Battle.net StarCraft II Matchmaking Too Good?

[ninjajoeman]

<spoiler=to remove congestion>

I have to say, while I do like this idea, and I even agree with the matchmaking being too good in some games to the point of getting really tired after an hour or 2 of close competitive games, I also agree with a post above that it will be very frustrating to some people, I know im one of them, due to taking a long break from the game and coming back to realize you forgot your account information.

For example the game they put in the article, Warcraft III, I have probably uninstalled and reinstalled the game 3 or 4 times now, and with each reinstall I have had to make a new account due to me forgetting the old information due to it no longer being neccessary. Also the whole thing about being able to send the information to an email doesn't always work, I dont know about the rest of you but I personally made some extremely stupid emails in the past when I was younger that I would rather forget, so sending my account info to an email I made in 6th grade isn't gonna work for me.

I agree with you on the issue of horrible email names

they need a little bit of a mixture because how the hell do you learn to be better if you play average joe everyday...seriously you learn new things from vet players and if you keep playing noobs you wont learn jack.

I deffinitely agree with you.

I am the kind of guy who tries not to read strategy guides, they cause players to follow the path of pre-destined build orders, allowing them to be easily countered.
I prefer learning tricks from my allies or enemies, or on occations; thinking completely new tactics on the spot (Well, atleast new to the person who is thinking the tactic on the spot).

Someone mentioned something of having to let others play your account on line and lower your score. Well I have something similar to say:
What about the people that play at Net Baaangs or internet coffees. Are they going to be forced to use elite accounts and be forced to be stomped?

for the last thing that might be useful for blizzards end so people don't just play on their friends account but there own so they have to buy their own game.

 

[TitsMcGee1804]

dont they have like specific ladder games and just random games, i.e. if you just want an unranked skirmish for funzies, either get stomped or own someone, then you can do that?

I stopped playing SC1 online after getting owned 15 times in a row, i wasnt having fun and i know I sucked but does that mean i shouldnt have fun? i think blizzard have really done their fanbase proud here

also - <3 GAY for Rob Pardo

 

[Jaebird]

Yes, you are exaggerating

A Spawning Pool (what Zerg need to build Zlings) costs 200 minerals; a Barracks just costs 150. Zlings and Marines cost 50 minerals apiece (though you get two Zlings for the price of one). If the other guy has the resources to build a Spawning Pool, you've got the resources to build a Barracks 50 minerals before him. And his Zerglings might outnumber your marines two-to-one, but the Marines can fire at them from behind a Supply Depot wall while the zlings do nothing.

So it's actually not that hard to counter, I promise!

One of these days I'll Fraps a game to prove how much I suck and how stupid-fast other players are. But for now, I'll leave this discussion.

 

[Jaebird]

Yes, you are exaggerating

A Spawning Pool (what Zerg need to build Zlings) costs 200 minerals; a Barracks just costs 150. Zlings and Marines cost 50 minerals apiece (though you get two Zlings for the price of one). If the other guy has the resources to build a Spawning Pool, you've got the resources to build a Barracks 50 minerals before him. And his Zerglings might outnumber your marines two-to-one, but the Marines can fire at them from behind a Supply Depot wall while the zlings do nothing.

So it's actually not that hard to counter, I promise!

One of these days I'll Fraps a game to prove how much I suck and how stupid-fast other players are. But for now, I'll leave this discussion.

 

[Jaebird]

Yes, you are exaggerating

A Spawning Pool (what Zerg need to build Zlings) costs 200 minerals; a Barracks just costs 150. Zlings and Marines cost 50 minerals apiece (though you get two Zlings for the price of one). If the other guy has the resources to build a Spawning Pool, you've got the resources to build a Barracks 50 minerals before him. And his Zerglings might outnumber your marines two-to-one, but the Marines can fire at them from behind a Supply Depot wall while the zlings do nothing.

So it's actually not that hard to counter, I promise!

One of these days I'll Fraps a game to prove how much I suck and how stupid-fast other players are. But for now, I'll leave this discussion.

