Some bitching about "sat or obs"

[wastedlandering]

OK I'm getting kinda pissed about all my friends observing every game because they "sat or obs". It really fucking sucks as Titan when the games start and there are only 7 players because one is afk, and two spammed sat until the end.

If you spam a builder during selection period, no one will be able to pick the builder. Usually people will sit there and spam sat until the other person pusses out, or they both end up observing. While I love the programmed chicken contest, it is really getting annoying playing games with 6-8 players constantly.

I don't know anything about programming or map editing to give a solid suggestion. But I would rather people get fuckt because of their ping than constantly play under populated lobbies. I appreciate Neco's effort here, and I think he has a badass idea, but as it is now, it doesn't work at all. It also really fucks up new players who wonder why they never get the builder they pick.

tl;dr: this pick system doesn't work, let's just go back to old UP with the ring of builders around mound?

Edit: @neco

[Burn]

Or make a quick change to make -ap default until -up is fixed.

Old UP was still shit, force random is worse than sat or obs.

-Burn

[wastedlandering]

No, the old UP where it was first come first serve on the ring of builders with no forced random.

Never go back to AP. AP was garbage, nothing worse than a shit load of seeders and supports every game.

[Burn]

Eh, if what you say is true, I support. Even though I hated the ring because it is delay dependent, it's still better than sat/obs.

-Burn

[FollowingPath]

It doesn't have to be a ring of builders. Just add a stock system until -up is fixed.

[Remixer]

I still think it would be interesting to see limited pick system, meaning each builder has a team value, that determinates what other builders can pick.
For example:
Demonologist team value = 4.00 points
Magnataur team value = 3.50 points
Satyr team value = 3.50 points
Tauren team value = 3.00 points
Faerie team value = 2.50 points
Goblin team value = 1.50 points
Troll team value = 0.50 points
Gnoll team value = 0.50 points
Murloc team value = 0.50 points
Makrura team value = 0.50 points

Total team value = 18.50 points
Now lets say that maximum allowed team value is 15.00 points. This means that demonologist has to change (since he has the highest team value in that team) his builder to one with less team value, making it 15.00 points or less.'

Those team values are completely off-balance in this post, but with tuning we could really restrict the amount of certain builders. In my eyes a secondary factor, uniqueness point would also be required, meaning that if there is more than one of the same builder, it increases the team value even further, for example Demonologist' unique value could be 2.00, meaning that having 2 demonologists in the same team would cost 4.00+4.00+2.00 team points = 10.00 team points, leaving only 5 points for the rest of the team pretty much forcing all other builders to pick basers, 0.50x8=4, so for example Goblin could be also picked.

So Team Value restricts huge amount of different golders from being picked, and Unique Value would restrict picking of the same builder more than once (having e.g. 2 satyrs and still other golders would be pain in the ass), of course basers wouldn't have unique value at all or very little of it.

[FollowingPath]

@Remixer Even if picking the same builder more than once had a penalty, it would still be a step backwards in balancing. The main reason -up is superior is because it doesn't allow double tauren, double magnataur, or the dreaded double demonologist. Your system is basically -up but with allowed double picks. Except instead of screwing other people out of the builder they want by picking that builder, you can now do it by picking 2 of the same support.

Basically, the amount of supports compared to basers can definitely be a problem(which I'm guessing is what your mode is trying to fix), but not as much as 2 demonologists in the same game.

[Remixer]

@Remixer Even if picking the same builder more than once had a penalty, it would still be a step backwards in balancing. The main reason -up is superior is because it doesn't allow double tauren, double magnataur, or the dreaded double demonologist. Your system is basically -up but with allowed double picks. Except instead of screwing other people out of the builder they want by picking that builder, you can now do it by picking 2 of the same support.

Basically, the amount of supports compared to basers can definitely be a problem(which I'm guessing is what your mode is trying to fix), but not as much as 2 demonologists in the same game.

I'd much rather fight 2 of the same golders than a satyr, demo, tauren, magna, faerie and morph at the same time. You see that if there is 2 demonologists there is no space left for a single golder anymore, but of course e.g. demo or tauren unique value could be so high that it would restrict any more than 1 of that builder.

[Lynx]

You shouldn't be allowed to double pick. I do like having a value for each builder, it adds a bit more of a strategic element to the picking phase. Although I also believe it might be a very time consuming task for Neco and it's unnecessary for public games. However this would be a great mode for in houses, and it could be done via enforced rules (like 2 per base rule) instead of code.

[Remixer]

Lynx, true. But we certainly see too many golders in each game, with only 2-3 basers.

[Lynx]

A bit exaggerated but that is also true. The best games are when titans and builders are relatively even in their powered at 15 minutes. Which happens mostly when there is little pressure on titan and builders in the early game, that of which correlates with how many golders are in the game. Less golders -> less pressure.

[1337hamburger]

ez fix, remove satyr plz

[Burn]

First X players will get to pick non-lumber basers. Last Y players must pick builders with lumber bases.

This forces every game to have at least a few non-favourable lumber bases with workers in nuke range, or seed to feed. X= 8 & Y = 3 would work well. Could be X = 3 Y = 8 in in-houses.

Keep -UP, since two of any builder is faggot af. Game is more fun to play with variety, and prevents faggots from abusing flavour of the month (too much).

-Burn

[Remixer]

First X players will get to pick non-lumber basers. Last Y players must pick builders with lumber bases.

This forces every game to have at least a few non-favourable lumber bases with workers in nuke range, or seed to feed. X= 8 & Y = 3 would work well. Could be X = 3 Y = 8 in in-houses.

Keep -UP, since two of any builder is faggot af. Game is more fun to play with variety, and prevents faggots from abusing flavour of the month (too much).

-Burn

I did not quite understand what would prevent the 3 "lumber basers" from seeding? Also, can you name 8 non-lumber basers? The fact that the map is very sided for the builders' favor is pretty clear in my opinion, that is why i made the huge post in the Terrain Ideas thread.

Yes, maybe two of the same builders is not very nice to have, but we clearly are having too many golders, perhaps the Team value thing combined with unique pick?

[Burn]

Because seeding is feeding?

I don't need to name 8 non-lumber basers. The number can be adjusted. That's the point of X and Y.

-Burn