Plexa Profile Blog Joined October 2005 Aotearoa 38208 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-28 06:22:06 #1



Of course Macro mechanics have been in the spotlight for exactly this reason, with the community divided on what is the correct approach to take is. Personally I'd prefer to see a StarCraft without macro mechanics tested thoroughly, but it doesn't look like that's going to happen. Nevertheless Blizzard have decided to preserve the proscene by retaining the mechanics (albeit in a an altered form) and we're left wondering what can we do to encourage casual players to play the game.



Obviously this is a complex problem and any one proposal isn't going to magically solve this overnight. But there are a lot of smaller changes that can be made that move us in the direction of a more enjoyable casual experience without compromising on the proscene.



The idea I'm going to put to you is split the ranked/unranked ladder and use different map pools for each. This suggestion is nothing new, but perhaps anther articulation of why this is a good idea is needed at this time.



There are two aspects of this:

The culture of casual StarCraft needs to be changed so that "unranked" = normal StarCraft. Be this by locking the ladder until you've played enough unranked games, or renaming unranked to "normal", steps need to be taken to normalise this game mode so that ranked == hardcore.



The "unranked" ladder needs to use only standard maps (coda, echo, etc.) while the "ranked" ladder should use the WCS map pool as it currently does.

Changing the Culture



Why do we need to change the culture of StarCraft? It's quite simple. Back when the community was larger it was very common to see people complaining about ladder anxiety when they were playing. TeamLiquid is a bit of an anomaly, we're naturally a more hardcore community and we thrive off of the competitive aspects of StarCraft -- the ladder being one such example.



Ladder anxiety, however, can be a huge barrier to entry for casual players. Not everyone who plays games want to play games to compete against other people. Nor should all gamers play this way. It's a good thing to have a spectrum of different ways to play StarCraft rather than everyone being single-minded and competitive.



Let's also differentiate here between "winning a match" and being competitive. It's entirely possible to play a game where one team/player will win but the game be not inherently competitive. Think along the lines of Mario Party where there are winners, but there's no consequences for losing aside from bragging rights. When you're playing on the ladder there's always the fear of dropping in ranks when you lose, and getting over that fear isn't something that happens overnight (or at all for some people). So while you can enjoy playing a game and winning a game, when you throw in the competitive ranking system suddenly that becomes a huge turn off and induces anxiety that we're all familiar with.



If we're able to change the culture of StarCraft so that "unranked" (or I'd rename to, "normal") is the default game mode with no inherent competitive aspect allows people to enjoy StarCraft more freely and encourages people to play.



The next question we must ask ourselves is do these people want to play on WCS maps?



"Unranked" using a standard map pool



"Unranked" using it's own map pool is not a new suggestion by any stretch. But perhaps focusing on standard maps is. For the purposes of discussion let's assume that the WCS map pool consists of 3/4 standard maps and 4/3 experimental maps. In this scenario I suggest that the "unranked" ladder uses standard maps from the current WCS season but also retains 3/4 standard maps from previous seasons so that all 7 maps are standard (and have been seen in proplay).



As an example, if this proposal were implemented today that "unranked" map pool would be Coda, Echo, Vaani, Overgrowth, King Sejong Station, Cactus Valley (if we accept 4p maps as possibilities). Terraform would probably be added next season as originally it was an experimental map. Again, this is just an example.



Why standard maps?



Look at any competitive game that has been raised organically. By that I mean any game where the developer has taken a hands off approach to developing a competitive scene. The obvious example is BW, but Melee is also worth a mentioned.



In BW we had communities ladders where everyone, despite the ladders best efforts, would play whatever the standard map of the time was. At one point in time everyone was playing Lost Temple, then Luna, then Python, then Fighting Spirit (mixing in stuff like Tau Cross/Gaia occasionally). The point is, people enjoyed playing the same standard maps again and again grinding out mechanics/standard builds.



Why do people find this fun? Because it allowed them to practice in an efficient way with builds that weren't necessarily complicated, on a map that was reasonably well balanced and minimised the success of bullshit by being ultra familiar with the map (of course, it was still possible, but proxy locations were well known for instance). People feel like they are actually improving and don't ever feel like they are fighting the map - just their opposition. This is a good thing. You even see these trends in modern StarCraft where standard maps are favored above all other maps in proplay/ladder.



