Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Back in affirmative action.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby erwtenpeller » Wed Jul 07, 2010 2:12 pm

It usually is, though.
erwt.blogspot.com - Personal art exposé.
www.wc3campaigns.net - For all your modding needs.
User avatar
erwtenpeller
 
Posts: 3238
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby -Y- » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:58 am

Merlin wrote:Cheesing is a bastardly thing to do, and it basically ruins the game.

I'd say I disagree about this. It isn't a bastardy thing on itself to do. Is it not the point of the game to kill towers? Shouldn't a team that pushes and use subterfuge more be rewarded for their strategy and co-ordination?

To quote a signature I read somewhere:
"If you go to a fist-fight with hands tied behind your back, thinking bumping shoulders is fun, don't be surprised when you get punched in the face."

Merlin wrote:It's not a good tactic; it's the best. The best tactic in ToB right now is bastardly. I don't like that the most effective way to play the game is also the most bastardly way.

That being said I don't think you are wrong. If cheesing is non-counter-able (or counter-able only by cheesing) its probably a degenerate strategy which could explain why you find it "bastardy".

BTW can cheesing be countered by Backdooring or other strategy (I haven't got the time to play the game :( )?
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:23 am

Cheesing is not a strategy of the game; cheesers do not play the game.
It is emergent, but is not to be mistaken and protected as emergence.

The term names a mechanical flaw at unscrupulous abuse. A much more fitting comparison would be "Don't be surprised to be hated on when bringing a gun to a fist fight."

A divergence of the implicit design from the explicit design that rewards best playing the game when not playing the game. It's like calling a gunslinger the winner of a boxing fight--it makes no sense.

The game deceives, and those who defend this deception basically say "What? You did not bring a gun to this fist fight? Hah, you should have known better, you moron!"

Everyone can smuggle in a gun to a fist fight and easily win against the opponent's expectations on the game, declaring the smuggle to be part of the game, everyone can cheese, it is the responsibility of the organizers to not let that happen if they want meaningful matches to take place, and if they don't want gun fights instead of fist fights. Circumventing and thwarting this is a bastardly thing to do towards your fellow players, oversights of the organizers no real justification.

AoS has to make a conscious choice for a radical turning point in its future development; as long as it keeps pretending to be about hero fights with a tint bases and troops to stage the flow, while in reality being about bases and troops with heroes as mere means to an end, the end game will always stay broken as it always has been in this genre.

And paradoxically, to achieve this, the meaning of bases and troops must be much better articulated to set the scene, and the actual game of player conflict embedded into it; player interaction with the backdrop scene be indirect--AoS is a fighting game set into a more elaborate level/stage background.

The end game is bad, because it has never been designed, and designed to be good--there just happens to be an end game, and it happens to be bad most of the times.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby -Y- » Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:02 am

Though I'm burdened with certain private obligations, so I'll try to be short:

A diverge of the implicit design from the explicit design that rewards best playing the game when not playing the game. It's like calling a gunslinger the winner of a box fight--it makes no sense.

No. A diverge of implicit and explicit design is just that a diverge. Game is your playground and you can play any way you want. If you can use some technic/glitch to your advantage, then more power to you for doing so. If the designer does nothing to remedy it, then they either think it is OK for it to be in, or they don't care. In both case not your fault. If you use it and think this might be cheap then complain to designer and see if he will fix it (nothing yells a degenerate tactic more than a top player complaining about using a mechanic to win).

BTW bringing a gun to a boxing match would be cheating unless boxing match rules have included guns in the last decade. Cheesing on the other hand is a strictly within limits (wc3 doesn't prevent you or tell you you shouldn't cheese before booting you off). As for the fist fight the rules are a bit more fuzzy ;)
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:06 am

I am not resentful. This is one of the times that remind me why I should be.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 8:20 am

A cheeser does not play in dialogue, he does not play with other players, he does not play the game--he toys with the map, and the map wins him the game.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby -Y- » Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:17 am

What dialogue? You mean like understanding some deeper meaning or intention of the map, designed for multiplayer?

