partially because of its simplicity and the long travel distance. Those are two things one might take into account in designing maps for a noob league, maybe even several different types, some being very good for aggressive strategies and some very good for defensive strategies but always as simple as possible without giving the better player the ability to get too big of an advantage because of his skill.
|
I like the idea, maybe my only concern is smurfers.
But if it's like 0 MMR... I mean Zero... that's probably not an issue (even somewhat above zero probably)
I mean, it should be an MMR so low that a good smurf player can't reach even trying
EDIT: I have to point out that the guilds were the back bone of new players experience and learning back in the days, unfortunately Blizzard haven't lost that habit of reducing or getting rid of social tools in their games. There's no more personal channels, bots, a warm chat layout, etc. Yes, there's the bnet 2.0 friends list which is kind of useless because those who play othe Blizz titles basically never play sc1.
The new players discord channel... LMaster and the others should post it at last every single week on TL (on BW general mb?). Even I don't remember where to find that discord link to copy paste when I see a new player.
EDIT2: I think I've missread the op a little bit. 0 - 1000 no fog make no sense. We're losing the souls of an RTS here.
My idea is: when a player get to a low MMR (very low) the fog is removed for him which mean that if he get matched to someone with a MMR way too high (quite common outside of Korea), one player is gonna have the fog and the lesser skilled one not. It most only happen when the difference in MMR is huge, like 200 to 1k, (the 200 mmr player have no fog, the 1k mmr player have fog). This system is basically smurf proof because a good player smurfing is not going to 200 mmr anyways beside some rare pathological troll.
|
On June 17 2019 09:52 AntiHack wrote: My idea is: when a player get to a low MMR (very low) the fog is removed for him which mean that if he get matched to someone with a MMR way too high (quite common outside of Korea), one player is gonna have the fog and the lesser skilled one not. It most only happen when the difference in MMR is huge, like 200 to 1k, (the 200 mmr player have no fog, the 1k mmr player have fog). This system is basically smurf proof because a good player smurfing is not going to 200 mmr anyways beside some rare pathological troll.
"how to absolutely destroy a multiplayer game and make ladder shit 101."
|
Just buff guardians, that should fix everything.
How about we play tag football only, the game is too dependent on physicality and tackling.
How about we make chess be pawns only, the other pieces complicate the game.
How about we limit sprinters to 5 miles per hour, it's not fair for the fat and out of shape runners otherwise.
How about we change poker so everyone can see everyone else's hands all the time, having hidden information is basically cheating.
How about we just test people based on whether or not they bought the book and not whether or not they read it or studied it, after all, we don't want to be able-ist. Right?
|
Find a friend that is new too. Play against computers together. Play fastest maps. That is what everyone here that plays ladder did back in the day, it was not easy then either. There are ways to improve and having fun. You don't need to straight up practice.
|
On June 17 2019 09:52 AntiHack wrote:I like the idea, maybe my only concern is smurfers. But if it's like 0 MMR... I mean Zero... that's probably not an issue (even somewhat above zero probably) I mean, it should be an MMR so low that a good smurf player can't reach even trying EDIT: I have to point out that the guilds were the back bone of new players experience and learning back in the days, unfortunately Blizzard haven't lost that habit of reducing or getting rid of social tools in their games. There's no more personal channels, bots, a warm chat layout, etc. Yes, there's the bnet 2.0 friends list which is kind of useless because those who play othe Blizz titles basically never play sc1. The new players discord channel... LMaster and the others should post it at last every single week on TL (on BW general mb?). Even I don't remember where to find that discord link to copy paste when I see a new player. EDIT2: I think I've missread the op a little bit. 0 - 1000 no fog make no sense. We're losing the souls of an RTS here. My idea is: when a player get to a low MMR (very low) the fog is removed for him which mean that if he get matched to someone with a MMR way too high (quite common outside of Korea), one player is gonna have the fog and the lesser skilled one not. It most only happen when the difference in MMR is huge, like 200 to 1k, (the 200 mmr player have no fog, the 1k mmr player have fog). This system is basically smurf proof because a good player smurfing is not going to 200 mmr anyways beside some rare pathological troll. Yea the idea is even if someone smurfs and intentionally loses lots of matches to reach the lowest possible rank or mmr the game is still easier and benefits the noob more.
