|
On July 12 2016 21:29 classicyellow83 wrote: So many players have problems with the new maps. They want them gone. >.< How surprising (that's sarcasm!). Seriously, these are still badly made and imbalanced. They did actually hardly fix any of the bugs I pointed out (although they at least did some of the obvious changes, but it's really too little)... At least the random cover tiles on Overwatch are gone, as a by-effect of making the high ground ring buildable. However, that and the extra ramp making the 3rd gas expansion much easier accessible will probably make this another Terran-favoured map – not what the meta need right now.
On July 12 2016 23:13 Peeano wrote:I've done little testing, but I think I found an error: After you kill 1 temple of the temple stack, the temple stack remains impassable terrain, but it does become buildable terrain. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Byl3LpU.gif) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QNWVshl.jpg) That's normal, it's just how stacked buildings work. You can do the same on Heartbreak Ridge (for example) Good practice would be to make terrain under stacked building blocks unbuildable, just in case. However, these map makers seem to understand painfully little about the underlying game mechanics of things, so they haven't got any good practices to avoid weirdness like this.
I've also found something that surprised me a lot: + Show Spoiler +Neither a probe, marine, firebat, medic, nor ghost could pass there, but a zealot could. Wtf? If that is intentional it's quite ingenious. (No, I didn't test with lings, yet) (My testing was done offline: singleplayer>scexp>custom) If Zealots fit through, lings do as well. The simple explanation is the difference in collision box height: Zergling: 16 px Zealot: 19 px Marine, Medic: 20 px Ghost, Firebat: 22 px Worker: 23 px A Zealot barely fits throught the gap here, anything higher gets stuck:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/85j7tju.jpg)
|
Netherlands4676 Posts
Thanks for clarification, Freakling. I didn't think of the different height n width in units tbh. I always thought a ghost was even tinier than a zergling, but I guess that's only true for the box width?
these map makers seem to understand painfully little about the underlying game mechanics of things, so they haven't got any good practices to avoid weirdness like this I think that's very sad and inexcusable bad for BW in general.
I wanted to make a thorough post on wall ins. I'm not gonna bother if there are this many problems already.
|
Also wanted to show these. It's a terrain level analysis (using chkdraft). green is low ground, red is high ground (sorry, red-green-blind people, I did not pick the colours, but if you cannot make out anything, I could colour-shift the pictures for you). Observe this weirdness:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Ko3KwIm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oF5dntW.jpg) To be fair, though, neither of these is particularly bad when compared many other popular maps. For the longest time there simply has no proper tool been around for efficiently finding and fixing these kind of bugs. However, now there is. It should be made good use of!
|
On July 13 2016 00:22 Peeano wrote: Thanks for clarification, Freakling. I didn't think of the different height n width in units tbh. I always thought a ghost was even tinier than a zergling, but I guess that's only true for the box width? Exactly. Zergling is 16 wide, ghost only 15 (hence they can pass Troy gates, but Lings cannot)
|
Netherlands4676 Posts
If you ask me ASL should just hire Freakling to make the maps or either have him educate Ragnarok[Valkyrie]...
|
On July 12 2016 23:13 Peeano wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2016 21:41 BisuDagger wrote:On July 12 2016 20:59 Seeker wrote: Lol, Overwatch map already? These damn clever Koreans. Taebaek Mountains looks fun but doesn't really look like a memorable map. But who knows, maybe I'll be proven wrong. The map is terrible for protoss. Two entrances into the main and you can't wall of either effectively. If anyone has time to test walls for any of the races, please post pics here. Do you mean into the natural? You're talking about Taebaek Mountains, right? I've done little testing, but I think I found an error: After you kill 1 temple of the temple stack, the temple stack remains impassable terrain, but it does become buildable terrain. + Show Spoiler +I've also found something that surprised me a lot: + Show Spoiler +Neither a probe, marine, firebat, medic, nor ghost could pass there, but a zealot could. Wtf? If that is intentional it's quite ingenious. (No, I didn't test with lings, yet) (My testing was done offline: singleplayer>scexp>custom)
Unit sizes
TL:DR: yes, thats normal. a zeal is only 19 wide while all units you mentioned are wider. Is that wall lingtight over the gate? in that case i like it. 1 gap wall blockable with 1 zeal.