So tell me can a single player cheese on his own? Can it be countered? If so, how? What skills are required to perform it?
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:20 am

Abandon all hope.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby Merlin » Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:21 am

-Y- wrote:That being said I don't think you are wrong. If cheesing is non-counter-able (or counter-able only by cheesing) its probably a degenerate strategy which could explain why you find it "bastardy".

BTW can cheesing be countered by Backdooring or other strategy (I haven't got the time to play the game :( )?

I explained why I don't like it in a previous post, and RAV has gone into detail about why it's bad.

Also, backdooring is a type of cheese. It's basically the first sort I defined.
Merlin wrote:
  1. A tactic involving one or more players suddenly attacking an undefended enemy structure with the intention of destroying it before the enemy has the time to react. Usually performed as a last-ditch effort, or timed to coincide with a diversionary attack at another location.
  2. A strategy involving short and rapid, but sustained bursts of aggression against enemy structures with the overall goal of causing maximum damage while minimizing personal risk by staying back and only exposing oneself while casting.

A single player can cheese very well. BR, BLM, and Malf are examples of heroes that can destroy a Keep in under 60 seconds.
User avatar
Merlin
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby -Y- » Sun Jul 11, 2010 12:48 pm

Well it seems that would be quite a hard problem to counter. Again, what skill levels (of a player) and item/spell power requirements are needed to start a cheese? Still it might be too early to tell, really. It takes time for a counter for a dominate strategy to form (if it does).

As for the whole explicit/implicit design I consider it a non-issue. As a gamer your job is to scan around for a hole/personal advantage in the explicit design space and use it. People's impression of what is implicit varies a lot; from allowing, condemning to prohibiting of backdooring/using leavers/pooling/etc. In other words Play to Win.
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby Cassiel » Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:15 pm

Please don't regurgitate Sirlin's bullshit.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3306&p=65281&#p65281
User avatar
Cassiel
 
Posts: 5083
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:20 pm

Having just watched the finals of the soccer world cup, that whole fouling and faking shit ruining match quality is bit for bit all the same as what we were talking about with cheesing here.

One player wants to play soccer, the other wants to kill him.

while his mates block the view of the referee so that he can't properly judge the situation and let's the fouler keep playing. And what say high soccer functionaries in the half-time pause, to defend keeping video proof out of the game? "Well, it's all part of the game, when one team is just too good, you gotta somehow hold your ground, sometimes you gotta foul them a bit to teach them some respect!". What dare they being better at playing the game than you! You gotta do everything you can to win, winning is all that counts, and hey, nothing of the game prevents fouling and that the eye of the referee can be fooled, so why not take advantage, it's for your country after all! And don't anyone dare suggesting improvements to the game like augmented referee technology, it would certainly dumb the game down, all that amazing strategy of fouling and faking would be gone, it would just be some players kicking around a ball, how boring!
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 2:03 pm

The commentator kept telling me this was soccer, and I swear I just watched "Whack a mole!" or "Fool me once,..!".

But hey, where's the issue, right? since as a soccer player "your job is to scan for a hole/personal advantage in the explicit design space and use it" to break the legs of opposing players.

"People's impression of what is" a foul or fake "varies a lot", especially for the referee, which constitutes the actual game for the players,

and those who just want to kick balls in pretty patterns are naive, not hard enough, they can't take the pressure in a competitive man's game. "In other words Play to Win."
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby Death » Sun Jul 11, 2010 2:50 pm

Let's review once more, children:

A game full of ganking is fun in the player vs. player action.

A game full of cheese is tedium.

Playing tag with an inanimate object is dull and makes people want to stop playing the game.
User avatar
Death
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:37 pm

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:09 pm

Talk about tedium, here too the problems compare, all those players terribly falling to the ground every damned five seconds, everyone concerning himself with that goddamned unnecessary drama instead of kicking some good combinations off, everyone demolishing the others by any means necessary, terribly prolonged this uneventful match to over two hours, I almost slept away, it was such a torture to watch.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:35 pm

RageAgainstVoid wrote:One player wants to play soccer, the other wants to kill him.




What I referred to from the finals some hours ago, in case you missed that. Asshole was allowed to play on. The game defined through that referee allowed for playing like that, ergo that shit must have been alright, right? and so it happened galore.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby -Y- » Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:15 pm

@Cass: I think you are overgeneralizing what Sirlin said. From what I've read PtW is focused exclusively on multiplayer competitive games, which almost always have a clear goal, rules and victory/lose condition(s).