On June 17 2019 15:39 Jealous wrote: Just buff guardians, that should fix everything.
How about we play tag football only, the game is too dependent on physicality and tackling.
How about we make chess be pawns only, the other pieces complicate the game.
How about we limit sprinters to 5 miles per hour, it's not fair for the fat and out of shape runners otherwise.
How about we change poker so everyone can see everyone else's hands all the time, having hidden information is basically cheating.
How about we just test people based on whether or not they bought the book and not whether or not they read it or studied it, after all, we don't want to be able-ist. Right? What's your problem?
and yeah sure, I like guardians like you can remember from my thread but we'll see if when hopefully some day island maps become more of a thing and some other things can be balanced (things that affect no other meta or matchup outside of island maps), maybe I won't whine about guardian buffs again.
All I'm doing in this thread is trying to make the game easier for casuals to approach, which believe it or not might not include me as I've been around for about 20 years already so I'm not leaving any day soon most likely. Is there something wrong with trying to come up with solutions to make the game more approachable?
So what's your problem?
On June 17 2019 16:10 reps)squishy wrote: Find a friend that is new too. Play against computers together. Play fastest maps. That is what everyone here that plays ladder did back in the day, it was not easy then either. There are ways to improve and having fun. You don't need to straight up practice. I'm not bringing this up for my sake but for potential players that haven't gotten into Brood War just because it might be hard to get into for new players especially in this day and age with today's skill level of the playerbase etc. but let me go through your suggestions point by point.
Find a friend that is new too. Let's assume they don't have any friends, or any friends in Brood War, how can we make the game as appealing and approachable to new people as possible even in that case?
Play against computers together. Play fastest maps. That is what everyone here that plays ladder did back in the day, it was not easy then either. I know, I started with the campaign and singleplayer free for alls too and then increasingly online mostly first UMS, then UMS and fastest, free for alls, hunters, BGH and nowadays mostly UMS, free for alls, hunters, BGH and 1v1. When it comes to new players, what if they're just not into that, maybe they want to try and start BW because they look at pro players playing 1v1s but give up too soon because they feel others are simply too good.
...and of course you could say that: "Well, maybe they should be more patient", but the problem is that, it's about the numbers of people actually playing, and I feel that we should do what we can to make sure to raise the number of people actually playing the game if possible instead of wishing the players were whatever you would like them to be. It's just being practical instead of idealistic.
There are ways to improve and having fun. You don't need to straight up practice. I know, and obviously I wouldn't play the game myself if I wasn't having fun and neither would probaly you either right? It's just I'm thinking of a way of trying to motivate newcomers to stick around before they feel like it's too much of a hill to climb. That can't be a bad thing can it? What does Jealous think?
|
First, I appreciate any effort to try and make this game more noob friendly apart from changing the game itself, that is, by better reception of newcomers, offering them accessible information, educational streams/Vods etc.
I think that, at the moment, if someone manages to find TL, then he/she should be able to get all that with the little bit of effort and dedication that is needed to get started. (Maybe a very visible, very flashy "New to BW?"-banner that leads to a comprehensive thread about all the best ways to get in touch with others (the right threads, discords, twitch-streams etc.) would be a good improvement for the site, placed right on the main-page or at the top of every BW-forum-section.)
But I doubt that the number of noobs around justifies the creation of any separate ladder-league or something elaborate like that. You just won't have the SC2-noob-base around to really run a bronze/silver league, I'm afraid - and Blizzard knows.
I think it'd be better to tell these people the truth and offer them what they need to quickly get low-level-ladder-proof. (That means: they know that they will have sub 50% winrate for a long time and they know why that is, but every 2nd or 3rd game or so is vs someone that is roughly on their level.)
