Fixing Troubled Battlegrounds - GoT, BhB, HM

[SamiSha-21964]

Typical troll mentality.

[JeanFrancois-1217]

So I spent most of my Sunday into Monday morning (6:30 am local time) just to troll your monkey butt? You really believe that? Talk about narcissism.

[MrFizzbin761-1918]

@JeanFrancois-1217

Garden of Terror

• Revert map to “original” state.

The issue with the original state is that nobody knew what the heck to do with the plant, and that it tended to lead to snowbally games as people with talent tier advantages would keep getting to 100

@JeanFrancois-1217

This is the single most troubled battleground in the history of the game, pulled out altogether for years I believe. On this battleground high level players would apparently ignore or neglect the objective (skulls in the mine) and push lanes instead, do mercenary camps.

Yep thats the basic strategy, but the real issue was the inconsistent behavior of the 2 level maps and the extra QA cycles this map caused when adding a new hero to make sure interactions work across transitions from top to bottom . Also any changes to existing heroes needed to be constantly checked to make sure something didn’t break. When you have reduced development cycles you can’t afford to have tasks of diminishing return like testing a map nobody really likes CONSTANTLY. Not only bad design but a burden on the dev team so its probably gone forever. Let it go.

[JeanFrancois-1217]

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.

@Planar-11507

And winner takes all was also not part of the original Garden Terror map.

Now it is. The original battleground failed. Accordingly, I would have been a complete fool to retain everything. [snip]

@Planar-11507

And what you wrote doesn’t really justify the change.

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.

@Planar-11507

All you really said is you personally don’t like how it worked and some waffling on.

I’m guessing my response to this quote was potentially inappropriate? Why not lay off the moderation and just let me handle these people?

@Planar-11507

I would contend if you want to capture the spirit of the original map

Don’t bother.

@Planar-11507

allowing a scenario where the objective literally does nothing for either team is extremely poor design.

Part of the “fun” of objectives is the payoff.

Contend with this:

@Shapeshifter-21359

Chasing seeds during night mode up to 2 times before a team got 100
Making the objective fight very uninteractive and boring, much of the time both teams would just collect 90 from their side (30 from boss Shambler, 30 from each small Shambler camp) and not bother invading the enemy side, then both teams got 1 terror during the next cycle

@Planar-11507

You’ll note other “winner take all” maps either;

Proceeds to note exceptional conditions, without explaining, that make “winner take all” battlegrounds work.

@Planar-11507

Imagine if on Battlefield of Immortals, if the winning team got the full shield on their immortal if they won the race by any amount. That’s akin to what making Garden Terror only able to spawn for one team does.

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:

@Planar-11507

The only manner that such a system could work, in my opinion, is if you had the terrors spawn at a singular point of battle, akin to Infernal Shrines.

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.

@Planar-11507

Would you mind linking or telling me who the poster was so I can try to track it down?

Same poster:

@Shapeshifter-21359

By picking Sonya or Illidan, then farming camps all game. If the enemy camped your coins at turn in - they farmed more camps forcing the enemy to defend them (during which you paid). Games would often end without a kill on either team.

Professional players protested and it eventually got removed from HGC, along with Garden of Terror and Haunted Mines.

@Planar-11507

Also why is pro play relevant here? ???

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.

@Planar-11507

It’s the KISS principle. And why while I—who loves complexity—will push for simpler changes/solutions.

This is another place where I may have offended someone.

@Planar-11507

Try watching a video of how the map plays. You’ll figure out why the change you suggest is a “Why?”.

@Shapeshifter-21359

Haunted Mines wasn’t too far from this dynamic either: Both teams killing the small golems and avoiding the boss as long as possible, then spawning 40-60 strength golems each. Making it more lucrative to even ignore the golems and push with a Sylvanas or other macro hero and get camps during objective.

@Shapeshifter-21359

It didn’t really pay off to go down the mines. It paid off to do mercenary camps and push the Golem’s lane with Sylvanas while the enemy was down in the mines (especially in early game).

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.

@Planar-11507

Uh, nope. Not solved.

And here.

@Planar-11507

Also I realize I misread something.
Doh.

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.

[Volun-1143]

@JeanFrancois-1217

Talk about narcissism.

LoL. If you won’t do it, how else will anyone recognize your “brilliant” ideas?

I prefer the old version of GoT. It was perhaps more complicated, but it was different and made the map dynamic and often split up teams to different points on the map (The way Shapeshifter describes does not at all describe my experience with the map). Was always fun trying to see how greedy I could get to sneak in the minor seeds. Make the choice between bursting down your own boss or ganking their attempt. And as silly as it was, chasing down terrors actually had urgency to it.