I'll throw in Melee here as well where players have been playing (essentially) the same set of maps (stages) for over a decade. Apply the analysis from the previous paragraph to this standard set of stages and you'll see why the community there naturally gravitated towards this over time.



The point here is that as a casual player you're more likely to derive enjoyment from the game playing standard maps rather than playing challenging maps like Bridgehead. Indeed, Bridgehead (and other progressive/experimental maps) can be hugely challenging for a casual player. The average build which they've been practicing no longer works on this map meaning they have to spend time trying to work out how on earth this crazy map works. That's not fun. We shouldn't be pushing casual players into playing these challenging maps since it undercuts the enjoyment they would get by playing on a standard map.



Why shouldn't all maps be standards then?



It's important to have variety in a map pool. While everyone in BW played the same maps on the ladder, the pro competitions had a regularly rotating map pool which regularly included very difficult maps to play on. In this hard core environment players were challenged and some of the unique builds created on this maps created some amazing moments in progaming (hello Flash vs Bisu on monty hall). But more importantly, Blizzard have explicitly stated that this is a design goal for future WCS map pools.



We don't quite have the same situation as BW in SC2; so much of progamer practice is done via the ladder whereas in BW it was done in teamhouses. This suggests that the natural analogue is that the "ranked" ladder should use the WCS map pool, exactly as it does now.



If we're successful in changing the culture of "unranked" this necessarily means that those playing ranked are the more hardcore members of the community; including professionals. The change I propose here won't effect progamers in any way shape or form, they will continue to ladder in ranked ladder. As such there's no compromise on practice opportunity on these maps or any change for them at all, really.