And for the period when ladder is too much of a imposition for someone, they can team up with other noobs or people who are willing to help, via TL or discord or whatever, and play custom games, to either practice and improve or play some fun games.
As for the things OP mentions (playing with full visibility of the map or your opponents vision etc.), I think you can just open a custom game and share vision, no? That would be no problem in such a rather private-practice-environment as I mentioned. And here you could receive help on what to look for with that additional vision - because I doubt that a 0-1000 points noob could even figure out what's going on and substract the information that he/she needs in the long run.
|
On June 17 2019 15:39 Jealous wrote: Just buff guardians, that should fix everything.
How about we play tag football only, the game is too dependent on physicality and tackling.
How about we make chess be pawns only, the other pieces complicate the game.
How about we limit sprinters to 5 miles per hour, it's not fair for the fat and out of shape runners otherwise.
How about we change poker so everyone can see everyone else's hands all the time, having hidden information is basically cheating.
How about we just test people based on whether or not they bought the book and not whether or not they read it or studied it, after all, we don't want to be able-ist. Right?
It's not about making it easier but compensating the complete lack of a community in a dead 1000 peack western servers. Why don't you brainstorm some decent idea to help out newcomers like we're doin instead of venting without even reading sht.
I disagree with OP too but I can see some potentials in the idea so I try to add on it. Mb you're happy with a dead community that keep getting smaller.
On June 17 2019 16:10 reps)squishy wrote: Find a friend that is new too. Play against computers together. Play fastest maps. That is what everyone here that plays ladder did back in the day, it was not easy then either. There are ways to improve and having fun. You don't need to straight up practice.
Here's the problem, you don't find new "friends" in a dead server with a bunch of angry veterans. No guild, no sensei, no advices in a game full of bugs and tricks, no nothing.
I think that, at the moment, if someone manages to find TL, then he/she should be able to get all that with the little bit of effort and dedication that is needed to get started. (Maybe a very visible, very flashy "New to BW?"-banner that leads to a comprehensive thread about all the best ways to get in touch with others (the right threads, discords, twitch-streams etc.) would be a good improvement for the site, placed right on the main-page or at the top of every BW-forum-section.)
I really like the idea! Plz TL listen 🙏
As for the things OP mentions (playing with full visibility of the map or your opponents vision etc.), I think you can just open a custom game and share vision, no? That would be no problem in such a rather private-practice-environment as I mentioned. And here you could receive help on what to look for with that additional vision - because I doubt that a 0-1000 points noob could even figure out what's going on and substract the information that he/she needs in the long run. The problem is that nobody play 1v1 custom nowadays and you don't find new friends so easily in such a small community of veterans.
On June 17 2019 09:52 AntiHack wrote: I like the idea, maybe my only concern is smurfers.
But if it's like 0 MMR... I mean Zero... that's probably not an issue (even somewhat above zero probably)
I mean, it should be an MMR so low that a good smurf player can't reach even trying
EDIT: I have to point out that the guilds were the back bone of new players experience and learning back in the days, unfortunately Blizzard haven't lost that habit of reducing or getting rid of social tools in their games. There's no more personal channels, bots, a warm chat layout, etc. Yes, there's the bnet 2.0 friends list which is kind of useless because those who play othe Blizz titles basically never play sc1.
The new players discord channel... LMaster and the others should post it at last every single week on TL (on BW general mb?). Even I don't remember where to find that discord link to copy paste when I see a new player.
EDIT2: I think I've missread the op a little bit. 0 - 1000 no fog make no sense. We're losing the souls of an RTS here.
My idea is: when a player get to a low MMR (very low) the fog is removed for him which mean that if he get matched to someone with a MMR way too high (quite common outside of Korea), one player is gonna have the fog and the lesser skilled one not. It most only happen when the difference in MMR is huge, like 200 to 1k, (the 200 mmr player have no fog, the 1k mmr player have fog). This system is basically smurf proof because a good player smurfing is not going to 200 mmr anyways beside some rare pathological troll.