 

[Echo136]

The whole reason I wont buy Starcraft 2, not to meantion no longer play online on Warhammer and Warcraft 3 is because Im not great at RTS games. Im not new to them, but by comparison to 90% of people who play them online, I might as well be. 30 seconds after I start establishing a base, Im already destroyed. I might as well not even try. Starcraft 2 isnt even worth my money. But the fact that they are trying to address this is great.

 

[Echo136]

Edit: wow double post sorry

 

[Nateman742]

Am I the only person who doesn't care about stats? At all?

The whole reason I wont buy Starcraft 2, not to meantion no longer play online on Warhammer and Warcraft 3 is because Im not great at RTS games. Im not new to them, but by comparison to 90% of people who play them online, I might as well be. 30 seconds after I start establishing a base, Im already destroyed. I might as well not even try. Starcraft 2 isnt even worth my money. But the fact that they are trying to address this is great.

If one of your friends gets it, try the Use Map Settings maps. You don't necessarily have to fight anyone who might be better than you, and the map editor will allow players to make literally whatever they want. I'm similarly terrible at competitive strategy, but the UMS maps are always a blast.

 

[Chipperz]

Oh thank god. I'm sick of being obliterated in under a minute by people whose only communication is constant "lolnub".

Are they going to fix the Skirmishes, too? I once spawned as many Zerglings as I could against a Protoss NPC player and still got overwhelmed by Zealots in the first five minutes.

 

[knhirt]

One point I haven't seen in this thread so far (although I did skim a few posts, sorry if I missed it) is: I think a lot of casual players are actually content with being "noobs" (ugh, hate that word) as long as they're fighting other such noobs. They can stick around at the bottom of the barrel, fighting other people who tend to lose against higher-level players, and still have a blast.

This is in response to the concerns that playing against equal-level players won't encourage people to learn better builds or strategies.

Of course, there are many kinds of people, and those who want to get better will no doubt get better by researching builds online, watching higher-level replays and such.

I'm honestly quite excited for this.

 

[UnusualStranger]

I'm somewhat worried by this article. Matchmaking works too well, so they want to randomize it so sometimes you fight a pro who will wipe you in the first 10 minutes?

That is absolutely....idiotic. The reason I really stopped playing Starcraft online was because the game had changed. It was about build orders now. It was about doing timing attacks, using units and buildings in ways I ordinarily would not think of doing. It was more about using the flaws in the game itself to your advantage rather than the game.

Yes, you will get tired when you play all these exciting matches. Know what? I think that is a good thing. It MAKES you stop. You can't play any more. You now have to go do something else, cause you lack the wits to keep playing the game.

Sometimes, yes, a random stopping can bring you back to reality, but the thing is balancing that out. If every 3rd game I find myself being utterly crushed, I'm not sure I care about the damn matchmaking anymore. Every third game, I'll go get a bite to eat while I wait to be stomped in 10 minutes.

 

[theultimateend]

Wow, having topay $$$ for another copy in order to have more fun...
I smell a scheme here!!

It is perfectly understandable to me.

If it was free people would just keep making new accounts.

 

[Jaebird]

Yes, you are exaggerating

A Spawning Pool (what Zerg need to build Zlings) costs 200 minerals; a Barracks just costs 150. Zlings and Marines cost 50 minerals apiece (though you get two Zlings for the price of one). If the other guy has the resources to build a Spawning Pool, you've got the resources to build a Barracks 50 minerals before him. And his Zerglings might outnumber your marines two-to-one, but the Marines can fire at them from behind a Supply Depot wall while the zlings do nothing.

So it's actually not that hard to counter, I promise!

Yeah, well, you have your playstyle, and I have mine. As I said before, I like to sit and build my base.

