A1m Profile Joined November 2010 Germany 48 Posts #1

Here are two of his articles:

http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/486347-re-thinking-starcrafts-ladder

http://blog.cyberpowerpc.com/2014/07/03/making-starcraft-2-more-accessible/





Now here is my take on it. I think Archonmode is a great step forward, but I would love to make 1on1 more accessible without affecting the great proscene that we already have.



Give new players the ability to play 1on1 but in somewhat like an Archonmode, where a computer assists you with macro. It could be called a general, like Arbatur for Zerg. You can give him commands to choose your build path, like "2 base roach timing attack", or "expand 3 times and go for hive tech". Afterwards you have like 3 buttons on the left side of your screen. "Agressive" "Economy" "Tech up". You can also choose which (predefined) armycomposition you would like to have, and he will rebuild whenever possible.



At a higher level of play theses assistance would be deactivated, but it wouldn't be viable anyways, since the AI would never be good enough. But at a lower level of play new people don't feel overwhelmed from micro and macro and could have more fun controlling fancy armys and just feel the awesomeness of starcraft 2 while learning the game.



There could be "General AI packs" downloadable from communitysites, so the system stays fresh. They would define starting buildorders and selectable armycompositions.



I wouldn't use it my self, since I'm in master league, but I would love to play against friends that are assisted by generals and see the casual playerbase grow again.



It could also be a seperate league. I read some posts from qxc and he is absolutly right, that a casual playerbase is needed to grow a healthy proscene.Here are two of his articles:Now here is my take on it. I think Archonmode is a great step forward, but I would love to make 1on1 more accessible without affecting the great proscene that we already have.Give new players the ability to play 1on1 but in somewhat like an Archonmode, where a computer assists you with macro. It could be called a general, like Arbatur for Zerg. You can give him commands to choose your build path, like "2 base roach timing attack", or "expand 3 times and go for hive tech". Afterwards you have like 3 buttons on the left side of your screen. "Agressive" "Economy" "Tech up". You can also choose which (predefined) armycomposition you would like to have, and he will rebuild whenever possible.At a higher level of play theses assistance would be deactivated, but it wouldn't be viable anyways, since the AI would never be good enough. But at a lower level of play new people don't feel overwhelmed from micro and macro and could have more fun controlling fancy armys and just feel the awesomeness of starcraft 2 while learning the game.There could be "General AI packs" downloadable from communitysites, so the system stays fresh. They would define starting buildorders and selectable armycompositions.I wouldn't use it my self, since I'm in master league, but I would love to play against friends that are assisted by generals and see the casual playerbase grow again.It could also be a seperate league. www.youtube.com/A1mStarcraft

wasilix Profile Joined August 2014 Russian Federation 80 Posts #2 Hey,



While I totally disliked qxc suggestions on making game more accessible (it goes way too far in my opinion), your suggestion seems decent and fits some sort of "archon with AI", which ain't gonna be played anywhere but on a lower level. And that's where it's the most useful, so that's very good.



I still feel though that this is hardly gonna happen: creating even a semi-intelligent and decent AI is time-consuming itself, whilst creating a way for users to create their own AI packs is even more so. Unless it is in any shape of form provided by current map/mod editor, I wouldn't count on it being implemented anytime soon.



Cheers!

BreakfastBurrito Profile Joined November 2011 United States 847 Posts #3 Definitely a fresh idea. The big problem to me is blizzard though, i would need to really be convinced that they would be willing to add in a feature like this. Bnet still isn't stellar and sc2 has been out for a while, though it would be unfair to say it hasn't improved quite a bit. twitch.tv/jaytherey | Yapper891 if you are reading this, PM me. its Twisty.

aka_star Profile Blog Joined July 2007 United Kingdom 1543 Posts #4 When you meet someone new, just talk about SC2 like a mad man. Repeat how fun it is over and over again and eventually they'll give it a shot. Fire up archon mode and just let them control everything, nudging them in the right direction until they enjoy the game. If they don't then tell them they suck and don't be friends. You have to move onto next person because the game isn't easy to enjoy. This is the only strategy I found to work if we wanna build it back up again. FlashDave.999 aka Star

graNite Profile Blog Joined December 2010 Germany 4412 Posts Last Edited: 2015-06-22 06:51:21 #5



and when you learn to drive a car, you learn it step by step and have to do more and more at the same time, until you are like this





an archon partner could be the driving teacher the hard learning curve is sc2s entry problem. it comes down to this + Show Spoiler + and when you learn to drive a car, you learn it step by step and have to do more and more at the same time, until you are like thisan archon partner could be the driving teacher "Oink oink, bitches" - Tasteless on Pigbaby winning a map against Flash

TRaFFiC Profile Blog Joined December 2010 Canada 1442 Posts #6



Archon mode will not bring new players to the game. Having two noobs splitting up the tasks doesn't help. It just breeds confusion. Besides, the opponent has the same "advantage." People will still get their egos hurt by losing 50% of games and therefore it's no different in that sense than 2v2.