Hopefully I've convinced you that this change would be a step in the right direction for making StarCraft more accessible to the casual player. I concede that this won't be a panacea for all of StarCraft's problems, but I think this is an undeniably positive change for the game. If you're not convinced, please do tell me why. Making StarCraft easier and hence more accessible has been are the forefront of discussion for the past few months. There's little secret as to why this is the case; a game draws its biggest support from the casual player and if StarCraft has the difficulty bar set too high then that makes it trickier for them to become permanent/long-term members of the community. At the same time, StarCraft is a game which derives a lot of it's beauty from the difficulty of execution at the highest level of play and to compromise on that to make the game more accessible to newer players isn't necessarily a path that we want to go down.Of course Macro mechanics have been in the spotlight for exactly this reason, with the community divided on what is the correct approach to take is. Personally I'd prefer to see a StarCraft without macro mechanics tested thoroughly, but it doesn't look like that's going to happen. Nevertheless Blizzard have decided to preserve the proscene by retaining the mechanics (albeit in a an altered form) and we're left wondering what can we do to encourage casual players to play the game.Obviously this is a complex problem and any one proposal isn't going to magically solve this overnight. But there are a lot of smaller changes that can be made that move us in the direction of a more enjoyable casual experience without compromising on the proscene.The idea I'm going to put to you is. This suggestion is nothing new, but perhaps anther articulation of why this is a good idea is needed at this time.There are two aspects of this:Why do we need to change the culture of StarCraft? It's quite simple. Back when the community was larger it was very common to see people complaining about ladder anxiety when they were playing. TeamLiquid is a bit of an anomaly, we're naturally a more hardcore community and we thrive off of the competitive aspects of StarCraft -- the ladder being one such example.Ladder anxiety, however, can be a huge barrier to entry for casual players. Not everyone who plays games want to play games to compete against other people. Nor should all gamers play this way. It's a good thing to have a spectrum of different ways to play StarCraft rather than everyone being single-minded and competitive.Let's also differentiate here between "winning a match" and being competitive. It's entirely possible to play a game where one team/player will win but the game be not inherently competitive. Think along the lines of Mario Party where there are winners, but there's no consequences for losing aside from bragging rights. When you're playing on the ladder there's always the fear of dropping in ranks when you lose, and getting over that fear isn't something that happens overnight (or at all for some people). So while you can enjoy playing a game and winning a game, when you throw in the competitive ranking system suddenly that becomes a huge turn off and induces anxiety that we're all familiar with.If we're able to change the culture of StarCraft so that "unranked" (or I'd rename to, "normal") is the default game mode with no inherent competitive aspect allows people to enjoy StarCraft more freely and encourages people to play.The next question we must ask ourselves is do these people want to play on WCS maps?"Unranked" using it's own map pool is not a new suggestion by any stretch. But perhaps focusing on standard maps is. For the purposes of discussion let's assume that the WCS map pool consists of 3/4 standard maps and 4/3 experimental maps. In this scenario I suggest that the "unranked" ladder uses standard maps from the current WCS season but also retains 3/4 standard maps from previous seasons so that all 7 maps are standard (and have been seen in proplay).As an example, if this proposal were implemented today that "unranked" map pool would be Coda, Echo, Vaani, Overgrowth, King Sejong Station, Cactus Valley (if we accept 4p maps as possibilities). Terraform would probably be added next season as originally it was an experimental map. Again, this is just an example.Look at any competitive game that has been raised organically. By that I mean any game where the developer has taken a hands off approach to developing a competitive scene. The obvious example is BW, but Melee is also worth a mentioned.In BW we had communities ladders where everyone, despite the ladders best efforts, would play whatever the standard map of the time was. At one point in time everyone was playing Lost Temple, then Luna, then Python, then Fighting Spirit (mixing in stuff like Tau Cross/Gaia occasionally). The point is, people enjoyed playing the same standard maps again and again grinding out mechanics/standard builds.Why do people find this fun? Because it allowed them to practice in an efficient way with builds that weren't necessarily complicated, on a map that was reasonably well balanced and minimised the success of bullshit by being ultra familiar with the map (of course, it was still possible, but proxy locations were well known for instance). People feel like they are actually improving and don't ever feel like they are fighting the map - just their opposition. This is a good thing. You even see these trends in modern StarCraft where standard maps are favored above all other maps in proplay/ladder.I'll throw in Melee here as well where players have been playing (essentially) the same set of maps (stages) for over a decade. Apply the analysis from the previous paragraph to this standard set of stages and you'll see why the community there naturally gravitated towards this over time.The point here is that as a casual player you're more likely to derive enjoyment from the game playing standard maps rather than playing challenging maps like Bridgehead. Indeed, Bridgehead (and other progressive/experimental maps) can be hugely challenging for a casual player. The average build which they've been practicing no longer works on this map meaning they have to spend time trying to work out how on earth this crazy map works. That's not fun. We shouldn't be pushing casual players into playing these challenging maps since it undercuts the enjoyment they would get by playing on a standard map.It's important to have variety in a map pool. While everyone in BW played the same maps on the ladder, the pro competitions had a regularly rotating map pool which regularly included very difficult maps to play on. In this hard core environment players were challenged and some of the unique builds created on this maps created some amazing moments in progaming (hello Flash vs Bisu on monty hall). But more importantly, Blizzard have explicitly stated that this is a design goal for future WCS map pools.We don't quite have the same situation as BW in SC2; so much of progamer practice is done via the ladder whereas in BW it was done in teamhouses. This suggests that the natural analogue is that the "ranked" ladder should use the WCS map pool, exactly as it does now.If we're successful in changing the culture of "unranked" this necessarily means that those playing ranked are the more hardcore members of the community; including professionals. The change I propose here won't effect progamers in any way shape or form, they will continue to ladder in ranked ladder. As such there's no compromise on practice opportunity on these maps or any change for them at all, really.Hopefully I've convinced you that this change would be a step in the right direction for making StarCraft more accessible to the casual player. I concede that this won't be a panacea for all of StarCraft's problems, but I think this is an undeniably positive change for the game. If you're not convinced, please do tell me why. Administrator ~ Spirit will set you free ~

opisska Profile Blog Joined February 2011 Poland 8848 Posts #2 First and foremost, a big NO to anything along the lines of "... by locking the ladder until you've played enough unranked games ..." One great quality of SC2 is that you can play the very same ladder as the top pros (and even randomly meet someone remotely famous, if you are good or lucky enough) from day one. That the game is exactly the same for everyone and any game is completely fair and square.



