Jump to content


Member Since 03 Jul 2008
Offline Last Active Jan 27 2016 01:49 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: 4 player roster in tournaments

25 January 2016 - 07:40 PM

View PostAvengelyne, on 25 January 2016 - 06:55 PM, said:

Only thing I can disagree with is:

"The 2014 final BlizzCon in Mists of Pandaria was without a doubt the most comp-diverse BlizzCon to date."

If I remember right, every single team from the 2014 tournament was Lock/Shaman or Mage/Druid with the exception of Kording's WW/Spriest (only because their Lock couldn't come). If you weren't one of these or a class that synergized with them, you're shit out of luck. Maybe next Blizzcon you'll be viable. The 2015 Tournament was a lot more diverse (arcane mage, melee cleaves, wizard cleaves, caster/melee etc.). it felt more entertaining to watch at times because every game didn't involve LSD.

I don't want to derail because it's really besides the point but that's simply not true. In 2015 we had 3 RMD/godcomp, 3 FLS/Jungle, 1 Turbo and 1 WLS. In 2014 there was LSD2, MLS, WMD, 2 Godcomp (1fire 1 frost), LSM, HLS and spriest/WW. 2015 was literally the first time ever a single comp appeared 3 times in one blizzcon. To say in 2014 "every game involved LSD" makes no sense at all when there was a single LSD2.

View PostAvengelyne, on 25 January 2016 - 06:55 PM, said:

I think the game is heading in a direction where it's about picking a class from a menu instead of you representing your class you chose when you started playing. Gone are the days of teams like Zelia's TSG and Hydra's RMP dominating.

Edit: Forgot to mention I really like the 2 comp limit idea

I think that is a perfect description of what I'm talking about. Some of it has to do with game design, but far more because of the ruleset imo.

In Topic: 4 player roster in tournaments

25 January 2016 - 06:02 PM

View Postdrzy, on 25 January 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

I think you do present a very valid point - when players at the top tier are doing games on their main characters as a main composition, entertainment value increases drastically, but that's only off the sole reason that most of the people know them for their main classes.

Personally, I don't see a problem with four man rosters, and I don't really think they present an issue at all in tournaments. The only thing I could really think of that would be problematic is the constant composition changes every game, which I agree at a certain point it becomes more of a comp based tournament then anything else. Quite frankly, I don't think any shaman in the game finds it fun to queue into WWDK. You better damn believe if I'm a resto shaman I'm subbing in a Holy Paladin.

But let's be honest here, that's what the game has come down to. No amount of roster limits or anything will determine the entertainment value. If I'm playing a game to potentially earn a rather large paycheck, then I'm going to play whatever is needed to make sure my changes of achieving that money is greater.

But I don't think four man rosters are the reason for the crappy viewing experience for tournaments. GCD is probably the most professionally run tournament ever, but gets sub 10K viewers almost every time, whereas a tournament like NAO Inv got well over 50K viewers quite frequently. It just comes down to dull, boring, comp based, crappy gameplay.

To put it into perspective for you: I tuned into one game today, it was an LSD vs. Boomkin/Mage on Tol'Viron Arena. I watched the LSD run around in circles afk until the dampening hit 25%, then I closed the stream not even interested in the result. I don't think anybody finds that enjoyable to watch.

I agree that at a certain point players should be swapping classes in an absolute dire situation, like the WW DK situation you mentioned. As I said, the problem may not be inherently within the 4 player rule but rather because the rule and the organizers seem to encourage counter comping on a frequent basis. The picking phase may be even more of a problem than the 4 player roster honestly.

When it comes down to it, players will do what they have to to win, you're absolutely right. It's the same reason I would fully expect a player to make full use of any rule despite their personal opinion on it. The problem is there's a clear mentality change at this point in time. In previous years rather than reroll players would aim to prefect the matchup, advance the meta and figure out how to win as best they could. I realize in WoW that sounds like a fairy tale, but it's true and it happens every expansion.

Even now, you take teams like SK gaming who with hours and hours of practice were able to beat a comp considered a counter months prior or watching Absterges team have exceptionally close games vs the best WW DK team as FLS are good examples of this. With the extended rosters, not only is it more appealing to just find the hardest counter you can but it's difficult justifying putting in all the time to overcome one specific comp when you can expect the other team to change comp on a whim.

I'm also not trying to imply that this the sole reason for shortcomings in viewership, it's clearly not. I think it's important to look at the effects of each rule though regardless of it's overall impact, this one I feel is more important than others. But if we are talking about viewership in the previous tournament GCD got close to 20k~ concurrents in a finals where players all played their mains and in the most recent they had 8k~ where they were changing comps every map.

In Topic: Blog: WoD PvP Flaws

09 November 2015 - 07:58 PM

View PostVoksen, on 09 November 2015 - 05:57 PM, said:

There is something implied yet somewhat indirectly referenced in your commentary regarding pre-cata vs. post-cata cooldown usage.  Its an issue that I feel the community fails to label, elaborate, or mention enough.  If you do expand the blog, please expose what I've been calling symmetrical vs. asymmetrical gameplay (mainly via cooldown usage).

I think your concerns are absolutely correct, but I see them as the combined result of all the flaws within the game. Like you said, cooldowns are a major offender, but so are many of the other things I've listed and things I intend to list in future blogs (like CC cooldowns).

This is a major concern for a majority of the playerbase, however I think you're able to articulate it in a more effective way than most. When people say things like "I hate deep sheep" or "we just trade cooldowns all game" it's all essentially saying what you're trying to describe in a more refined way.

My goal with the blog though, was to go one step further and ask why are we experiencing this "symmetrical" type of play and examine the problem at it's roots. The blog goes on to describe what I see as the core of the problem.

It's possible I should have emphasized that due to those problems, the result is symmetrical gameplay. I do make an effort to reduce the length as much as possible though while still getting the point across.

In Topic: Blog: WoD PvP Flaws

09 November 2015 - 07:46 PM

View PostDizzeeyo, on 09 November 2015 - 06:07 PM, said:

with their "focus on the fantasy" of each class/spec this time around there is some hope that they might reverse 3 expansions of bad class design decisions and move back towards fun mmo classes/specs rather then scripted boring raiding classes/specs

Sadly, I think their focus on fantasy aims to appeal in a way that you fulfill your class fantasy in a raid environment :(

Or at least that's how I'm understanding it so far. I do sincerely hope things turn out well, I'm just not that optimistic.

In Topic: Blog: WoD PvP Flaws

09 November 2015 - 03:07 PM

I agree, I think classes in recent years have been designed specifically for consuming raid content. That's where it starts while PvP utility and other considerations are done afterwords. That's not to say there aren't passionate people at blizzard working hard on PvP, but those people are primarily working on new systems (honor, pvp talents), and new content like bgs, arenas, ashran rather than class design.

That's a serious contrast there compared to the previous expansions where, it seems like the classes were built to be thrown into an MMO rather than a raid. This is very noticeable when you consider drawbacks to spells which are significantly different in a raiding environment compared to the open world and PvP. There's a quote somewhere saying that the original windfury totem was designed with the drawback of having a 5 hp totem, but when you put that in a raid environment it doesn't apply. This kind of logic applies to anything, so when you see changes first look at them based on their context in a raid and it won't seem so misguided as it does when you look at it from the pvp side of things.