|
I don't myself want to build a topic around Blizzard's commitment to balance in general - we can all quickly imagine how that ends up looking. The spread of factors there is so vast, and we'll still only end up with people saying this, and people saying that. I want to look at their commitment to balance in light of a single, recent decision on their part.
So, in keeping this topic far simpler, I wanted to talk about their decision to let the community vote on the entirety of the map pool in the upcoming fourth season. Let me just quickly say that much of my reaction/response to this unprecedented decision is that it lends itself to what will surely be an interesting experiment. Will more people be more active during this season, than the last? What other positives might come about from giving this a go for one season? I'm not without the ability to either accept that this is coming, or to be particularly open to and focused on what positive outcomes may stem from it.
But is it worth it?
Here is the issue I am having in how I perceive Blizzard, relative to their commitment to balance: How am I to believe that Blizzard is both genuine and focused on maintaining a healthy balance in this game, knowing that that depends in huge part on map design and which maps are played on, while watching them throw their decision-making power on these matters to the masses?
Anyone? That is the question I would most love to see people making attempts to answer in the ensuing conversation.
I missed the memo where Blizzard underwent a radical shift in how they perceive the masses of players and how good of a job they will or won't do with something like balance. And let me remind everyone that, according to Liqupedia, that the worst/lowest three out of seven total leagues make up roughly 60% of the player base.
I feel forced to conclude that Blizzard decided that for one season, map balance will stop being something that we've slowly worked for and refined, and simply become inexistent. No conversation or contemplation about the matters. No appreciation of already understood realities/issues concerning these maps, that we generated heaps of data to support.
That many of these maps have glaring balance issues is a matter of fact. And the information supporting it is abundant and easily accessible, and, honestly, SURELY already known by Blizzard.
And yet they decide to forego balance. So when I recall the public face Blizzard has tried to show in the past, acting sincerely concerned with how the balance changes in their game effect their players, especially the pro players who make a living on this game and to whom balance is an especially important matter... I think it's bullshit. Now, mind you, it's not that I ever really bought any of that. But at least on the outside, they made the appearance of caring.
But, to go and do this, really thrashes all of that. To me, it makes the fact that David Kim has a job and gets paid money to attempt to balance this game quite hilarious. I do not believe that Blizzard is now even maintaining an appearance or pretense of being serious about balance. I don't see how they can imagine themselves that way, or think that anyone else will, while they make decisions like this.
Can anyone out there witness this, as I've described it, and retain a sense of conviction about Blizzard being truly committed to balance? Is that really possible? What would the argument look like?
As for the matter at hand coming to bear.. I'm at peace with that and waiting to learn from it. I can't play due to wrist injuries right now, so it's an easy scenario for me to sit back, not compete, and watch what is to be learned from this experiment. I'm always eager to learn.
|
This is not meant to be a competitive season. This is meant to be a stupid fun season, which really displeases me, but why not. That's the reason why we get to play those maps. If this doesn't turn out well, they won't do that again in the offseason next year. Simple as that.
|
There is no WCS season during season 4. This is a troll season trying to get community involvement.
I like the idea. Those who want to play a balanced game can always practice on other balanced maps, but this is meant to bring back fans of maps that have been played on a lot and have a lot of memories on.
|
Its not as serious of an issue as your excessively grandiloquent inflammatory rhetoric makes it seem.
They are trying to make season 4 a fun season, and an experiment. Even if you personally disagree with their decision to bring back maps, revisiting old maps is something that most players enjoy, and that enjoyment supersedes your concern for perfect balance. There's no WCS, so maintaining rigid balance isn't that important.
|
On October 29 2014 06:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: This is not meant to be a competitive season. This is meant to be a stupid fun season, which really displeases me, but why not. That's the reason why we get to play those maps. If this doesn't turn out well, they won't do that again in the offseason next year. Simple as that.
Every season is a non-competitive season if you simply play unranked, or otherwise opt out of approaching it competitively. This is not the expansion of options for us to play non-competitively - it is only the opportunity to play certain fan favorite maps via using the 1v1 match-making tool. This is the loss the loss of options for us to play competitively, on maps with decent balance, and presented in a spread that attempts to accommodate a variety of playstyles, and which also gives us the option of putting a somewhat equal share of this and that type of map in. This and that type of map may be ones where balance is in favor of a given race, generally speaking. Or it might be a 'rush' map or a 'macro' map.
I'm also thinking of how few people who participated in the vote will actually play any meaningful amount of games before quitting or simply tiring of the gimmick or any of the inevitable balance horrors waiting there-in. The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play.
|
You should take this opportunity to create new builds that are applicable to future seasons. I.e. If you know you'll be playing on Metalopolis and Cloud Kingdom you'll need a build which is able to respond to blink attacks without relying on certain map features as a crutch.
If you have that build then in future seasons, not only do you as a player have more options going forwards, mapmakers also have lots more options in terms of where they can take the game.
tl;dr, take this as an opportunity to be innovative!
|
I would have liked it if they would have takes this opportunity to test more thorough changes (Tank changes, Swarm Hosts), but this is safer and might be better for the popularity of the game for mor ecasual players
|
On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote: I'm also thinking of how few people who participated in the vote will actually play any meaningful amount of games before quitting or simply tiring of the gimmick or any of the inevitable balance horrors waiting there-in. The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play.