I am not against implementing whatever floats other people's boats, but I hate the concept of having my options taken away just beacuse some people can't get mentally over losing in a video game. If implemented now, it would probably have no effect on me (at least if the account carried over - I can't imagine my 4920 carrer games being "not enough" by any measure) but if such a restriction had existed when I bought SC2, I would be pissed as hell. The need to grind games before I am allowed in the old boys' club is the main reason I never even thought of playing LoL. Moreover, SC2 is a game where you pay for a new account, so the need for some entry barrier that inherently exists in matchmaked F2P games is not really there.



If the thing is optional, then whatever. I won't probably use it, as I don't use unranked now - maybe if it had completely separate MMR to allow me to consistently play two races, that would be a usefull thing, but as it stands right now, I see absolutely no reason for a creature capable of rational thought to play unranked. Also I have waited bloody years to finally play on the same mappool as the top tourneys, why on Earth would I give that away? "Jeez, that's far from ideal." - Serral, the king of mild trashtalk

Plexa Profile Blog Joined October 2005 Aotearoa 38208 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-27 19:31:31 #3 I think if you're forced to play 5 normal games before you can play ladder (and those 5 normal games used in the place of placement matches) that it's not such a bad thing. Particularly if it helps change the culture away from ranked being the default game mode. And moreover, I appreciate that most people on TL are naturally more hardcore than the average casual player hence your position on how useless unranked is. Administrator ~ Spirit will set you free ~

Hider Profile Blog Joined May 2010 Denmark 8554 Posts #4 I agree. I clearly remember when I first started playing SC2 WOL beta and I would just veto all 4P/big maps as they were too complicated.



Steppes of War was my favourite when I first started in fact.



So I really think that the unranked mode should consist of relatively simple maps whereas ranked can have more experimental maps. Innovation was a better player in 2013 than Byun in 2016.

Pontius Pirate Profile Blog Joined August 2013 United States 1556 Posts #5 Oh god, hell no. I would be quite bereft if it went back to seeing the same 3 Coda games, 2 King Sejong games and 1 Ohana game every single map. I get where you're coming from, but no matter how much pros whine and bitch and moan, some variety in the map pool is good for the viewers and good for the scene. Blizzard is right on this point, as wrong as they sometimes are on others. "I had to close the door so my parents wouldn't judge me." - ZombieGrub during the ShitfaceTradeTV stream

opisska Profile Blog Joined February 2011 Poland 8848 Posts #6 Oh, you really meant just 5 games? But what would be the practical difference with respect to the 5-match placement? You don't gain/lose points for that either.



And I don't think it's about being "hardcore" - I am not really that "hardcore" myself, I never train focusedly and I still really suck (never have been more than plat 1v1/dia in ATs) - it's just about being reasonable. Again, the observation that most people aren't reasonable is pretty believable, so I am not against any extras for them, I would only care about not harming the comeptitive freedom of the ladder as it is. "Jeez, that's far from ideal." - Serral, the king of mild trashtalk

Plexa Profile Blog Joined October 2005 Aotearoa 38208 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-27 19:38:35 #7 On September 28 2015 04:33 Pontius Pirate wrote:

Oh god, hell no. I would be quite bereft if it went back to seeing the same 3 Coda games, 2 King Sejong games and 1 Ohana game every single map. I get where you're coming from, but no matter how much pros whine and bitch and moan, some variety in the map pool is good for the viewers and good for the scene. Blizzard is right on this point, as wrong as they sometimes are on others.

You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases.

You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases. On September 28 2015 04:36 opisska wrote:

Oh, you really meant just 5 games? But what would be the practical difference with respect to the 5-match placement? You don't gain/lose points for that either.



And I don't think it's about being "hardcore" - I am not really that "hardcore" myself, I never train focusedly and I still really suck (never have been more than plat 1v1/dia in ATs) - it's just about being reasonable. Again, the observation that most people aren't reasonable is pretty believable, so I am not against any extras for them, I would only care about not harming the comeptitive freedom of the ladder as it is.

