So while I’m trying to argue with people who make zero effort in a constructive thread or the subject matter is simply over their heads a moderator has decided to remove a highly important post altogether rather than edit out whatever is deemed offensive, as if the most offensive aspect of this thread isn’t thoughtless responses.
Now it is. The original battleground failed. Accordingly, I would have been a complete fool to retain everything. [snip]
The original battleground had a total of 180 dispersed seeds, 90 on each side. I would imagine the intention was to incline teams to go for the extra 10 they needed for the Terror, leading to engagements. However, pro teams were apparently collecting 90 seeds, avoiding fights, then simultaneously getting Terrors during the next cycle. That’s the premise, if someone thinks it’s incorrect correct it.
So a way needs to be figured out to induce fights out of very passive players. That doesn’t happen by increasing the number of seeds and it doesn’t happen by allowing seeds to carry over (technically it could; it is some food for thought that at the moment I don’t find compelling, entails heavy distribution imbalances [that or you change the nature of the map from dispersal to centralization, and avoiding this is the whole damn point] and could be a bigger competitive mess, I think it’s silly). Given that the maximum number of seeds should be capped at below 200 it’s always possible that both teams collect < 100 seeds. The trick is to get one to collect 100 seeds with the involvement of the other through conflict. That happens by making even the most passive bozos aggressive in denying their ability to split the battleground, forcing them to fight. Unlike with seeds carrying over and relying on heavy spatial imbalances in seed distribution to induce fights, which leads to randomness having a big competitive effect (or without randomness is just centralization of the objective, the thing to avoid), the randomness in distribution only serves to force decisive conflicts rather than really tip the scales.
I’m guessing my response to this quote was potentially inappropriate? Why not lay off the moderation and just let me handle these people?
Don’t bother.
Contend with this:
Proceeds to note exceptional conditions, without explaining, that make “winner take all” battlegrounds work.
That’s dependent on the power level of the objective, which is battleground specific. Infernal Shrines Punishers are a counter-example, but in your unparalleled genius you decided to make this exception:
Why, I don’t have the faintest idea. Here are some other maps where winner takes all:
- Volskaya Foundry
- Dragon Shire
This is the battleground that bears a close comparison. Your “fixed capture points” exception makes no sense - it’s a semantic difference. Players are induced to break splits or win individual or smaller engagements to attain a winner-takes-all objective that spans a huge portion of a battleground. That’s why you don’t have seeds carry over - you remove the incentive for passivity. If that may not be enough touches of imbalance get the job done.
- Hanamura Temple
The different conditions you try to claim are significant are arbitrary - you’re just looking for a reason to disagree rather than understanding why you’re disagreeing. The only thing that matters is that players are induced to engage one another in a winner-takes-all objective. The differences in distributions of that objective (centralized, decentralized, dispersed or diffused) amount to greater gameplay variety, something to value most of all.
Same poster:
Because developers can’t exclusively balance or judge battleground designs relative to players like you. Pro players generally figure out best ways to play a game and if the game plays poorly at their level that’s a problem.
This is another place where I may have offended someone.
I watched the video on the introduction of the rework, same key complaint noted in the comments. Pushing during the objective. If anything one change I should have mentioned was redistributing skulls from the Undead Army to the Grave Golem.
And here.
And here. If I’m not allowed to deal with these people they’re never going to learn, and just deleting constructive posts indicates a terrible priority. Why not get a community manager or a developer to respond so I don’t have to discuss things with these people or does literally no one care about substantive matters? Not like there’s a lot to do in a bustling game! Years of this ensured things would slow down.