 

[AquaAscension]

Prefacing this comment by saying that I didn't read everything through yet, but I highly doubt that you would much need to remember any account information if the account is linked to a specific copy of the game. Seriously, passwords and such are used when the account information is essentially fluid and the account was attached to a supposed single entity. Now, that linking is no longer ambiguous and the account information will be attached to an actual thing rather than a pseudonym that doesn't really exist in physical form.

 

[John Funk]

Yes, you are exaggerating

A Spawning Pool (what Zerg need to build Zlings) costs 200 minerals; a Barracks just costs 150. Zlings and Marines cost 50 minerals apiece (though you get two Zlings for the price of one). If the other guy has the resources to build a Spawning Pool, you've got the resources to build a Barracks 50 minerals before him. And his Zerglings might outnumber your marines two-to-one, but the Marines can fire at them from behind a Supply Depot wall while the zlings do nothing.

So it's actually not that hard to counter, I promise!

Yeah, well, you have your playstyle, and I have mine. As I said before, I like to sit and build my base.

And you can. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't prepare

 

[Draco Kaiser]

I like the idea and hope that I works so that I don't get pwned by every "noob" I face.

 

[Felgy76]

The first thing that came to my mind is give players an option to choose what kind of match they're looking for.

Want to see how you'd fare against a much better player? Choose the 'Harsh Life Lesson' ranked match.
Just looking to hone your current skills? Select the 'Like Me, But Different' option.
Want to help a lower ranked player improve their game (aka: open a can of whoop ass)? Pick 'Dawww, he thinks he's people'.

 

[Deleted]

Good. I hate it when a players rank is misleading just to troll me.

 

[ReverseEngineered]

Talk about a slippery slope. Preventing people from intentionally lowering their rank; okay, I can accept that. But limiting them to one account per copy? This has some serious side effects, which they may have intended.

What happens when I get bored with SC2 and want to sell it or give it away? The new owner can't create his own account, so I have to give him mine. But that account has my name, password, and email address associated with it, none of which I want to give up to him, and he likely doesn't want to be stuck with those either. Many new games have this same problem and they do it intentionally to squash the second-hand market.

As a consumer, I expect to be able to get value out of what I buy. That means playing it, enjoying it, and when I'm done with it, reselling it. This is especially important if I don't enjoy it, because I can't return it, so I had better be able to resell it for basically the same price I bought it for. I could do this if a used copy were just as good as a new copy, but companies are building in all sorts of pitfalls to ensure this isn't the case, devaluing used copies (which is my copy the second I buy it) and encouraging new purchases.

They say it is there to prevent gaming the matchmaking system, but it also kills the second-hand market, which is something they also want, and which gamers should be angry about. Killing the used market is just as bad as DRM -- it punishes those who legitimately purchase games.

 

[evilentity]

Talk about a slippery slope. Preventing people from intentionally lowering their rank; okay, I can accept that. But limiting them to one account per copy? This has some serious side effects, which they may have intended.

What happens when I get bored with SC2 and want to sell it or give it away? The new owner can't create his own account, so I have to give him mine. But that account has my name, password, and email address associated with it, none of which I want to give up to him, and he likely doesn't want to be stuck with those either. Many new games have this same problem and they do it intentionally to squash the second-hand market.

As a consumer, I expect to be able to get value out of what I buy. That means playing it, enjoying it, and when I'm done with it, reselling it. This is especially important if I don't enjoy it, because I can't return it, so I had better be able to resell it for basically the same price I bought it for. I could do this if a used copy were just as good as a new copy, but companies are building in all sorts of pitfalls to ensure this isn't the case, devaluing used copies (which is my copy the second I buy it) and encouraging new purchases.

They say it is there to prevent gaming the matchmaking system, but it also kills the second-hand market, which is something they also want, and which gamers should be angry about. Killing the used market is just as bad as DRM -- it punishes those who legitimately purchase games.

Secondhand market is worse than piracy. Pirates doesn't care if games are 5 euro or 50 they just wont buy it anyway. People think its ok to buy used because they paid for it. Truth is developers wont see single penny and retailers get huge profit margins. And clerks are ordered to shove that crap down customers throat.