[b]EDIT: Take in mind that the stronger player (the 1k mmr?) Get a message that the opponent is gonna have no fog and he have 2 minutes to leave with no penalty points or to stay and play with the weaker player and mb socialise and mb teach him something. That might develop in a sensei/student friendships, something that was happening all the times back then.
SC1 is the perfect master/student game because the game is full of bugs and tricks but the game itself basically tells you nothing. Maybe that's one of the reasons why it appeal so much to Koreans.
The 3v3 MM (if it ever comes out) is gonna have a huge problem in evenly marching so few players, a system like that might enable "team coach vs team pupil" matches where the pupil ones are fog free. The problem in having absurdly long 3v3 MM waiting time is that the lobby system works better because you can chat in the lobby while waiting for other players.
|
|
Ridiculous claims, imo. This is the charm of the game - that one on one it is challenging beyond belief. Making it easier destroys the fun in it. What do you think? When we were playing 4v4 on hunters back in 2000 that someone gave us slack? Far from it, they bashed our heads with whatever build they did until we knew better. Or then on Lost Temple, did they not abuse the cliffs vs my innocent protoss population? Hell no, they did not, until I realized shuttles were a thing and then that they needed to be ready before a certain timing. How many games did that take me? A hundred? I don't know, maybe more. Idk, I had fun doing it and discovering and this is all that mattered for me. This is the only reasonable way to learn and play this game - trail, error, correction, rinse and repeat.
|
On June 17 2019 20:02 JoinTheRain wrote: Ridiculous claims, imo. This is the charm of the game - that one on one it is challenging beyond belief. Making it easier destroys the fun in it. What do you think? When we were playing 4v4 on hunters back in 2000 that someone gave us slack? Far from it, they bashed our heads with whatever build they did until we knew better. Or then on Lost Temple, did they not abuse the cliffs vs my innocent protoss population? Hell no, they did not, until I realized shuttles were a thing and then that they needed to be ready before a certain timing. How many games did that take me? A hundred? I don't know, maybe more. Idk, I had fun doing it and discovering and this is all that mattered for me. This is the only reasonable way to learn and play this game - trail, error, correction, rinse and repeat. The difference is that back in the days there where a lot of players and new players so you happen to make new frieds and guilds that used to help you out with advices like "the shuttle is a thing".
Also not every player is willing to go hardcore-training-only-lose-for-one-year, most of the ppl are willing to improve a little bit and then hopefully win a couple of games.
I mean, with so few players is much more boring and slower and harder to improve. You can't compare 1999 with 2019.
|
On June 17 2019 18:59 Highgamer wrote: First, I appreciate any effort to try and make this game more noob friendly apart from changing the game itself, that is, by better reception of newcomers, offering them accessible information, educational streams/Vods etc.
I think that, at the moment, if someone manages to find TL, then he/she should be able to get all that with the little bit of effort and dedication that is needed to get started. (Maybe a very visible, very flashy "New to BW?"-banner that leads to a comprehensive thread about all the best ways to get in touch with others (the right threads, discords, twitch-streams etc.) would be a good improvement for the site, placed right on the main-page or at the top of every BW-forum-section.)
But I doubt that the number of noobs around justifies the creation of any separate ladder-league or something elaborate like that. You just won't have the SC2-noob-base around to really run a bronze/silver league, I'm afraid - and Blizzard knows.
I think it'd be better to tell these people the truth and offer them what they need to quickly get low-level-ladder-proof. (That means: they know that they will have sub 50% winrate for a long time and they know why that is, but every 2nd or 3rd game or so is vs someone that is roughly on their level.)
And for the period when ladder is too much of a imposition for someone, they can team up with other noobs or people who are willing to help, via TL or discord or whatever, and play custom games, to either practice and improve or play some fun games.
