|
I see alot of new maps and mapmakers here who show nice maps with great designs and funny ideas. However, there is one quite anoying pattern that goes trough all of them. Im not saying it's wrong, im saying its not preferable. Im talking about the gas placement.
When Blizzard made this game some things we later on would have appreciated (like up left/right ramps etc) were forgotten, or not made by intetion - what do i know. 1 thing they could have corrected by now, since the game has reached proffesional gaming status, is to fix that anoying gas issue.
This is common belief:
The problem is as following:
"People tend to use the placement since it is symetrical. Unfortunately the game doesn't work that way..."
I was talking to hefty the other day as he seemed to do the same thing, and he said that the WCG maps had the above shown placement [picture #1]. People tend to use the placement since it is symetrical. Unfortunately the game doesn't work that way... Personally i think its quite weird that wcg maps use that placement since a player can be really set back in certain MU's if he doesn't know he has to use 4 workers on the gas...
I was just pointing this out since i seem kinda nagging to be commenting on the issue every time a new map is released... If im mistaken please correct me, but this is what i learned from the mapcompetition this winter, and by experience i know it works this way. Consider this next time you release your new map and my reviews may be less harsh 
/Starparty
|
or we can place the gas one tile away and have optimum gas with at most two workers >:D!?!?!
|
right, that will be popular
|
I did not know that. Are there any tests on how many gas you lose when using only 3 gas on one of the "bad" gas positions? Why have I never heard of that before  ?
|
the position of the gas on certain maps is often much more vital than whether or not u need 3 or 4 workers.
if u need 4 workers to mine it, it is not the end of the end world.
|
Calgary26004 Posts
Look at the ratio of mineral workers to gas workers. Putting an extra worker on gas always yields better results than if that worker was put on minerals (except for Zerg in certain cases). I think you should always put 4 on gas.
|
On June 15 2005 03:47 Teroru wrote:
the position of the gas on certain maps is often much more vital than whether or not u need 3 or 4 workers.
if u need 4 workers to mine it, it is not the end of the end world.
Agreed. There are far worse issues with maps than that. It isn't evened mined much slower, either, and people aren't reviewing harshly based on that, anyways.
|
-
I don't believe this is an important issue or what you saying are true. I don't know how you've come up with this conclusion Starparty but the first time you told me I didn't believe it either.
To have the gas at bottom to the Main building doesn't slow down your gas ratio, haven't seen any evidence of this. No one has complained about this before, not even the progaming map makers... All geysers is at the same distance, I don't see the problem... The concept doesn't work anyway of things like; Terran are seiging at a cliff and can hit natural gas nod at 3 positions but not on the last one. It gets imbalanced.
Even if it were any differences I would still place the gas nods symmetrical because it feels stupid not to. I don't like to follow rules when I build maps.
-
If a player won over another and had the "right" gas placement, is it right to say that his victory is because of the "better" gas ratio? No, of course not. His victory is his own, won by clever strategies and fast thinking, good apm etc etc.
This gas thing you're talking about must be such a minor thing that players naturally coop for it when they play. They don't win because of "better" gas; they win because they understand that it's more important things to think about.
|
Zerg and Toss need 4 workers for optimal mining anyhow. -_-
|
17083 Posts
This is not a problem. In my maps, I either place all gas above the CC, or place it to the left and right, but two tiles above optimal so the other races don't benefit if Terran have an addon. It'll then take four for all races.
|
I just did a test on a UMS I made. I placed two refineries to the left and right of the CC as in the pictures Starparty posted. I also put three workers near each refinery. I created a game on Battle.net, and mined on one of the refineries for 15 minutes, then on the other refinery for 15 minutes. Here is what I found:
Left Refinery: 4512 gas mined
Right Refinery: 4080 gas mined
I would post the map I tested on, but I can't figure out how to do it so if anyone is interested just post or PM me and I'll add the map. Also post if you want any other details that I might have forgotten.
|
In my maps, I always try to put the main's gas on the top/left. I think once you expo, though, it doesn't matter as much, so I don't sacrifice symmetry for an extra worker.
|
15 minutes and the difference is a whopping 4XX gas... By then I have at least 3 geysers, and adding an extra drone on one isnt going to kill me or lose the game.
|
On June 15 2005 10:18 decafchicken wrote:
15 minutes and the difference is a whopping 4XX gas... By then I have at least 3 geysers, and adding an extra drone on one isnt going to kill me or lose the game.