Blizzard’s “rework” just made the map pool less interesting, and I disagree with people like Sami who said the map “needed” to be changed, but your modifications are unnecessary.

1. Gathering supplemental seeds means there’s always some value in getting them. That’s one of the problems with Haunted Mines.

2. Making the shambler placements random is unnecessary because the map was already quite complex and the variations in which people approach seed gathering is part of that fun.

3. Your last change makes no sense ever since they changed pots requiring you to stay and hit buildings to do extra damage.

[xSpeILx-2719]

@Volun-1143

Was always fun trying to see how greedy I could get to sneak in the minor seeds.

problem is pros avoided being greedy like the plague since money was on the line
they take their own small seed camps, boss seeds, then stop

same thing with the haunted mines: they don’t go in the mine shaft but push a lane because it’s so much safer

think about it, if your win or loss means winning or losing tens of thousands of dollars, are you going to make the risky play or the optimal play?

same thing when i look at old blackhearts bay games on youtube: they only take camps and avoid risks, that’s boring as hell to watch
everyone instant locks camp takers first

[Volun-1143]

Maybe that’s where the disconnect might be. But even playing at masters in HL, that was not at all how the map was consistently played. If anyone knows of any old pro games on that map, I’d be curious to see. Right now, the map plays more boring especially when we already have maps like Cursed and Alterac Valley.

[JeanFrancois-1217]

@Volun-1143

I prefer the old version of GoT. It was perhaps more complicated, but it was different and made the map dynamic and often split up teams to different points on the map (The way Shapeshifter describes does not at all describe my experience with the map). Was always fun trying to see how greedy I could get to sneak in the minor seeds. Make the choice between bursting down your own boss or ganking their attempt. And as silly as it was, chasing down terrors actually had urgency to it.

Exactly, more or less. But you can’t blame Blizzard for initiating its removal. It was the pro players who not only made it simple but very boring and passive. What I’m trying to do is reintroduce its old essence by tweaking it enough to ensure it won’t be played in a boring and passive manner.

@Volun-1143

Making the shambler placements random is unnecessary because the map was already quite complex and the variations in which people approach seed gathering is part of that fun.

The way the map was ultimately played was anything but complex and varied, and it never ceases to amuse me that any change not totally straightforward immediately terrifies people from a complexity standpoint. The effect is relatively simple. Players react dynamically, seeing opportunities. This is exactly what you want. If there is no resolution, teams group, and due to the time it takes to collect enough seeds to win the objective along with the display information one team has enough time to realize that it needs to make a move as trying to split the battleground would lead to it losing the objective. A fight ensues.

There are three levels of inducing conflict.

1. Seeds don’t carry over. If you want the objective you have to take a risk or look for an opportunity. This alone could solve the map’s key problem. But perhaps it is not enough.
2. Shambler camp sizes vary, 20-40 seeds at least. This could be done with or without ensuring the halves are imbalanced, I presume top and bottom is how the map was played. The point is to dangle a carrot in front of players, and if they aren’t hungry to threaten them with the stick of losing the objective.
3. The number of possible shambler camp spawn locations is made greater than the number of camps spawning, enlarging the size of the carrot and the stick. If further variance is introduced to the shambler camp sizes then the number of locations itself can vary.

Another thing has also crossed my mind, not making it known to players when the objective will spawn so that players would be more spread out rather than grouped in preparation. This may be how pro teams were able to split the map in a top and bottom when lanes are symmetrical left and right. They grouped ahead of time.

One thing is certain, this map is solvable.

@xSpeILx-2719

problem is pros avoided being greedy like the plague since money was on the line
they take their own small seed camps, boss seeds, then stop

same thing with the haunted mines: they don’t go in the mine shaft but push a lane because it’s so much safer

think about it, if your win or loss means winning or losing tens of thousands of dollars, are you going to make the risky play or the optimal play?

same thing when i look at old blackhearts bay games on youtube: they only take camps and avoid risks, that’s boring as hell to watch
everyone instant locks camp takers first

This poster generally gets it.

@Volun-1143

Maybe that’s where the disconnect might be.

Right there in the first paragraph of the opening post. I don’t know why people seem to think I write for the mere fun of it.