Your concerns have already been voiced in another thread. Wire has already argued and debated about this to death.
Most of us have already accepted the problems inherit in this experiment, while others actually anticipate it.
Wire advocated against it for a long time because he was vastly afraid the trolls would triumph with horrible maps, but he has slowly accepted it because we currently only have Metalopolis as a horrible map. The others are arguably decent to some degree.
|
On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2014 06:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: This is not meant to be a competitive season. This is meant to be a stupid fun season, which really displeases me, but why not. That's the reason why we get to play those maps. If this doesn't turn out well, they won't do that again in the offseason next year. Simple as that. Every season is a non-competitive season if you simply play unranked, or otherwise opt out of approaching it competitively. This is not the expansion of options for us to play non-competitively - it is only the opportunity to play certain fan favorite maps via using the 1v1 match-making tool. This is the loss the loss of options for us to play competitively, on maps with decent balance, and presented in a spread that attempts to accommodate a variety of playstyles, and which also gives us the option of putting a somewhat equal share of this and that type of map in. This and that type of map may be ones where balance is in favor of a given race, generally speaking. Or it might be a 'rush' map or a 'macro' map. I'm also thinking of how few people who participated in the vote will actually play any meaningful amount of games before quitting or simply tiring of the gimmick or any of the inevitable balance horrors waiting there-in. The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play.
So really you're just whining that you don't think these maps are going to be fun.
All of your "commitment to balance" stuff is just fluff, you already realize why Blizzard is doing this and that it has no bearing on how they balance the game. You just want to complain about it anyway.
|
Northern Ireland20729 Posts
Yeah sweet and I'm sure those 'casuals' will stick around once normal service is renewed.
I applaud attempts to try and incentivise more people to play, just don't really think this was the best way. I don't think you'll see appreciable increases in new players coming in, while annoying a certain segment of actual active players.
|
On October 29 2014 07:13 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote:On October 29 2014 06:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: This is not meant to be a competitive season. This is meant to be a stupid fun season, which really displeases me, but why not. That's the reason why we get to play those maps. If this doesn't turn out well, they won't do that again in the offseason next year. Simple as that. Every season is a non-competitive season if you simply play unranked, or otherwise opt out of approaching it competitively. This is not the expansion of options for us to play non-competitively - it is only the opportunity to play certain fan favorite maps via using the 1v1 match-making tool. This is the loss the loss of options for us to play competitively, on maps with decent balance, and presented in a spread that attempts to accommodate a variety of playstyles, and which also gives us the option of putting a somewhat equal share of this and that type of map in. This and that type of map may be ones where balance is in favor of a given race, generally speaking. Or it might be a 'rush' map or a 'macro' map. I'm also thinking of how few people who participated in the vote will actually play any meaningful amount of games before quitting or simply tiring of the gimmick or any of the inevitable balance horrors waiting there-in. The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play. So really you're just whining that you don't think these maps are going to be fun. All of your "commitment to balance" stuff is just fluff, you already realize why Blizzard is doing this and that it has no bearing on how they balance the game. You just want to complain about it anyway. Calling people out just before your 10k post. Nice!
Now go make a blog about your 10k post on your 10k post.
|
On October 29 2014 07:14 Wombat_NI wrote: Yeah sweet and I'm sure those 'casuals' will stick around once normal service is renewed.
I applaud attempts to try and incentivise more people to play, just don't really think this was the best way. I don't think you'll see appreciable increases in new players coming in, while annoying a certain segment of actual active players. I don't think the idea behind the retro map pool voting is getting new players. I think the idea is to bring back lost ones. It will probably accomplish that as well
|
On October 29 2014 07:13 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote:On October 29 2014 06:57 [PkF] Wire wrote: This is not meant to be a competitive season. This is meant to be a stupid fun season, which really displeases me, but why not. That's the reason why we get to play those maps. If this doesn't turn out well, they won't do that again in the offseason next year. Simple as that. Every season is a non-competitive season if you simply play unranked, or otherwise opt out of approaching it competitively. This is not the expansion of options for us to play non-competitively - it is only the opportunity to play certain fan favorite maps via using the 1v1 match-making tool. This is the loss the loss of options for us to play competitively, on maps with decent balance, and presented in a spread that attempts to accommodate a variety of playstyles, and which also gives us the option of putting a somewhat equal share of this and that type of map in. This and that type of map may be ones where balance is in favor of a given race, generally speaking. Or it might be a 'rush' map or a 'macro' map. I'm also thinking of how few people who participated in the vote will actually play any meaningful amount of games before quitting or simply tiring of the gimmick or any of the inevitable balance horrors waiting there-in. The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play. So really you're just whining that you don't think these maps are going to be fun. All of your "commitment to balance" stuff is just fluff, you already realize why Blizzard is doing this and that it has no bearing on how they balance the game. You just want to complain about it anyway.