As for the things OP mentions (playing with full visibility of the map or your opponents vision etc.), I think you can just open a custom game and share vision, no? That would be no problem in such a rather private-practice-environment as I mentioned. And here you could receive help on what to look for with that additional vision - because I doubt that a 0-1000 points noob could even figure out what's going on and substract the information that he/she needs in the long run. And I'm all for new players being able to easily find all the resources out there that help them get better at the game but I was wondering if there could be or should be something on top of that, which you disagreed with. I'm not so sure why though, out of principle?
because I doubt that a 0-1000 points noob could even figure out what's going on and substract the information that he/she needs in the long run You have a point. However I think a noob can figure out something simple or obvious like: "Oh he made a pool that early? That's why X." or "Oh, he had that many workers? That's why Y." in this case during the game, so he can respond to it A.S.A.P. I think it could be a potentially great way of helping noobs train and figure out the game and connect the dots by themselves.
On June 17 2019 19:18 AntiHack wrote: EDIT: Take in mind that the stronger player (the 1k mmr?) Get a message that the opponent is gonna have no fog ang he have 2 minutes to leave with no penalty points or to stay and play with the weaker player and mb socialise and mb teach him something. That might develop in a sensei/student friendships, something that was happening all the times inside guilds.
This is sort of unrelated to Battle.net maybe or to the ladder but I wonder if there was some sort of ranking for student and coach league, where the leader who gets his students the farthest in the ladder is rewarded his own MMR points based on the success of his students in a leader... leader board. You guys should try something like that in the coach pupil league, would be pretty cool. Would give a whole new element to clan play if something like that was put into battle.net in BW, can u imagine?
EDIT: not couch league, coach league
On June 17 2019 20:02 JoinTheRain wrote: Ridiculous claims, imo. This is the charm of the game - that one on one it is challenging beyond belief. Making it easier destroys the fun in it. What do you think? When we were playing 4v4 on hunters back in 2000 that someone gave us slack? Far from it, they bashed our heads with whatever build they did until we knew better. Or then on Lost Temple, did they not abuse the cliffs vs my innocent protoss population? Hell no, they did not, until I realized shuttles were a thing and then that they needed to be ready before a certain timing. How many games did that take me? A hundred? I don't know, maybe more. Idk, I had fun doing it and discovering and this is all that mattered for me. This is the only reasonable way to learn and play this game - trail, error, correction, rinse and repeat. The thing is however back in 2000 everyone were noobs together, it's a little bit different when someone gets into the ring only to get his head bashed in. Is that really fun? for most people? No, that is not.
Hell I saw a game on the 24/7 old pro match stream on twitch back from like 2001, where Boxer played against some zerg, and I literally thought to myself "Even I could roll over this Boxer". So think about that, and have a little perspective.
|
This is sort of unrelated to Battle.net maybe or to the ladder but I wonder if there was some sort of ranking for student and coach league, where the leader who gets his students the farthest in the ladder is rewarded his own MMR points based on the success of his students in a leader... leader board. You guys should try something like that in the couch pupil league, would be pretty cool. Would give a whole new element to clan play if something like that was put into battle.net in BW, can u imagine? I like the idea a lot
EDIT btw guys, can you give me that "New players Discord" link again, so I can try to save it somewhere and share it more often. Ty
EDIT2 nvm just found it on Lmaster twitch: https://discordapp.com/invite/geQGabn
EDIT3 I think ppl understimate how mechanically demanding this game is, if a player is way better is gonna win all the times even if the opponent "maphacks". I've witnessed it billions of times.
|
On June 17 2019 20:19 JonttuTonttu wrote: The thing is however back in 2000 everyone were noobs together, it's a little bit different when someone gets into the ring only to get his head bashed in. Is that really fun? for most people? No, that is not.