@RAV: I'm going on a limb here and say - yes. Heck, they should do it more often and more dramatically. Is it unprofessional - yes. Is it unsportsmanlike - yes. Is he douche - hell yes. Is it playing to win - maybe if you really stretch that definition.
But seriously, what did you expect? And this lies completely on the hands of the organizers. They should have either added more (or more competent) judges, added cameras, etc. If anything this will either:
A) Make people lose interest in football, forcing FIFA to "patch" things up.
B) Attract another crowd. Maybe more people who like pro wrestling will start watching football.
C) Make people lose interest in football, causing it to vanish into oblivion.

If you could insta-kill any unit in starcraft by clicking on it too many time while observer wasn't looking at you, would you yell at the player doing it or Blizzard, for leaving this crap in the game?
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:15 pm

-Y- wrote:Is it unprofessional - yes. Is it unsportsmanlike - yes. Is he douche - hell yes.
Which is why Merlin called it a bastardly thing to do, a word that is basically a synonym to what you just said, and to which you disagreed.

-Y- wrote:Is it playing to win - maybe if you really stretch that definition.
Anything else would be a stretch to definition.

-Y- wrote:But seriously, what did you expect?

To fix the game?

-Y- wrote:And this lies completely on the hands of the organizers.

Like ToB, which is why we discuss it here.

-Y- wrote:They should have either added more (or more competent) judges, added cameras, etc.
Like ToB, which is why we discuss it here.

-Y- wrote:If anything this will either:
A) Make people lose interest in football, forcing FIFA to "patch" things up.
B) Attract another crowd. Maybe more people who like pro wrestling will start watching football.
C) Make people lose interest in football, causing it to vanish into oblivion.

Like ToB, which is why we discuss it here.

-Y- wrote:If you could insta-kill any unit in starcraft by clicking on it too many time while observer wasn't looking at you, would you yell at the player doing it or Blizzard, for leaving this crap in the game?
That players choose to play fair and rely on skill although they could play as dirty as any other, is why Spain is so popular, has been favored and is widely seen to have entirely deserved the World Cup the most; people recognize honor and reward it with admiration. Germany did not play this bastardly as well and lost in honor, becoming one of the most popular teams this cup; Uruguay's "hand of god" foul play winning them a match and throwing out another team, made them the most unpopular team.

But aside that, what some of those utilitarian computer pro-gamers forget is that we play not just against opponents but also with opponents. People have nothing else to gain in casual games than a good time; that does not mean you shouldn't try to win, it means to play fair, it means to negotiate the terms to which everyone would enjoy a match, and either hold to the promise, or be straight about your dislike of those terms beforehand. They donate some of their precious free time to you so that you can have fun playing an opponent, and so do you for them. We play for each other as much as for ourselves. You don't just play to win by any means, you play for a good group experience. You should not apply a different standard from playing with friends on the kitchen table than playing with casuals on the net. And you should not play against them to a reckless standard written by a commercial tourney player in his gambits for money and attention.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby Merlin » Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:41 pm

User avatar
Merlin
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby The_Fuhrer » Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:48 am

-Y- wrote:Well it seems that would be quite a hard problem to counter. Again, what skill levels (of a player) and item/spell power requirements are needed to start a cheese? Still it might be too early to tell, really. It takes time for a counter for a dominate strategy to form (if it does).

As for the whole explicit/implicit design I consider it a non-issue. As a gamer your job is to scan around for a hole/personal advantage in the explicit design space and use it. People's impression of what is implicit varies a lot; from allowing, condemning to prohibiting of backdooring/using leavers/pooling/etc. In other words Play to Win.


Well, the consensus to remove cheese from the game doesnt really need such detailed explanation if you really play the game and experience it yourself.
That would really save RAV and Merlin these lengthy posts :)
...
The_Fuhrer
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 7:58 pm

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby Dominant-Male » Mon Jul 12, 2010 7:02 am

Quick thought.

A lot of the consumables that were added to WC3 in TFT were non-combat consumable. I think that mechanic is underused and could be great to help a number of issues ToB currently has.