The point is to get people familiar with unranked and make it appear like the default game mode. That way when the casual player loads up SC2 they view ranked as an extension of SC2, as opposed to the default way to play the game. It's an important mindset difference. The point is to get people familiar with unranked and make it appear like the default game mode. That way when the casual player loads up SC2 they view ranked as an extension of SC2, as opposed to the default way to play the game. It's an important mindset difference. Administrator ~ Spirit will set you free ~

Pontius Pirate Profile Blog Joined August 2013 United States 1556 Posts #8 On September 28 2015 04:37 Plexa wrote:

Show nested quote +

On September 28 2015 04:33 Pontius Pirate wrote:

Oh god, hell no. I would be quite bereft if it went back to seeing the same 3 Coda games, 2 King Sejong games and 1 Ohana game every single map. I get where you're coming from, but no matter how much pros whine and bitch and moan, some variety in the map pool is good for the viewers and good for the scene. Blizzard is right on this point, as wrong as they sometimes are on others.

You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases. You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases.

No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps. No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps. "I had to close the door so my parents wouldn't judge me." - ZombieGrub during the ShitfaceTradeTV stream

TelecoM Profile Blog Joined January 2010 United States 10265 Posts #9 I think this sounds like a really great idea Plexa, but what if the people playing Ranked like the Unranked map pool better? What if there was 2 different map pools that could be picked in Ranked and Unranked? Also, are you proposing that Unranked would be Free to Play and the map pool would be catered to the more casual player? Like fastest map possible, Blood Bath, or the easiest / most simple type maps for people to learn the game in the most simple way possible? AKA: TelecoM[WHITE] Protoss fighting

Plexa Profile Blog Joined October 2005 Aotearoa 38208 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-27 19:42:21 #10 On September 28 2015 04:38 Pontius Pirate wrote:

Show nested quote +

On September 28 2015 04:37 Plexa wrote:

On September 28 2015 04:33 Pontius Pirate wrote:

Oh god, hell no. I would be quite bereft if it went back to seeing the same 3 Coda games, 2 King Sejong games and 1 Ohana game every single map. I get where you're coming from, but no matter how much pros whine and bitch and moan, some variety in the map pool is good for the viewers and good for the scene. Blizzard is right on this point, as wrong as they sometimes are on others.

You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases. You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases.

No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps. No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps.

Not sure where I suggested that.

Not sure where I suggested that. On September 28 2015 04:39 GGzerG wrote:

I think this sounds like a really great idea Plexa, but what if the people playing Ranked like the Unranked map pool better? What if there was 2 different map pools that could be picked in Ranked and Unranked? Also, are you proposing that Unranked would be Free to Play and the map pool would be catered to the more casual player? Like fastest map possible, Blood Bath, or the easiest / most simple type maps for people to learn the game in the most simple way possible?

Since competitions (i.e. WCS) will be using the ranked map pool (or some derivative of it) it's only natural that if you want to succeed in tournaments that you should be playing that set of maps. I'm not making any comments about a free to play unranked mode, and I don't think we should be pushing FMP etc. through unranked ladder. I'm referring to uses standard maps (i.e. old standard wcs maps) on the unranked ladder. Since competitions (i.e. WCS) will be using the ranked map pool (or some derivative of it) it's only natural that if you want to succeed in tournaments that you should be playing that set of maps. I'm not making any comments about a free to play unranked mode, and I don't think we should be pushing FMP etc. through unranked ladder. I'm referring to uses standard maps (i.e. old standard wcs maps) on the unranked ladder. Administrator ~ Spirit will set you free ~

TelecoM Profile Blog Joined January 2010 United States 10265 Posts #11 On September 28 2015 04:40 Plexa wrote:

Show nested quote +

On September 28 2015 04:38 Pontius Pirate wrote:

On September 28 2015 04:37 Plexa wrote:

On September 28 2015 04:33 Pontius Pirate wrote:

Oh god, hell no. I would be quite bereft if it went back to seeing the same 3 Coda games, 2 King Sejong games and 1 Ohana game every single map. I get where you're coming from, but no matter how much pros whine and bitch and moan, some variety in the map pool is good for the viewers and good for the scene. Blizzard is right on this point, as wrong as they sometimes are on others.

You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases. You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases.

No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps. No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps.

Not sure where I suggested that.

Show nested quote +

On September 28 2015 04:39 GGzerG wrote:

I think this sounds like a really great idea Plexa, but what if the people playing Ranked like the Unranked map pool better? What if there was 2 different map pools that could be picked in Ranked and Unranked? Also, are you proposing that Unranked would be Free to Play and the map pool would be catered to the more casual player? Like fastest map possible, Blood Bath, or the easiest / most simple type maps for people to learn the game in the most simple way possible?