This seems hardly relevant. Material for learning now is abundant, then it was scarce. Nowadays you can learn in a week what then required maybe an entire year and I am not exaggerating, even play time was severely limited because we were a bunch of 13 - 14 year olds paying with pocket money in pc clubs per hour. Anyway - let's try another example if I have not been clear in the first one. Say we try your logic of lowering the initial difficulty by changing the rules but keeping the activity and we move to a physical sport. Should a guy that is aspiring to be a heavy lifter then start with jogging, you know, jogging is easier on the body and in might attract more folk to the sport (because this is what your logic implies - changing the existing game to something vaguely resembling it in order to make it more appealing to new players; what you propose will feel nothing like real actual ladder experience yet will have the looks of the game, much like tasty foods when compared to healthy foods, when you ask a child or someone with the experience of a child about what should be eaten, the dietologist will starve and the pastry cook will thrive even though his product will harm the eater in the long term)? By no means, he would even harm himself and hinder his progress in heavy lifting if he jogs. He has to start the actual discipline, with whatever kgs he can lift for 5 repetitions for 5 sets and just add mass when he grows stronger. If someone finds it too hard - it is all well and good, he can look for something else. And I also think artificially swelling the number of players (like the means you suggest) in BW just means nothing to the actual ladder players and to the game as well.
|
On June 17 2019 20:50 JoinTheRain wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2019 20:19 JonttuTonttu wrote: The thing is however back in 2000 everyone were noobs together, it's a little bit different when someone gets into the ring only to get his head bashed in. Is that really fun? for most people? No, that is not.
This seems hardly relevant. Material for learning now is abundant, then it was scarce. Nowadays you can learn in a week what then required maybe an entire year and I am not exaggerating, even play time was severely limited because we were a bunch of 13 - 14 year olds paying with pocket money in pc clubs per hour. Anyway - let's try another example if I have not been clear in the first one. Say we try your logic of lowering the initial difficulty by changing the rules but keeping the activity and we move to a physical sport. Should a guy that is aspiring to be a heavy lifter then start with jogging, you know, jogging is easier on the body and in might attract more folk to the sport (because this is what your logic implies - changing the existing game to something vaguely resembling it in order to make it more appealing to new players; what you propose will feel nothing like real actual ladder experience yet will have the looks of the game, much like tasty foods when compared to healthy foods, when you ask a child or someone with the experience of a child about what should be eaten, the dietologist will starve and the pastry cook will thrive even though his product will harm the eater in the long term)? By no means, he would even harm himself and hinder his progress in heavy lifting if he jogs. He has to start the actual discipline, with whatever kgs he can lift for 5 repetitions for 5 sets and just add mass when he grows stronger. If someone finds it too hard - it is all well and good, he can look for something else. And I also think artificially swelling the number of players (like the means you suggest) in BW just means nothing to the actual ladder players and to the game as well. I completely disagree. It's extremely boring to learn just reading stuff over liquipedia and watching replays compared to improve all together with a group of friends.
It's like a RPG, first you improve in the babies zone, than you move in the "still babies but less babies" zone, than the "teens" zone and so so on.
|
On June 17 2019 20:50 JoinTheRain wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2019 20:19 JonttuTonttu wrote: The thing is however back in 2000 everyone were noobs together, it's a little bit different when someone gets into the ring only to get his head bashed in. Is that really fun? for most people? No, that is not.
This seems hardly relevant. Material for learning now is abundant, then it was scarce. Nowadays you can learn in a week what then required maybe an entire year and I am not exaggerating, even play time was severely limited because we were a bunch of 13 - 14 year olds paying with pocket money in pc clubs per hour. Anyway - let's try another example if I have not been clear in the first one. Say we try your logic of lowering the initial difficulty by changing the rules but keeping the activity and we move to a physical sport. Should a guy that is aspiring to be a heavy lifter then start with jogging, you know, jogging is easier on the body and in might attract more folk to the sport (because this is what your logic implies - changing the existing game to something vaguely resembling it in order to make it more appealing to new players; what you propose will feel nothing like real actual ladder experience yet will have the looks of the game, much like tasty foods when compared to healthy foods, when you ask a child or someone with the experience of a child about what should be eaten, the dietologist will starve and the pastry cook will thrive even though his product will harm the eater in the long term)? By no means, he would even harm himself and hinder his progress in heavy lifting if he jogs. He has to start the actual discipline, with whatever kgs he can lift for 5 repetitions for 5 sets and just add mass when he grows stronger. If someone finds it too hard - it is all well and good, he can look for something else. And I also think artificially swelling the number of players (like the means you suggest) in BW just means nothing to the actual ladder players and to the game as well. Well that is not my logic at all. ???