€: already answered.
|
On July 13 2016 00:22 Peeano wrote:Thanks for clarification, Freakling. I didn't think of the different height n width in units tbh. I always thought a ghost was even tinier than a zergling, but I guess that's only true for the box width? Show nested quote +these map makers seem to understand painfully little about the underlying game mechanics of things, so they haven't got any good practices to avoid weirdness like this I think that's very sad and inexcusable bad for BW in general. I wanted to make a thorough post on wall ins. I'm not gonna bother if there are this many problems already.
do it anyway pls. If the map doesn't get ditched last sec, it will be valuable for viewers who are watching ASL and to the TL Coverage (Cast&Article)
I'd do it myself, but walls are not my strong suit. I can help u test though if u want (;
|
On July 13 2016 00:46 Cele wrote:TL:DR: yes, thats normal. a zeal is only 19 wide while all units you mentioned are wider. Is that wall lingtight over the gate? in that case i like it. 1 gap wall blockable with 1 zeal. No wall is ever ling-tight above the gate (unless there is a pre-placed unwalkable tile at the top right edge or something like a neutral egg plugging the gap, neither of which is the case here).
|
Bisutopia19152 Posts
On July 13 2016 01:26 Freakling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 00:46 Cele wrote:TL:DR: yes, thats normal. a zeal is only 19 wide while all units you mentioned are wider. Is that wall lingtight over the gate? in that case i like it. 1 gap wall blockable with 1 zeal. No wall is ever ling-tight above the gate (unless there is a pre-placed unwalkable tile at the top right edge or something like a neutral egg plugging the gap, neither of which is the case here). We need more neutral eggs.
|
Netherlands4676 Posts
I just want to note that in Celes' explanation, he mixed up units' width with height.
And if it can be confirmed that these maps are going to be played, I'd be happy to provide wall ins coverage. Otherwise I don't see the point.
|
Bisutopia19152 Posts
On July 13 2016 03:58 Peeano wrote: I just want to note that in Celes' explanation, he mixed up units' width with height.
And if it can be confirmed that these maps are going to be played, I'd be happy to provide wall ins coverage. Otherwise I don't see the point. Please do. They will be played and the effort would be greatly appreciated.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
adding neutral eggs doesnt solve the issue though, only placates it
|
Bisutopia19152 Posts
On July 13 2016 04:35 amazingxkcd wrote: adding neutral eggs doesnt solve the issue though, only placates it I was just being silly.
|
|
On July 13 2016 03:58 Peeano wrote: I just want to note that in Celes' explanation, he mixed up units' width with height.
And if it can be confirmed that these maps are going to be played, I'd be happy to provide wall ins coverage. Otherwise I don't see the point.
i did. My offer still stands to accompany you with testing though (;
|
You could call this a feature ;D
Yeah, that tank hole should have been plugged...
And by "can" you probably mean "workers go there on their own account", i.e. there is a worker migration problem through the gap?
They seem to also have realized the obvious differences in vision (and hence terrain elevation) between the ramps.
The unequal walling options at the nats are also a real positional balance problem (and even more so in ZvP): + Show Spoiler [Images] +
|
Netherlands4676 Posts
On July 13 2016 07:02 Cele wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 03:58 Peeano wrote: I just want to note that in Celes' explanation, he mixed up units' width with height.
And if it can be confirmed that these maps are going to be played, I'd be happy to provide wall ins coverage. Otherwise I don't see the point. i did. My offer still stands to accompany you with testing though (; I appreciate that but I feel it's easier to do it by myself. And it will take some time with making the right screenshots, so I'd feel like I'd be wasting your time.
|
looks like overwatch is still a garbage map lol
|
Netherlands4676 Posts
On July 13 2016 07:20 Freakling wrote: And by "can" you probably mean "workers go there on their own account", i.e. there is a worker migration problem through the gap?
Yep, I can confirm that's the case for 5, 7 and 11. I imagine it's true for 1 as well, but as I was about to test that I accidentally ended the game and I can't be bothered to redo it.
Edit: Just checked ygosu and it appears to be true for 1 as well.
|
On July 13 2016 08:05 Peeano wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2016 07:20 Freakling wrote: And by "can" you probably mean "workers go there on their own account", i.e. there is a worker migration problem through the gap?
Yep, I can confirm that's the case for 5, 7 and 11. I imagine it's true for 1 as well, but as I was about to test that I accidentally ended the game and I can't be bothered to redo it. It's a minor issue, though. Even more so as all starting points have it to more or less the same extend. Actually, mining in general is surprisingly good for Overwatch (at least as far as Protoss is concerned). I could only find three major worker pathfinding bugs at the bottom 3rd as well as some fairly minor ones at the left mineral only(1), the left nat (1) ant the top 3rd (2).
|
|
|
|