If we were to add a potion that heals HP/MP over time but its effect is removed if the target is attacked, we would fix the issue of having to return all the way to the HQ to regenerate whilst in a long siege. You could just quickly hop behind the frontlines and heal up, but you wouldn't be able to get extra HP while being chased by enemy heroes.

An consumable item that would repair structures over time but would have its effect removed if the structure was attacked would greatly help against cheese in lategame, but wouldn't affect normal gameplay when each base is constantly being sieged and the forces wouldn't have the time to repair.

I'm not a big fan of consumables in AoS maps but in this case I'd make an exception.

Thoughts?

(Oh, and RAV, there are millions of people that want to implement instant-replays to football, it's just that FIFA is run by a reactionary fucktard)
Woo
User avatar
Dominant-Male
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:16 am

Playing to Win

Postby -Y- » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:53 am

RageAgainstVoid wrote:
-Y- wrote:Is it unprofessional - yes. Is it unsportsmanlike - yes. Is he douche - hell yes.
Which is why Merlin called it a bastardly thing to do

Note, all those attributes describe a player not an action. You can Play to Win without acting like a douche. Playing like a douche might even be contrary to Playing to Win. You can win without playing to win.

RageAgainstVoid wrote:You don't just play to win by any means, you play for a good group experience.

PtW doesn't say "Win by any means", it says "Mind the end result, not the implicit social contracts" (which is pretty much what Machiavelli said). How you chose to win doesn't matter.

Also, side-note Uruguay "hand of god" is PtW. Thanks for mentioning that. You do know they got sanctioned for playing with hand, right?
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby -Y- » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:54 am

Anyway don't wanna pollute this thread, so I've moved discussion to another thread.

I think Merlin idea for Protoss Shields on all buildings is probably the best solution.
-Y-
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:19 am

Re: Playing to Win

Postby Nooneyouknow » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:18 am

Uh, playing to win does mean doing whatever it takes to win, and learning from your losses when you do lose. You do anything within the rules of the game to win. That's it.
User avatar
Nooneyouknow
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:15 am

Re: Feedback - 1.23 (6/14/2010)

Postby RageAgainstVoid » Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:02 am

-Y- wrote:Anyway don't wanna pollute this thread, so I've moved discussion to another thread.

You pollute wherever you step, I'd actually prefer if you don't spread.

-Y- wrote:You can Play to Win without acting like a douche. Playing like a douche might even be contrary to Playing to Win. You can win without playing to win.

We were discussing cheese/fouls. By definition that is acting like a douche, assumed by the perpetrator to be the most effective means to win. That this is possible, tolerated and even excused is the relevant problem.

-Y- wrote:PtW doesn't say "Win by any means", it says "Mind the end result, not the implicit social contracts" (which is pretty much what Machiavelli said). How you chose to win doesn't matter.
And I don't say "mind the social contracts", I say mind that any game is created in social context. I really don't care what commercial tourney players have to say on that; their theories about games removed from social context are wrong. A game inherently is a social construct, a game only exists the moment people agree to play to certain rules, people acknowledge a winner and people measure the quality of play. It's people, it's always the people that matter, it's only them that matter, everything loses sense without them.
People agreed to play to certain rules, people agreed to watch a game played to certain rules--that is the game, that starts the game, that concludes the game. The end result does not remove a player's own obligations to stay within defined bounds of the agreed game, that's freedom enough, it's freedom that can be enjoyed, and it's the only freedom to make sense. Letting the end result justify total anarchy on every opportunity--what's the point in playing or watching a specific game then?

-Y- wrote: You do know they got sanctioned for playing with hand, right?
Didn't seem to matter much compared to winning that game and staying in the world cup tourney; no one of them minding a single thought on repercussion, they were celebrated like heroes by their own people. Just as the Netherlands got dozens of yellow cards, and they didn't seem to mind either, they just managed foul deficits across the team as if that was a strategical resource to the game.
Wut ohne Ziel. Wut ohne Folgen.
User avatar
RageAgainstVoid
More like Rage Against Roids/Rrhoids
 
Posts: 4397
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:23 am
Location: Ravenna

PreviousNext

Return to Tides of Blood

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest