On July 09 2018 19:43 castleeMg wrote: wheres 2v2 matchmaking why isnt this one of the highest priorities ? it would make the community the happiest imo. is the blizzard team incapable of making this happen? it seems like it at this point with their vague statements on any team matchmaking...
They said server saturation is an issue before, if the eastern/western server population is between 1k-2k players, then maybe they are concerned about not having enough people. I wonder if this fear is real, But a 2v2 ladder would definetly be fun
Honestly if this is their view it’s pretty unacceptable. Iccup still has an active 2v2 ladder with sub 100 players online. It’s very hard to get games there yes but it was very easy to play 2v2 ladder prior to remastered and the server was around 400-500 average at that time. Even if they’re worried about not having enough saturation, can’t they at least trial it and test it out? I mean I know I’m whining like a baby at this point but how can iccup have a working 2v2 system for 12+ years with a small admin team compared to a multi billion dollar company who seems like they don’t even have a blueprint ready for it yet? It makes no sense and is complete incompetence on their part... I know this is not a constructive post but I really want to express how I feel on this portion of remastered
I personally think it's a fair point that you're making. They did say 2v2 is coming this year, but we're over halfway through already. In a little over a month, remastered would've been out for a full year yet there are still issues plaguing the game. It's pretty sad to see and from what the looks of it, the dev team is not concentrating just on RM which is why they released that WCIII patch with balance fixes a while back...
i am not sure thats true. Usually the structure of devs in those companies are based on projects. You have a core dev team for the project and maybe some jumpers. I am still convinced that the active devs on SC:R are passionate about it, but we rather see a typical different attachment to Starcraft between the devs and the marketing people. And dont forget, SC:R has made the most part of its revenue within the initial release. For a short-sighted profit maximization there would actually be no need to give more support with patches. Since in long-term you are screwing a loyal fanbase over I guess some management people decided to still invest the bare minimum to have ANY development, so the community is not 100% against Blizzard. I would rather love to have a roadmap thats executed fast and than we have a finished product, while blizzard can user their devs on other projects.
On July 09 2018 19:43 castleeMg wrote: wheres 2v2 matchmaking why isnt this one of the highest priorities ? it would make the community the happiest imo. is the blizzard team incapable of making this happen? it seems like it at this point with their vague statements on any team matchmaking...
They said server saturation is an issue before, if the eastern/western server population is between 1k-2k players, then maybe they are concerned about not having enough people. I wonder if this fear is real, But a 2v2 ladder would definetly be fun
Honestly if this is their view it’s pretty unacceptable. Iccup still has an active 2v2 ladder with sub 100 players online. It’s very hard to get games there yes but it was very easy to play 2v2 ladder prior to remastered and the server was around 400-500 average at that time. Even if they’re worried about not having enough saturation, can’t they at least trial it and test it out? I mean I know I’m whining like a baby at this point but how can iccup have a working 2v2 system for 12+ years with a small admin team compared to a multi billion dollar company who seems like they don’t even have a blueprint ready for it yet? It makes no sense and is complete incompetence on their part... I know this is not a constructive post but I really want to express how I feel on this portion of remastered
I personally think it's a fair point that you're making. They did say 2v2 is coming this year, but we're over halfway through already. In a little over a month, remastered would've been out for a full year yet there are still issues plaguing the game. It's pretty sad to see and from what the looks of it, the dev team is not concentrating just on RM which is why they released that WCIII patch with balance fixes a while back...
i am not sure thats true. Usually the structure of devs in those companies are based on projects. You have a core dev team for the project and maybe some jumpers. I am still convinced that the active devs on SC:R are passionate about it, but we rather see a typical different attachment to Starcraft between the devs and the marketing people. And dont forget, SC:R has made the most part of its revenue within the initial release. For a short-sighted profit maximization there would actually be no need to give more support with patches. Since in long-term you are screwing a loyal fanbase over I guess some management people decided to still invest the bare minimum to have ANY development, so the community is not 100% against Blizzard. I would rather love to have a roadmap thats executed fast and than we have a finished product, while blizzard can user their devs on other projects.