Since competitions (i.e. WCS) will be using the ranked map pool (or some derivative of it) it's only natural that if you want to succeed in tournaments that you should be playing that set of maps. I'm not making any comments about a free to play unranked mode, and I don't think we should be pushing FMP etc. through unranked ladder. I'm referring to uses standard maps (i.e. old standard wcs maps) on the unranked ladder. Not sure where I suggested that.Since competitions (i.e. WCS) will be using the ranked map pool (or some derivative of it) it's only natural that if you want to succeed in tournaments that you should be playing that set of maps. I'm not making any comments about a free to play unranked mode, and I don't think we should be pushing FMP etc. through unranked ladder. I'm referring to uses standard maps (i.e. old standard wcs maps) on the unranked ladder.

But how is that exactly going to make the game more accessible for the casual players? Don't you think Ranked players will still play Unranked making the game equally as difficult for the "casual" players? But how is that exactly going to make the game more accessible for the casual players? Don't you think Ranked players will still play Unranked making the game equally as difficult for the "casual" players? AKA: TelecoM[WHITE] Protoss fighting

Plexa Profile Blog Joined October 2005 Aotearoa 38208 Posts #12 On September 28 2015 04:44 GGzerG wrote:

Show nested quote +

On September 28 2015 04:40 Plexa wrote:

On September 28 2015 04:38 Pontius Pirate wrote:

On September 28 2015 04:37 Plexa wrote:

On September 28 2015 04:33 Pontius Pirate wrote:

Oh god, hell no. I would be quite bereft if it went back to seeing the same 3 Coda games, 2 King Sejong games and 1 Ohana game every single map. I get where you're coming from, but no matter how much pros whine and bitch and moan, some variety in the map pool is good for the viewers and good for the scene. Blizzard is right on this point, as wrong as they sometimes are on others.

You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases. You should be more careful reading. I'm not suggesting WCS go to an all-standard map pool. I'm suggesting that unranked ladder use an only standard map pool. WCS/ranked ladder can use whatever maps it pleases.

No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps. No, I read that part. But you're suggesting that pros aren't getting regular ladder practice on those maps.

Not sure where I suggested that.

On September 28 2015 04:39 GGzerG wrote:

I think this sounds like a really great idea Plexa, but what if the people playing Ranked like the Unranked map pool better? What if there was 2 different map pools that could be picked in Ranked and Unranked? Also, are you proposing that Unranked would be Free to Play and the map pool would be catered to the more casual player? Like fastest map possible, Blood Bath, or the easiest / most simple type maps for people to learn the game in the most simple way possible?

Since competitions (i.e. WCS) will be using the ranked map pool (or some derivative of it) it's only natural that if you want to succeed in tournaments that you should be playing that set of maps. I'm not making any comments about a free to play unranked mode, and I don't think we should be pushing FMP etc. through unranked ladder. I'm referring to uses standard maps (i.e. old standard wcs maps) on the unranked ladder. Not sure where I suggested that.Since competitions (i.e. WCS) will be using the ranked map pool (or some derivative of it) it's only natural that if you want to succeed in tournaments that you should be playing that set of maps. I'm not making any comments about a free to play unranked mode, and I don't think we should be pushing FMP etc. through unranked ladder. I'm referring to uses standard maps (i.e. old standard wcs maps) on the unranked ladder.

But how is that exactly going to make the game more accessible for the casual players? Don't you think Ranked players will still play Unranked making the game equally as difficult for the "casual" players? But how is that exactly going to make the game more accessible for the casual players? Don't you think Ranked players will still play Unranked making the game equally as difficult for the "casual" players?