I'm sorry, but I've read over your reply twice now and am still struggling to figure out where you derived that conclusion from. So I'll have to ask you kindly to demonstrate that? I think you're mistaking my willingness to talk about anything other than strictly the main premise of the OP, in the following posts/conversation, means that I'm completely disingenuous in the OP? Is there some respectable logic that you're incorporating into the conclusions you just left at my feet?
On October 29 2014 07:17 Orcasgt24 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2014 07:14 Wombat_NI wrote: Yeah sweet and I'm sure those 'casuals' will stick around once normal service is renewed.
I applaud attempts to try and incentivise more people to play, just don't really think this was the best way. I don't think you'll see appreciable increases in new players coming in, while annoying a certain segment of actual active players. I don't think the idea behind the retro map pool voting is getting new players. I think the idea is to bring back lost ones. It will probably accomplish that as well
When you say that it will probably accomplish that, do you mean that it will accomplish that temporarily, or long-term? I don't see anything involved that should suggest that the players who are 'lost' and being brought back will stop being the kind of fan of sc2 who becomes 'lost' and stops playing it.
|
On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote: The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play. what is your evidence for this random and nonsensical claim? why would the least active players be the most active voters? you're just complaining to complain about a good idea for community involvement that not everyone liked
|
|
I like it, the most active people might find out there is a custom map function, if they really dislike. Just image we could see more then 3 maps for 3 month if the ladder loses some relevancy again. (Never gonna happen haha) But the off season is the perfect time to experiment with maps and the ladder is sadly the only place to properly experiment around and find out how to improve maps.
|
On October 29 2014 07:12 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote: I'm also thinking of how few people who participated in the vote will actually play any meaningful amount of games before quitting or simply tiring of the gimmick or any of the inevitable balance horrors waiting there-in. The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play. Your concerns have already been voiced in another thread. Wire has already argued and debated about this to death. Most of us have already accepted the problems inherit in this experiment, while others actually anticipate it. Wire advocated against it for a long time because he was vastly afraid the trolls would triumph with horrible maps, but he has slowly accepted it because we currently only have Metalopolis as a horrible map. The others are arguably decent to some degree.
Metalopolis AND Xel'naga Caverns are dreadful.
The rest is true. I was quite happy initially because I naively thought this was an occasion to pay tribute to the actually good maps we had. I was shocked and appalled when I saw some people thought it would be fun to select not the best maps we ever had (CK, Frost...) but to choose some moronic ones instead just for nostalgia's sake, for "fun" because they didn't care about those who want to play competitively even if they're bad or -this one really set my teeth on edge- to "shake the meta". Remember Scrap Station or Incineration Zone were sometimes asked for, and we all know Steppes of War was feared to be in the pool until the last map was revealed. So in the end I was quite worried and I'm now relieved, 5 out of 7 maps are decent. But don't get me wrong, this is still a bad idea : the community shouldn't vote for this, and I would have preferred this offseason to be used to playtest some good new maps instead of what they did, especially since the current map pool is quite obnoxious due to the most recent TLMC having quite a stale top 5 (I'm OK with Foxtrot Labs which is really interesting, but Catallena and Deadwing are really boring and not well-done ; Nimbus wasn't part of TLMC but it's an atrocious, imbalanced and broken map).
So I'll enjoy this season for what it's worth, I'll be happy to play again on Shakuras or Ohana, then I hope we get a good map pool for the season 5, and that a lot of the current maps (Catallena/Nimbus/Deadwing especially) get replaced with good solid 2p maps.
|
On October 29 2014 07:25 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2014 07:04 Lumi wrote: The least active, least competitive players have decided what the most active, most competitive players will play. what is your evidence for this random and nonsensical claim? why would the least active players be the most active voters? you're just complaining to complain about a good idea for community involvement that not everyone liked
Thanks for asking, I don't at all mind clarifying. More active players tend to move up in ranks. They become increasingly distanced from the majority of the player base. If you look at how active everyone is, by league, and start cutting out the upper leagues, you're left with the majority of players, and yet the least active ones. I'm not complaining at all. You're complaining about your misperception that I am complaining. I have no use for making threads on TL so that I can complain so that you could come here and do something about it for me. I am, in fact, not compatible with your unverified and pessimistic assumptions about my person and my intentions behind this thread. I'm a lover of conversation And someone, who, as it included at the very end of the OP, is eager to see what will come of this all.
|
blizzard stopped patching broodwar for the latter half of the game and look how things went for it. Maybe they need to take their hands off of sc2 for ahwile
|
Balance is overrated. People want fun units allowing for fun and insane tactics, but the problem is that Blizzard went and nerfed all of those in favour of sterile balanced play where every race can pretty much FE (or double FE) without having to be afraid for retaliation, and all players end up using the same unit compositions regardless of the builds they chose.
The game has become incredibly predictable, both in terms of strategies used and players who will inevitably end up in the ro8. Tournament viewership has gone down the drain compared to last year too. I don't blame blizzard for trying to shake things up a bit.
|
|
|
|