Yeah, they are worried about profit. Thats why they have people working on Warcraft 3, because thats were the money is. They dont do 2v2 Matchmaking because its insane in Peer-to-Peer. Every 1v1 Peer-to-Peer game has its problem. Make that 2v2 and you are in for a nightmare. And when its released and it doesnt work 100%, the backlash is going to be insane
I dont buy it. Lobby 2v2 would work just fine and thats always an option, and why would backlash be insane? they can already prioritize for latency, korean 2v2 should work just fine, american etc, the backlash if there is one, will be subdued to the randoms with bad connection or a small local area. They will suffer lag/longer ques.
The reality i think is that they dont have the staff to work quickly on this.
On July 10 2018 10:47 Dazed. wrote: I dont buy it. Lobby 2v2 would work just fine and thats always an option, and why would backlash be insane? they can already prioritize for latency, korean 2v2 should work just fine, american etc, the backlash if there is one, will be subdued to the randoms with bad connection or a small local area. They will suffer lag/longer ques.
The reality i think is that they dont have the staff to work quickly on this.
Well then don't promise on things you can't deliver..?
On July 10 2018 10:47 Dazed. wrote: I dont buy it. Lobby 2v2 would work just fine and thats always an option, and why would backlash be insane? they can already prioritize for latency, korean 2v2 should work just fine, american etc, the backlash if there is one, will be subdued to the randoms with bad connection or a small local area. They will suffer lag/longer ques.
The reality i think is that they dont have the staff to work quickly on this.
Well then don't promise on things you can't deliver..?
They never gave a date just said they're working on it. They never promised anything at all.
On July 10 2018 10:47 Dazed. wrote: I dont buy it. Lobby 2v2 would work just fine and thats always an option, and why would backlash be insane? they can already prioritize for latency, korean 2v2 should work just fine, american etc, the backlash if there is one, will be subdued to the randoms with bad connection or a small local area. They will suffer lag/longer ques.
The reality i think is that they dont have the staff to work quickly on this.
Well then don't promise on things you can't deliver..?
They never gave a date just said they're working on it. They never promised anything at all.
Didn't they already say before launch team matchmaking would be part of the game? I certainly remember reading some stuff about it and in the screen mockups it also seemed pretty clear there would be team ladder. Either way, I'd say they def made no attempt whatsoever to lower ppls expectations (more like the opposite).
We're now already like 1 year after launch and it seems development has been rather slow (in general) and it doesn't seem like its coming anything soon. By the time it will be done (if ever), 90% of the people that were looking forward to it probably will never even try it anymore. That's just a shame.
On July 10 2018 10:47 Dazed. wrote: I dont buy it. Lobby 2v2 would work just fine and thats always an option, and why would backlash be insane? they can already prioritize for latency, korean 2v2 should work just fine, american etc, the backlash if there is one, will be subdued to the randoms with bad connection or a small local area. They will suffer lag/longer ques.
The reality i think is that they dont have the staff to work quickly on this.
Well then don't promise on things you can't deliver..?
They never gave a date just said they're working on it. They never promised anything at all.
Wtf?? They promised solo matchmaking and team matchmaking as part of the release.
If their excuse for no 2v2 matchmaking is a low population, than that's the saddest joke I have heard in a while. Do they truly expect people to wait for 1+ year(s)? The population was there when the game shipped. Don't punish your players for shipping a beta. Release 2v2 MM, if it ends up as a dead que, well tough shit, but at least give us what you promised!
yeah honestly,i dont even think the game is in a better state,all i care about is ladder and if you click that MM as 2400 mmr player u will never find a good oponent or match koreans,except if you are using vpn (like i do) but what if tomorrow vpn stop working,i dont get it cuz i was playing tr20 L1 or TR16 games vs them..
On July 10 2018 05:57 castleeMg wrote: another hidden issue that many of you may not know about, i posted this on blizzards forums and no1 responded its when messaging friends and using /r. half of the time it doesn't work and im not sure many of you know. i've tested it out watching my friends stream and using /f m to communicate with him. only about 50-75% of the messages are actually recieved. im sure you guys have seen "Error: Failed to make initial server connection (Error 2:1). (Failed to make initial server connection (Error 2:1))" when using /r or /w to talk to somebody. it means for whatever reason your message is not sent. however when using /f m it may show you that your message sent properly but your friend is not seeing the actual message. ive tested this over a week to make sure i was right... im not sure if im just silly and missing something, or if this is happening to everyone....