Besides what you had to learn back then to be competitive was obviously much less than today so your point isn't relevant.
But you have your opinion on it, you don't like the idea and that's fine. Even though I feel like you purposefully misunderstood me but o well.
|
On June 17 2019 20:58 AntiHack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2019 20:50 JoinTheRain wrote:On June 17 2019 20:19 JonttuTonttu wrote: The thing is however back in 2000 everyone were noobs together, it's a little bit different when someone gets into the ring only to get his head bashed in. Is that really fun? for most people? No, that is not.
This seems hardly relevant. Material for learning now is abundant, then it was scarce. Nowadays you can learn in a week what then required maybe an entire year and I am not exaggerating, even play time was severely limited because we were a bunch of 13 - 14 year olds paying with pocket money in pc clubs per hour. Anyway - let's try another example if I have not been clear in the first one. Say we try your logic of lowering the initial difficulty by changing the rules but keeping the activity and we move to a physical sport. Should a guy that is aspiring to be a heavy lifter then start with jogging, you know, jogging is easier on the body and in might attract more folk to the sport (because this is what your logic implies - changing the existing game to something vaguely resembling it in order to make it more appealing to new players; what you propose will feel nothing like real actual ladder experience yet will have the looks of the game, much like tasty foods when compared to healthy foods, when you ask a child or someone with the experience of a child about what should be eaten, the dietologist will starve and the pastry cook will thrive even though his product will harm the eater in the long term)? By no means, he would even harm himself and hinder his progress in heavy lifting if he jogs. He has to start the actual discipline, with whatever kgs he can lift for 5 repetitions for 5 sets and just add mass when he grows stronger. If someone finds it too hard - it is all well and good, he can look for something else. And I also think artificially swelling the number of players (like the means you suggest) in BW just means nothing to the actual ladder players and to the game as well. I completely disagree. It's extremely boring to learn just reading stuff over liquipedia and watching replays compared to improve all together with a group of friends. It's like a RPG, first you improve in the babies zone, than you move in the "still babies but less babies" zone, than the "teens" zone and so so on.
I completely agree that the real problem new players are facing is a lack of equal skilled players. There just aren't enough players.
A solution to this problem could be to merge the servers. This would also benefit higher skilled players who would have an easier time finding opponents on the ladder. Regarding custom games, there would be a lot more games in the lobby to everyone's benefit.
I live in Europe, but i usually play on US West because there is a higher player base, and i have no problems regarding the internet connection. But to those who would be concerned about connection problems, when playing players from a different continent, you could make an option to only show games created from you own continent.
So what i am suggesting is merging all servers except Korea. Wouldn't it be nice if instead of seeing 500 players on EU, 100 players on US East, 1000 on US West and 2000 on Asia, you would see one server with 3600 players?
Back when people played on ICCUP, there was only one server too, which even included Korean players.
|
I know that there are many outlets for people to connect and get into the game, one I know of is LMasters discord, I have met a ton of REALLY cool people there who I have gamed with and actually learned a lot from. Myself and a friend of mine actually just started playing BW and ran into the same issue. We were just getting wrecked on the ladder and losing 10 games in a row can get extremely discouraging. Watching replays you can only really get build orders, but can't get the fundamental thought behind actions. For that reason, we have started a "New Players Club" so to speak, we actually co-stream, every morning, from 6am PST to about 12pm PST. We find people who are interested in playing, do a bo3, then go over the replay and get an analysis of the gameplay; what went wrong, build order, counters, placement, benefits of this and that..you get the jist. It is still a scuffed segment, but we are working to make it an enjoyable/knowledgeable experience. We have actually gained some traction and got a lot of people who are just installing the game and getting their new exciting career in BW happening lol. If anyone on here is interested, please DM me, would love to meet/collaborate and play with everyone.
|
|
|
|