EPTand i dunno about that thing
i only knew that
terran >>> protos >>> zerg
talking about 3 peons on gas
4 peons all gather the same
[Mapmaking] The gas issue! - Page 3
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
and i dunno about that thing i only knew that terran >>> protos >>> zerg talking about 3 peons on gas 4 peons all gather the same | ||
|
Peatza
Sweden393 Posts
So theoretically a map that first wasn't viewed as being imbalanced, suddenly is it? Seems pretty strange, in any case it's easily fixed with another version but it feels like... why bother? People who may have liked a certain map very much before suddenly "don't like" it sounds also kind of strange Look in you Map folder, nearly all maps has at least one gas placed wrong. Blade Storm, Alchemist, Bill137's Astral Eclipse and even his newly released Ash Rose. The Progaming map makers I believe knew about this long before us, still they continue use the placement that they feel suits best over the correct one. And no, we do not have any language barrier and making crude remarks on a obvious typo may be your style. Your "hypothetical situation" doesn't make a clear point since there are a lot more factors then gas position that can win the game into your favour. Maybe all the showmatches where the one who lost had a wrong gas, should be replayed? People don't give a damn. Absolutely this is something that Blizzard has to fix in the next patch (has someone even told them about this). Hopefully there may be one with all the new hacks running around just now. We can't say for sure, but I like to think that a new patch will be released someday and the gas issue will be fixed. And if that stands true, then we have edited all our maps to work with only two gas positions when suddenly all four works! | ||
|
ihatett
United States2289 Posts
Second, moving the gas around often has a much large effect that requiring 1 more peon on gas. Third, the fact that no one has noticed anything, no one has complained, build orders have worked just fine and now everyone if shitting their pants saying how big of a deal this will have as if we haven't been playing like this already. Moving the gas is more game-breaking than requiring one extra peon. | ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On June 20 2005 16:13 Peatza wrote: Look in you Map folder, nearly all maps has at least one gas placed wrong. Blade Storm, Alchemist, Bill137's Astral Eclipse and even his newly released Ash Rose. More importantly, on my maps the geysers in the *main bases* are balanced and fair. I usually try to avoid having a big difference between the nats as well, with less strict constraints on the remaining geysers. Because it's the ones in the main bases that will have the biggest impact on the game. As long as the others aren't HUGELY different with 3 workers on them, they are okay in my view. On June 20 2005 16:13 Peatza wrote: The Progaming map makers I believe knew about this long before us, still they continue use the placement that they feel suits best over the correct one. The progaming map makers are not omniscient. Just because they don't do it consistently doesn't mean that we shouldn't care. On June 20 2005 16:13 Peatza wrote: Absolutely this is something that Blizzard has to fix in the next patch (has someone even told them about this). Hopefully there may be one with all the new hacks running around just now. We can't say for sure, but I like to think that a new patch will be released someday and the gas issue will be fixed. And if that stands true, then we have edited all our maps to work with only two gas positions when suddenly all four works! I have a feeling that the ground unit movement in the game was not designed with this degree of equality in mind. For all we know, it might be impossible to change without rewriting the entire unit movement engine. And don't forget that any change, especially one to such a central and probably stable portion of the code, will introduce many additional bugs that will require a lot of testing to bug-fixing to resolve. In the end, the demand for fair geyser and mineral mining simply won't be enough to justify spending so much money on such a widespread change with very small gain. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On June 20 2005 16:25 ihatett wrote: Moving the gas is more game-breaking than requiring one extra peon. I wouldn't be so sure about that. Keep in mind that requiring one extra peon will affect EVERY SINGLE GAME where a player occupies that location. On the other hand, how many games do you see where the positioning of the geyser could have made a significant difference? And don't forget that smart map makers will design parts of their map around this asymmetry, to minimize the effects of the asymmetrical geyser positioning. So it's only fair to ask this question on maps where different geyser positioning was taken into consideration in the design from the beginning. | ||
|
ihatett
United States2289 Posts
According to you: The hell it isn't. If you don't put 4 workers on a geyser that needs 4 (i.e. to the right or below) then you WILL have to modify your build order to adapt to the lack of gas. It is VERY NOTICEABLE. I guess we can through most maps out of the window, now. Plus, we have had this forever, yet you act like this is a plague that is about to overtake us. We haven't had the dire problems you describe. When you require maps to be that asymmetrical, you are bound to have positional imbalanced. edit: stupid typo | ||
|
hefty
Denmark555 Posts
It's not fair to say I make crude remarks. When you wrote earlier that you might have misunderstood med due to difficult words - believing that we have what I chose to call a language barrier was a natural assumption. I'm not trying to patronize anyone, but when I debate I hold ground until someone makes me realize that I'm wrong. You haven't, and I haven't convinced you. I'll conclude that we wont agree on this and will stop wasting my breath on this matter. This is no personal thing guys, I still got much <3 for your work. That goes for both of you. NB. Thanks for the contribution, Bill. | ||
|
LazySCV
United States2942 Posts
| ||
|
8882
2737 Posts
On June 20 2005 06:16 GrandInquisitor wrote: IT DOESN'T MATTER if the gas isn't the entire cause of your defeat. It still contributed and ought to be fixed. -_-;;;; On June 20 2005 05:09 Peatza wrote: - If you lose against someone, then you have no right to say that you played or can play better then him. Doesn't matter who you are, if you lose then you lose because he played better(in that game). This is how I see it but it doesn't entirely hold true every time, there are major bugs that may cost you your win and maybe you didn't play seriously. Don't do that to often though, it destroys your karma. "If players are playing exactly equally well"... it doesn't exist, the one with the best moves wins. Human nature, non-is equal... maybe in death. You battle to find out who's the best. This is if they both have proper gas placement. If you lose with a "bad" gas placement, then sure the worse position was a part of your lose but you can't blame entirely on that. He didn't win entirely because he had better gas and you didn't lose entirely because you had a worse one. I believe that most map makers and myself will slowly start using this system Starparty has pointed out but you should still be able to use the bad gas positions if you make sure that every counter expansion/base also gets one. it's quite funny that both of you play protoss and know much about zvz and gas in zvz IS important | ||
|
ihatett
United States2289 Posts
And it is fairly common advice to hear that tosses (and zergs?) should put 4 peons on gas. | ||
|
Starparty
Sweden1963 Posts
| ||
| ||