That's mental man, way to create confusion and seriously disrupt communication obviously... as for 2v2 matchmaking/ladder, it just reminds me of diablo 3 pvp. A promise the company makes to get $, but then doesn't really care to actually deliver. It's not on Grant who seems like a cool guy and likely in a difficult position, but i'll just call it a blizzard thing. Guy who dodged buying SC:R and feels good about it, I think that was a good decision. I uninstalled it.
On July 10 2018 05:57 castleeMg wrote: another hidden issue that many of you may not know about, i posted this on blizzards forums and no1 responded its when messaging friends and using /r. half of the time it doesn't work and im not sure many of you know. i've tested it out watching my friends stream and using /f m to communicate with him. only about 50-75% of the messages are actually recieved. im sure you guys have seen "Error: Failed to make initial server connection (Error 2:1). (Failed to make initial server connection (Error 2:1))" when using /r or /w to talk to somebody. it means for whatever reason your message is not sent. however when using /f m it may show you that your message sent properly but your friend is not seeing the actual message. ive tested this over a week to make sure i was right... im not sure if im just silly and missing something, or if this is happening to everyone....
That's mental man, way to create confusion and seriously disrupt communication obviously... as for 2v2 matchmaking/ladder, it just reminds me of diablo 3 pvp. A promise the company makes to get $, but then doesn't really care to actually deliver. It's not on Grant who seems like a cool guy and likely in a difficult position, but i'll just call it a blizzard thing. Guy who dodged buying SC:R and feels good about it, I think that was a good decision. I uninstalled it.
Well, this just sounds bitter. Because it is bitter. Im bitter too, to be honest. They're even thinking about hosting a developer tournament, like what? How about you complete the game you promised a year ago, then we can all celebrate as one happy family. Call me old fashioned but I think you party when the work is done!
BUT: You should of bought scr, and you should play it. As much as we all got screwed over-- especially very top level players and 2v2 players -- for the average 1v1 player the experience actually is really really solid, better than iccup. It took a long time to get there...and it screwed over those aforementioned groups, but hey.
Qikz why are you so quick to side with blizzard, what do you owe them? They did promise team matchmaking that’s why I’m crying about it, so don’t tell me they didn’t promise anything when it was clearly promised multiple times early on this year. Now it seems like they don’t want to talk about it
Didn't they say they plan to have 2v2 ladder out some time this year? The dev team is small and has unfilled job openings so I don't know why so many people want to abuse them for the slow progress. They clearly want to finish the features that affect the majority of the playerbase first, like a 1v1 ladder with ranks and regular resets, instead of pushing out a bunch of half baked solutions for everything that just piss everyone off. There isn't some Blizzard conspiracy against 2v2 players.
On July 09 2018 19:43 castleeMg wrote: wheres 2v2 matchmaking why isnt this one of the highest priorities ? it would make the community the happiest imo. is the blizzard team incapable of making this happen? it seems like it at this point with their vague statements on any team matchmaking...
They said server saturation is an issue before, if the eastern/western server population is between 1k-2k players, then maybe they are concerned about not having enough people. I wonder if this fear is real, But a 2v2 ladder would definetly be fun
Honestly if this is their view it’s pretty unacceptable. Iccup still has an active 2v2 ladder with sub 100 players online. It’s very hard to get games there yes but it was very easy to play 2v2 ladder prior to remastered and the server was around 400-500 average at that time. Even if they’re worried about not having enough saturation, can’t they at least trial it and test it out? I mean I know I’m whining like a baby at this point but how can iccup have a working 2v2 system for 12+ years with a small admin team compared to a multi billion dollar company who seems like they don’t even have a blueprint ready for it yet? It makes no sense and is complete incompetence on their part... I know this is not a constructive post but I really want to express how I feel on this portion of remastered
I personally think it's a fair point that you're making. They did say 2v2 is coming this year, but we're over halfway through already. In a little over a month, remastered would've been out for a full year yet there are still issues plaguing the game. It's pretty sad to see and from what the looks of it, the dev team is not concentrating just on RM which is why they released that WCIII patch with balance fixes a while back...
