balance changes would be 20x better if locked by rating. Should be quite easy to implement, as players can already link their profile with their steam account. this would reduce clutter on forums immensely and actually provide constructive and meaningful balance feedback
EDIT: it was half serious anyway Iâm glad this sparked a discussion.
anyway, thinking about it, it wouldnât be such a horrible idea. But instead of blocking lower rated players, adding a new subforum specifically for higher rated balance discussion (so essentially two forums) would be great.
Lower rated players tend to balance units/techs that are rarely seen, or care about historical accuracy. Higher rated players look at the full picture and the actual metagame that gets affected by balance changes. They really donât care if a tech like herbal medicine is buffed
By doing so you risk gradually turning aoe 2 into what more or less killed starcraft 2, becuase starcraft 2 is a great competitive game at high level but much too stressfull to be fun for many average plebs, which in the end really hurt its playerbase.
The concerns of bad players need ot be addressed becuase bad players are the majorit of this games customers and they want to have fun.
The concerns of good playersa are euqally important too keep the competitive scene alive and allow entertaining tournaments.
Focusing one extreme, leads to noob stomps or an extinct competitive scene, which leads to pain and hatred. This is the way of the sith.
This is why I stay away from balance topics. Idk what my DE rank would be as Iâm 1930HD but at my level players still have a limited understanding of how all the units are connnected, to create meaningfull discussion you need a place where high level players can engage in conversation and not be confused by low level opinions.
At least displaying elo would benefit the entire forum, to help put what is said in perspective.
Bad idea. Here is freedom of speech and everyone can suggest/talk whatever they want. If balance suggestion is not suitable, then it does get a lot of criticism or will be ignored anyway. This has happened to a lot of suggestions. It can usually be quickly derived from general feedback from other players, whether idea is at least somewhat reasonable or not.
Also often when novice players suggest some improper balance changes, then more experienced players explain to them, why these changes are not appropriate and what those players should do differently in order to play better. This way people learn how to play better.
Also it seems to me, that a lot of players here love to discuss balance (even bad ideas )
I get the reasoning but anyway the first category is pretty easy to spot. Actually people remain on these threads more to help the dude that believes something is OP/UP or at least other people who might have the same misconception. Also there is the obvious problem of TG ELO that is a complete mess. The two other categories often donât base their opinion only on their own experience, but also on what caster and pros say/how they play.
Iâm not particulary high level and yet when I read genius claims like âcataphract arenât too expensive to upgrade because you save ressources on bloodlines/blast furnaceâ I donât feel confused the slightest. Anyway, if I remember correctly such a place exist, itâs a discord server where pros and casters can indeed give their opinion without any noob in sight.
to be honest, i have only seen the first 8 star wars movies, didnt even bother with the latest disney ****. My knowledge about star wars is therefor limited to these sources.
will watch that last movies some time maybe. expanded universe has been excluded form canon by disney right?
I only watched the first movie of the Disney triology (Force Awakens?) and immediately gave up on it. Yes, EU has been excluded, but even Disney is slowly starting to reimplement it, because it is leagues better than anything they can come up with.
Iâm not particulary high level and yet when I read genius claims like âcataphract arenât too expensive to upgrade because you save ressources on bloodlines/blast furnaceâ I donât feel confused the slightest. Anyway, if I remember correctly such a place exist, itâs a discord server where pros and casters can indeed give their opinion without any noob in sight.
Well you are talking extremes, but something might make sense when you read it but it turns out to be coming from a limited perspective. I think it is important to show player elo next to our name, because it is a good indication of substance behind words. Also it is considered BM to ask for player rank. Currently we can only see names, which means we need to vaguely remember what level each of the regulars on the forums are at to put it in perspective. It gets really complex.
If I am walking on the street, I immediately spot who is better at solving my math question; the kid or the adult⊠This forum is like getting a written down math answer and then I have to interpret from that answers how credible the answer is⊠obviously problematic.
For the record: I think i have to say i know nothing based on that graph. Can i respond to this thread?
I like how players react on suggestions. Reading them mades me a better player. I like interaction. Interaction is completely fine. Just dont let those ânoobâ decised the balance changes. I agree pro players have a much better understand of balance changes than lower rated players.
I hate lower rated players who just dont listen to reactions on there threads. If something must be done is banning such players.
They can assume, but assumptions provide a much weaker base for intellectual dismissal, than confirmation bias does.
This is actually based on my own concept of Ghost Democracy, where there are no polticians, and everyone contributes anonimously with their own constructed ideas, as long as they can make a coherent case for them, based in logic and observation.
It would eliminate the present popularity contest issues that democracy has, and be the end of career politicians and parties.
I guess it would be true if people were 100% rational, it would work, but unfortunately people arenât always like that and will give too much importance to their assumptions. Regarding the idea of at least ELO being displayed, I guess it depends whether most people with higher ELO will react well or not. Actually it could go the other way too: people with lower ELO could accuse people with higher ELO to defend the meta they are comfortable with without minding the rest of the playerbase. I guess in the end it truely depends more on how people react to the ELO than by how much seeing ELO helps guide the debate.
Counterpoint : Iâm around like 12xx DE and I like to believe I have pretty good insight on balance and civ design. (The fact that I barely play ranked might have something to do with my advertised elo though )
But I agree with @SpartanCow696 in the sense that people posting balance suggestion should have a decent knowledge of the meta and how the game is played at a high level if they want to be taken seriously.
You donât have to be 1800 (ofc it wouldnât hurt) but you should at least have a reasonably good knowledge of how the game plays out at a 1800 level. Of course this is not to say inexperienced players shouldnât be allowed to complain about issues they face, but it will always be taken as a request to learn how to deal with a specific situation rather than actual feedback on the balance of the game.
Iâm glad this sparked a discussion.
)
)
Iâve been playing multiplayer since late 2015, man. I got like more than 3k hours on both HD and DE combined.