What the game really needs is a ladder for clans so being in a clan actually means something and people work together toward a common goal. QXC brings up a lot of good points. Surprise! None of them are new.Archon mode will not bring new players to the game. Having two noobs splitting up the tasks doesn't help. It just breeds confusion. Besides, the opponent has the same "advantage." People will still get their egos hurt by losing 50% of games and therefore it's no different in that sense than 2v2.What the game really needs is a ladder for clans so being in a clan actually means something and people work together toward a common goal. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/474937-lotv-suggestiondedicated-ladder-for-all-sc2-clans 2v2, 1v1, Zerg, Terran http://www.twitch.tv/trafficsc2

sharkie Profile Blog Joined April 2012 Austria 16538 Posts #7 I don't know what sc2 needs to get back its player base.

I don't even see a reason why LoL is so successful with its shitty community.

A1m Profile Joined November 2010 Germany 48 Posts #8 On June 22 2015 13:59 wasilix wrote:

I still feel though that this is hardly gonna happen: creating even a semi-intelligent and decent AI is time-consuming itself, whilst creating a way for users to create their own AI packs is even more so. Unless it is in any shape of form provided by current map/mod editor, I wouldn't count on it being implemented anytime soon.



Cheers!



Actually I'm a guy who builds AIs and the hard part in sc2 AI is the interaction with the opponent and unit movement. A Macro AI is pretty simple, it justs builds things by predefined rules. It does not really react for the opponent but only the players command to build eco/aggro etc..



A user defined AI wouldn't do the actual AI programming, but just a set of new rules, e.g..

Actually I'm a guy who builds AIs and the hard part in sc2 AI is the interaction with the opponent and unit movement. A Macro AI is pretty simple, it justs builds things by predefined rules. It does not really react for the opponent but only the players command to build eco/aggro etc..A user defined AI wouldn't do the actual AI programming, but just a set of new rules, e.g..

<List of Openings>

<6 pool>

pool;drone;drone;overlord;zergling;zergling;zergling; ...

<2 base roach>

drone;drone;drone;overlord;drone;drone;queen;queen;drone;drone;gaysier;

[time:2:40] research lair

[time:4:20] build 20 roaches



<List of Armycompositions>

<Standard Mix>

50% Roach, 20% Hydra, 20% corruptor, 10% Broodlords

<Heavy Anti Air>

80% corruptor, 20% Zergling





Just as an example. The Player can then choose ingame.







Just as an example. The Player can then choose ingame. www.youtube.com/A1mStarcraft

Cascade Profile Blog Joined March 2006 Australia 5405 Posts #9



I suggested a slightly different approach



Anwyay, I agree on the general direction of letting newbs see more awesome and less steep learning curve. I think this is a good general direction, to change the conditions for starting players to focus more on the awesome of sc2, and less on the cut-throat competitive aspect.I suggested a slightly different approach here and here , not changing the game itself, but changing achievements and post-game screens to essentially remove the victory/defeat competitive aspect, and instead focus on awesome, such as short cut-scenes from scenes in the played game and whatever. Maybe also some statistics they can influence directly, such as spending quotients, APM, SPM etc. And achievement and prices and whatnot for good macro/efficient battles/more than 5 thors built/whatever. This entire ladder business should only be available through a fairly hidden setting. Point being that sc2 shouldn't be rude and keep telling the gamer how bad they are as welcome. Only after the gamer asks for honest assessment (ticking that option) will they see how much better other players are.Anwyay, I agree on the general direction of letting newbs see more awesome and less steep learning curve.

Larkin Profile Blog Joined January 2012 United Kingdom 7149 Posts #10 More attention on team games would go a ways. 1v1 isn't what a lot of people want - they want to play with their friends, or not struggle alone in a lonely ladder playing a stressful, taxing game, for little tangible reward.



But I think we have to accept that the Moba is the trendy "in" game right now, not least because they are free, so there's very little deterring people from trying. Blizz seems way more focused on Hearthstone and Heroes.



Not the end of the world. Tennis ain't the most popular sport. https://www.twitch.tv/ttalarkin - streams random stuff, high level teamleague, maybe even heroleague

NasusAndDraven Profile Joined April 2015 358 Posts Last Edited: 2015-06-22 13:00:18 #11 On June 22 2015 21:44 Cascade wrote:

I think this is a good general direction, to change the conditions for starting players to focus more on the awesome of sc2, and less on the cut-throat competitive aspect.



I suggested a slightly different approach



Anwyay, I agree on the general direction of letting newbs see more awesome and less steep learning curve. I think this is a good general direction, to change the conditions for starting players to focus more on the awesome of sc2, and less on the cut-throat competitive aspect.I suggested a slightly different approach here and here , not changing the game itself, but changing achievements and post-game screens to essentially remove the victory/defeat competitive aspect, and instead focus on awesome, such as short cut-scenes from scenes in the played game and whatever. Maybe also some statistics they can influence directly, such as spending quotients, APM, SPM etc. And achievement and prices and whatnot for good macro/efficient battles/more than 5 thors built/whatever. This entire ladder business should only be available through a fairly hidden setting. Point being that sc2 shouldn't be rude and keep telling the gamer how bad they are as welcome. Only after the gamer asks for honest assessment (ticking that option) will they see how much better other players are.Anwyay, I agree on the general direction of letting newbs see more awesome and less steep learning curve.



I love how you think treating players like 4year olds is the key to success, when it has never been the case ever in any game ever, not even the most casual ones like mobile and facebook games. Exeption is only games literally made for 4year olds.

This with the fact that SC2 is an RTS, the most hardcore video gaming genre in existence.

TL;DR: you could not be more wrong I love how you think treating players like 4year olds is the key to success, when it has never been the case ever in any game ever, not even the most casual ones like mobile and facebook games. Exeption is only games literally made for 4year olds.This with the fact that SC2 is an RTS, the most hardcore video gaming genre in existence.TL;DR: you could not be more wrong

BisuDagger Profile Blog Joined October 2009 Bisutopia 17617 Posts #12 I think the reverse of your idea would be fun too. Macro only and the AI takes control of your units. Then your job is solely to identify what your opponent is doing and modify your build to create the best composition possible. I would totally get behind that. Not touching units gives you lots of extra time to analyze the game while maintaining build order discipline. Moderator Ofiicial Afreeca Starleague Caster: http://afreeca.tv/ASL2ENG2

Musicus Profile Joined August 2011 Germany 23392 Posts Last Edited: 2015-06-22 13:09:25 #13 Wow I haven't seen QXC's cyberpowerpc blog before only his ladder post (which I liked a lot). Is he joking or trolling? I am really confused how a progamer can state something like this. Maybe he was paid by cyberpowerpc and had to come up with something?



Well at least I think it's safe to say Blizzard will never do the stuff he suggested. Otherwise I'd immediately stop playing and never buy LotV.



The OP's suggestion on the other hand seems solid. Maybe make it something that will only be available in unranked and every player has to level up on unranked with the AI help before he can play the ranked ladder. The AI would help less and less as your level grows. That would also prevent countless smurfs if the multiplayer ever gets f2p in the future. Maru and Serral are probably top 5.

graNite Profile Blog Joined December 2010 Germany 4412 Posts #14 On June 22 2015 22:04 BisuDagger wrote:

I think the reverse of your idea would be fun too. Macro only and the AI takes control of your units. Then your job is solely to identify what your opponent is doing and modify your build to create the best composition possible. I would totally get behind that. Not touching units gives you lots of extra time to analyze the game while maintaining build order discipline.



yes, and it also teaches how much more important macro is at this stage of learning the game yes, and it also teaches how much more important macro is at this stage of learning the game "Oink oink, bitches" - Tasteless on Pigbaby winning a map against Flash

Phaenoman Profile Joined February 2013 568 Posts #15 I keep reading ARCHIMONDE instead of ARCHONMODE. lol Random is hard work dude...

Glaze Profile Joined June 2015 United States 1 Post #16 I'm glad you posted this, since I'm of the same line of thinking and I've devised a similar method of reducing the burden of managing the econ and putting more focus on the battles.



I'll be posting a detailed explanation along with some variants to the solution with the pro's and con's of each variant in the next few days, maybe this weekend.



Basically, the idea is to replace worker units with a more abstract "worker pool". The Town Hall for each race has an auto cast ability that has a cooldown equal to the time it takes to create a worker, costs 50 minerals, and adds a single unit to the "worker pool". Each worker pool unit provides minerals at the same rate as a worker would, or they can be reassigned to a vespene geyser once the necessary structure has been built. Buildins can be constructed by the town halls directly, instead of by workers.



Of course some mechanics need to be addressed, such as when a terran is building a structure, the "worker pool" is reduced by 1, or a zerg structure reduces the "worker pool" by 1 permanently.



The goal of this is to keep the rest of the gameplay as close as possible to how it currently is, but reducing the effort to manage large numbers of bases and workers while mainting the amount of current flexibility that players have between macro-ing, cheesing, or all-inning.



I'm a perpetual gold leaguer, so I hope my views will represent what newer players or players that don't grind on ladder would like to see when they play the game.



Again, these details will be better fleshed out in a later post, but for now, I just hope the community acknowledges that there needs to be a way to grow the player base to keep the game alive, and that putting the econ management in the background is a good way to do it.

Pirfiktshon Profile Joined June 2013 United States 1072 Posts #17 Let's please not suggest something like this to exist within the ranked ladder system... if anything it should have its own rating system if at all lol Though I like the idea for lower leagues because like someone has already mentioned it helps show what macro is all about and how important it truly is

MonkeyBot Profile Joined June 2013 United States 125 Posts #18



OP, this is interesting. On June 23 2015 02:24 Pirfiktshon wrote:

Let's please not suggest something like this to exist within the ranked ladder system... if anything it should have its own rating system if at all lol



Agreed...if Archon and teams have a ladder, this could too. On the other hand matchmaking without a ladder may be enough. I'd wonder how people would deal with their rank being dependent on an AI.



Agreed...if Archon and teams have a ladder, this could too. On the other hand matchmaking without a ladder may be enough. I'd wonder how people would deal with their rank being dependent on an AI. On June 22 2015 22:04 BisuDagger wrote:

I think the reverse of your idea would be fun too. Macro only and the AI takes control of your units. Then your job is solely to identify what your opponent is doing and modify your build to create the best composition possible. I would totally get behind that. Not touching units gives you lots of extra time to analyze the game while maintaining build order discipline.



This so much. The system should be made capable of doing macro or micro.



graNite, those images were so funny!



Thanks to OP and everyone else who is making suggestions on lowering the bar for entry level players. It is what we need right now. This so much. The system should be made capable of doing macro or micro.graNite, those images were so funny!Thanks to OP and everyone else who is making suggestions on lowering the bar for entry level players. It is what we need right now.

Ctone23 Profile Blog Joined December 2012 United States 1819 Posts #19 On June 22 2015 22:04 BisuDagger wrote:

I think the reverse of your idea would be fun too. Macro only and the AI takes control of your units. Then your job is solely to identify what your opponent is doing and modify your build to create the best composition possible. I would totally get behind that. Not touching units gives you lots of extra time to analyze the game while maintaining build order discipline.

Agreed. Scouting and understanding what your opponent is doing is so huge. imo the scouting component gets lost in most of the guides out there, since the game is so mechanically demanding. Not only does it help your chances to win the game but I also think there is a calming factor in knowing what your opponent is doing. It would be great to see something like this. Agreed. Scouting and understanding what your opponent is doing is so huge. imo the scouting component gets lost in most of the guides out there, since the game is so mechanically demanding. Not only does it help your chances to win the game but I also think there is a calming factor in knowing what your opponent is doing. It would be great to see something like this. Gauntlet Esports

grogburg Profile Blog Joined December 2014 United States 329 Posts Last Edited: 2015-06-22 19:02:12 #20 On June 23 2015 01:35 Phaenoman wrote:

I keep reading ARCHIMONDE instead of ARCHONMODE. lol



Haha same here. I thought my TL settings weren't working.



On topic, I think this is a really cool idea! I have no idea how difficult it would be to implement, but I'd definitely use it to practice micro -- or macro, if the converse situation could be programmed as well, as suggested above. Haha same here. I thought my TL settings weren't working.On topic, I think this is a really cool idea! I have no idea how difficult it would be to implement, but I'd definitely use it to practice micro -- or macro, if the converse situation could be programmed as well, as suggested above. <3 BaseTradeTV <3

1 2 Next All