i am not sure thats true. Usually the structure of devs in those companies are based on projects. You have a core dev team for the project and maybe some jumpers. I am still convinced that the active devs on SC:R are passionate about it, but we rather see a typical different attachment to Starcraft between the devs and the marketing people. And dont forget, SC:R has made the most part of its revenue within the initial release. For a short-sighted profit maximization there would actually be no need to give more support with patches. Since in long-term you are screwing a loyal fanbase over I guess some management people decided to still invest the bare minimum to have ANY development, so the community is not 100% against Blizzard. I would rather love to have a roadmap thats executed fast and than we have a finished product, while blizzard can user their devs on other projects.
Maybe there are jumpers? I have no clue because I have no insight into how Blizzard does things. I don't doubt that the devs are great and passionate people, but it's already been almost a year since and we have issues with the game still.
Doesn't matter if most of their revenue was from initial release, they shouldn't have released such a buggy shitty remastered then. It's quite sad that people think this is actually acceptable. I have no clue what happened to the video game industry in the last decade, but from reading around, this looks like the new norm where devs release an unfinished product and keep patching it constantly.
For the record, I'm not blaming the devs, it's clearly an upper level decision to release RM in a poor state and it's more than likely they are overworked and managing multiple titles. Much like you said, a roadmap is needed so that people know what's being worked on etc...
On July 10 2018 09:29 10dla wrote: They dont do 2v2 Matchmaking because its insane in Peer-to-Peer. Every 1v1 Peer-to-Peer game has its problem. Make that 2v2 and you are in for a nightmare. And when its released and it doesnt work 100%, the backlash is going to be insane
It's fine.People have been playing that mode and 3v3 for 20 years. The problem is now there is not enough population to support it.These features needed to be there at release.
On July 10 2018 09:29 10dla wrote: They dont do 2v2 Matchmaking because its insane in Peer-to-Peer. Every 1v1 Peer-to-Peer game has its problem. Make that 2v2 and you are in for a nightmare. And when its released and it doesnt work 100%, the backlash is going to be insane
It's fine.People have been playing that mode and 3v3 for 20 years. The problem is now there is not enough population to support it.These features needed to be there at release.
The population now is unarguably higher than it was before remastered, if it could sustain itself on iccup with 400 people, it can sustain itself now...
On July 10 2018 09:29 10dla wrote: They dont do 2v2 Matchmaking because its insane in Peer-to-Peer. Every 1v1 Peer-to-Peer game has its problem. Make that 2v2 and you are in for a nightmare. And when its released and it doesnt work 100%, the backlash is going to be insane
It's fine.People have been playing that mode and 3v3 for 20 years. The problem is now there is not enough population to support it.These features needed to be there at release.
That wasnt with Matchmaking nor was it with a new version of the game. And for some reason people are no longer capable of creating 2v2 and so on by themself. Not sure why. And "It works fine". Yeah i bet iccup never had any problems with lag. NEVER! The Iccup guys should really sell their flawless netcode. They might be millionairs by now. Especially when every modern peer to peer game has lag issues
On July 10 2018 09:29 10dla wrote: They dont do 2v2 Matchmaking because its insane in Peer-to-Peer. Every 1v1 Peer-to-Peer game has its problem. Make that 2v2 and you are in for a nightmare. And when its released and it doesnt work 100%, the backlash is going to be insane
It's fine.People have been playing that mode and 3v3 for 20 years. The problem is now there is not enough population to support it.These features needed to be there at release.
The population now is unarguably higher than it was before remastered, if it could sustain itself on iccup with 400 people, it can sustain itself now...
If you don't mind playing teams 300 MMR above or below you then sure but you can't argue that wait times will not be way more than in 1v1.Also because there are 4 players and longer wait times this means there is an increased chance of one or more players being AFK either alt-tabbed, toilet, whatever at start of game - ruining the game.