Actually that's quite a big disadvantage for something that shouldn't exist - thank you thread creator for pointing this out to me - I know with the obvious bad geyser placements (such as old ladder LT), you need more workers, but I did not realize that by just simply having it face a certain direction it can also take away from maximum efficiency.
The point is not whether or not it is a "big" deal or not - this is an imbalance that everyone, especially mapmakers, should be aware of in the future.
|
-
I don't think this is such a big a deal, since so many maps are made this way. And people like to play them anyway. If you lose then it IS because your opponent was better in that game.
If you only are able to use 2 positions to place the gas then the map get imbalanced in a different way. One position could have the gas facing away from the cliff (tank can't hit it), another right next to the cliff (even goons without length can hit it). While one main has its gas facing away from the ramp, another could have it towards it. The gas and its probes get in the way for goons that have to chase away for example tanks.
|
On June 15 2005 09:23 Tuy wrote:
I just did a test on a UMS I made. I placed two refineries to the left and right of the CC as in the pictures Starparty posted. I also put three workers near each refinery. I created a game on Battle.net, and mined on one of the refineries for 15 minutes, then on the other refinery for 15 minutes. Here is what I found:
Left Refinery: 4512 gas mined
Right Refinery: 4080 gas mined
I would post the map I tested on, but I can't figure out how to do it so if anyone is interested just post or PM me and I'll add the map. Also post if you want any other details that I might have forgotten.
Thank you for proving my point.
Peatza, 400 gas is quite alot And the balance doesnt have to be affected just by placing the gases differently. Look up my map Jing&Jang posted some weeks ago, and see the placement there... All positions have equal starts, but all gasnodes are placed ok according to my pictures above. We follow rules like having enough space to build on, having enough space to fight on, and having long roads to travel to opponent on. Why not place gasnodes so they work properly for everyone too.
|
|
|
400 gas in 15 minutes IS a big deal. Just look at zvz. An advantage of three mutalisks after 11 minutes is a lot, that can very well decide the game. In future maps we should pay attention to this, now that we know about this problem.
And having 4 workers instead of 3 in the gas is really not that big a deal (It might be zvz, all other matchups you should have plenty of workers anyway), but remember that most players just don't know about that, they will mine with 3 players anyway. That's where it get's unfair.
|
the tests are not yet concluded.
you have only tested a 15 mintue game with 3 workers on gas.
the best test would be to compare the minerals u have after a 15 minute game with 3 peons on gas, and how many minerals u have in a minute game with 4 peons on gas.
400 gas IS a big deal. 1 worker missing out of 80 on minerlas is NOT a big deal.
The positioning of the gas according to postional balance is infinately more important than 3 or 4 workers on gas.
pls .
|
On June 17 2005 03:31 Teroru wrote:
the tests are not yet concluded.
you have only tested a 15 mintue game with 3 workers on gas.
the best test would be to compare the minerals u have after a 15 minute game with 3 peons on gas, and how many minerals u have in a minute game with 4 peons on gas.
400 gas IS a big deal. 1 worker missing out of 80 on minerlas is NOT a big deal.
The positioning of the gas according to postional balance is infinately more important than 3 or 4 workers on gas.
pls .
No, NOT when people don't realize that they will need the extra worker. It becomes a very deciding factor (expecially zvz, tvt), which it shouldn't be as it's just a map issue.
pls!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.freewebs.com/esx/wcgplacement.JPG)
![[image loading]](http://www.freewebs.com/esx/thegasissue.JPG)