@JeanFrancois-1217

I haven’t kept track of how many different versions there have been and what changes were made. The point is to return the map to a decentralized state where shambler camps and shambler bosses spawned at the beginning of the night phase. This diffuse dispersal of the objective is an important gameplay element allowing for a different and potentially more flexible experience in terms of picking fights that has ironically played out as the most boring and detached experience between two teams. Not coincidentally all three battlegrounds discussed here have diffusely dispersed objectives. As opposed to effectively altering these battlegrounds and holding their ground as bozo “professional” players condemned them the developers have struggled for years. Garden of Terror was essentially standardized, Blackheart’s Bay is ignored and detested (is it pulled from ranked?), and Haunted Mines was removed from the game altogether.

[Volun-1143]

@JeanFrancois-1217

The way the map was ultimately played was anything but complex and varied

It was though lol and ultimately one of the reasons why they simplified the map. I played TOOOONs of QM and Masters HL. GoT was always the map where weird stuff always happened. Aside from the map playing a little longer, objective phases often played out in so many different ways. You can argue pros played it differently, but considering where HOTS is at the moment, is that a view that needs to be indulged? And did listening to them the first time really make the map better? Not in my opinion.

[SamiSha-21964]

To clarify, I do not like the rework either but even prior of it there were issues that were tried being addressed, maybe it differs from experience between others, but from what I’ve read:

• Games took too long.
• Games were snowbally from multiple situations, including not to least gangs and macro pressure. (which honestly macro is was ok but I can clearly see how it will struggle if a level tier down team tries to push for seeds).
• Garden of Terror became weak as level passes on, that sometimes its usefulness is very timed as it tries to cross the map.

Those were the most ranting points I recall before the rework.

The map needed a change, not this way though.

[JeanFrancois-1217]

@Volun-1143

@JeanFrancois-1217

The way the map was ultimately played was anything but complex and varied

It was though lol and ultimately one of the reasons why they simplified the map.

Now that’s funny.

@Volun-1143

Aside from the map playing a little longer, objective phases often played out in so many different ways.

And that’s what I want to make robust.

@Volun-1143

And did listening to them the first time really make the map better? Not in my opinion.

It certainly got the map changed.

[phaseshifter-1283]

Which critters?

I would give the GoT the ability to polymorph back.

@Planar-11507

Also, did you play the map? Capturing siege giants after golems summoned to aid defense was a part of knowing timings on the map for defending golems.

Yep. And I always hated when my team mates ignored it.

@JeanFrancois-1217

The night phase ends without either team having a Garden Terror or progress toward one.

Ok that is a bad idea. You could go on for a LONG time with no one ever getting an objective Potentially the entire game). The objective has to mean something. If the chance of getting nothing is too high, it will just get ignored. The best thing to do if you’re losing in that scenario ,would be to avoid the enemy team, and pick up seeds wherever they’re not. You don’t have tp challenge them, and they still can’t win the objective.

@JeanFrancois-1217

Based on a detailed response of another poster matching my pro play recollection the largest issue is camp clearing and the avoidance of fighting.

Yes, but the reason teams do that is precisely because the objective is so strong, and you don’t need to fight to win it. You clear camps purely because they give coins for the obj. The camps themselves have little value since you don’t need to push that map.

@JeanFrancois-1217

The issue with the map is that pushing is too effective to the point of superseding the objective.

Um ,That’s incorrect. The objective burns structures so fast that you don’t need to prioritize pushing lanes. Planar was correct. BhB has the strongest objective in the game.

[Volun-1143]

Your first two points are kind of at odds with each other, so I don’t agree with the second. The third is definitely true, and I think a more targeted fix would have dealt with the first issue. Why that suddenly means we needed to make another Alterac Pass, I don’t know.

These are the kind of “reworks” that I detest from Blizzard. They’re limiting their imagination and pass off things already in the game, homogenizing them and passing it off as something “new” when it actually takes away its uniqueness. And that rework actually took a lot of work I’m sure which makes it all the more tragic.

[Minky-11649]

@SamiSha-21964

To clarify, I do not like the rework either but even prior of it there were issues that were tried being addressed, maybe it differs from experience between others, but from what I’ve read:

They did attempt an mini rework of GOT where they changed how the Terror vehicle and associated siege mechanic functioned. The changes didn’t work and I believe they did a few mini updates in an attempt to improve the changes. It didn’t fix any of the core problems that you listed in your post.

So it’s not like they didn’t try to preserve the original GOT. At this point it’s doubtful they could just revert it and then rework the map, people are expecting too much from a game in maintenance mode.

[JeanFrancois-1217]

It’s like having a discussion with a brick wall. What a waste of potential and latent opportunity this game is. You just have to run everyone left over.

[phaseshifter-1283]

Your counter argument sir?