Two reasons

1) Less ladder related anxiety (more play for enjoyment as opposed to play for rank)

2) No maps which are difficult to play (i.e. not forcing casual players to learn bridgehead) so they can execute standard builds without problem

I fully support other means to help teach players how to play the game, but that's a separate issue. Two reasons1) Less ladder related anxiety (more play for enjoyment as opposed to play for rank)2) No maps which are difficult to play (i.e. not forcing casual players to learn bridgehead) so they can execute standard builds without problemI fully support other means to help teach players how to play the game, but that's a separate issue. Administrator ~ Spirit will set you free ~

DeadByDawn Profile Joined October 2012 United Kingdom 476 Posts #13 Err, but I try out new strategies on unranked and I want the same map pool.

deacon.frost Profile Joined February 2013 Czech Republic 9812 Posts #14 Unranked MM is different and needs to be fixed if you want to use it as the standard one. Haven't seen this in your post and it is a big problem, believe me. I imagine France should be able to take this unless Lilbow is busy practicing for Starcraft III. | KadaverBB is my fairy ban mother.

Meavis Profile Blog Joined September 2011 Netherlands 1296 Posts #15 support, though I doubt we'll get to see this Ex organizer of Starcraft Mapmaking Association, currently retired.

jalstar Profile Blog Joined September 2009 United States 8122 Posts #16 Isn't unranked MMR broken? There was a guy on reddit who lost 100 games in a row on unranked, then went into ranked and went 4-1.

WGT-Baal Profile Blog Joined June 2008 France 2523 Posts #17 I think this is a good suggestion. Also, making custom games more friendly (for instance like typing a custom name as in BW or WC3 would be great). Things like PvZ Steppes of War beginners and the like...

This would be helpful for the newcomers.



I d like a ladder change then if we go for unranked as default: then I d like the ladder to be unique (for instance I dont care if I am 5th in my division in gold, I want to know where I am in the gold league overall etc...) Former WCG ref, WGTour.com and Fra-A admin. Clan ash Bwcl-D leader, TDR NW Team NEU captain

MrInocence Profile Joined February 2010 United States 171 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-27 21:32:27 #18 It's difficult to split the ladder and maintain good matchmaking when the playerbase is at its current size. For HotS it's already taking a while to find games in unranked, and the MMR is all over the place.



I think your main point is about attracting new players. I'd guess that most Starcraft players would agree, a steady inflow of new players is essential for longevity of the game. How to appeal to new players, and to keep them interested, is a tough question to answer.



We've had a lot of suggestions on how to draw in and keep new players interested, such as...

- arcade

- team play such as archon mode

- your suggestion of splitting the ladders

- toning down harass and binary win conditions

- implementing some sort of continuity and sense of improvement, achievements, points, skins, etc

- decreasing mechanical difficulty in the game (which I think is the least important compared to other points)



Honestly it's hard to tell what the best way to go about attracting new players is. Arcade? Multiplayer gameplay? Mechanical difficulty?



I personally believe that improving the arcade, introducing an incentive system, and improving multiplayer gameplay are the most feasible ways to improve LotV. Some other things are just not possible at this point. For example, microtransactions are just not going to happen, unfortunately. MrInocence, Monday, 1st of March 2010 - Tuesday, 2nd of October 2015

Supter Profile Joined February 2011 France 370 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-27 22:35:47 #19 On September 28 2015 04:30 Plexa wrote:

I think if you're forced to play 5 normal games before you can play ladder (and those 5 normal games used in the place of placement matches) that it's not such a bad thing. Particularly if it helps change the culture away from ranked being the default game mode. And moreover, I appreciate that most people on TL are naturally more hardcore than the average casual player hence your position on how useless unranked is.



This would have a bad effect, I think. Same apply for the ideas of Plexa on the subject.



By making it that way, people will see these games as "placement matches". Placement matches are stressful, because you want to be sure that you're playing at your best. Which is the cause of ladder anxiety for many. Placement matches for ranked should absolutely stay separated if we apply your system, that by the way, I agree with. This would have a bad effect, I think. Same apply for the ideas of Plexa on the subject.By making it that way, people will see these games as "placement matches". Placement matches are stressful, because you want to be sure that you're playing at your best. Which is the cause of ladder anxiety for many. Placement matches for ranked should absolutely stay separated if we apply your system, that by the way, I agree with.

crazedrat Profile Joined July 2015 272 Posts Last Edited: 2015-09-27 22:54:15 #20 I actually think the opposite - casual players probably more enjoy the craziness of experimental maps. They don't have the standard builds down, so giving them standard maps is kind of pointless.

1 2 3 4 5 Next All