On May 05 2018 05:55 [tyu38] wrote:
Gameplay changes will kill this game...
Gameplay changes will kill this game...
its not gameplay change per se, it's some sort of mining bug
Forum Index > BW General |
TT1
Canada9990 Posts
On May 05 2018 05:55 [tyu38] wrote: Gameplay changes will kill this game... its not gameplay change per se, it's some sort of mining bug | ||
AntiHack
Switzerland553 Posts
"I am happy with the 20th anniversary console skins, but if you have any specific feedback, you are welcome. Please add" omg "The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players" They could implement a chat commant to let better players to jump to (let's say) 2000 MMR in order to make the lower ladder less savage and more new-players-friendly. "Please add a re-match option to match opponents. If this option is added, it may be possible to eliminate the integrity of the opponent's opponent by repeatedly defeating the opponent in order to win the victory, but this is an option that can be considered sufficiently." Maybe a single use per day "Please allow the race to change when a match (before the mirror) occurs. What player should change their tribe if a match-up occurs? When both players are given the right to change, what if they change to the same race? Should we change the race again? It may happen that the two players continue to change to the same race and the game does not start. So, before we add this feature, we'll have to look carefully at what is going to be the best way." I dislike racepicking in general but they could implement it in a way that in case of mirror I have a single use turn based race switch and the opponent can see my race change so he can act accordingly in order to avoid the mirror match if he care about it. EDIT: The first guy have 10 seconds to change his race then the same for the second one. EDIT 2: Only if the player have "avoid mirror matches* option enabled somewhere in the options. | ||
AntiHack
Switzerland553 Posts
On May 05 2018 01:57 GGzerG wrote: Woah this is awesome! Hopefully they nerf siege tanks... ![]() xD | ||
![]()
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
- PTR for changes to mining where certain start locations were previously disadvantaged (wonder which one it was? probably either minerals above or below the CC/Nexus/Hatch?) - STUN support has eliminated the need for port forwarding as well as allowed TR20-24 in most matches (in Korea anyway) - SD resolution filters to mimic the effects of old CRTs to make it look more natural/nostalgic - Projectile ("sprite limit") increased from 2500 to 5000. May increase further with enough demand, but this should suit all but the most frenetic 4v4 games. - New ladder system will be deployed soon, and it will require placement matches (probably integrating more modern skill-based matchmaking like SC2). There will be seasonal rewards as well. - Will investigate a Map of the Week system (personally I hate MotW for various reasons), but nothing in the near term. - ASL maps are in for the new season, and the map pool will contain new maps each season (3 seasons per year). - The last used lobby name is remembered when joining/creating games. - Ranked games cannot be manually created, they can only use the automatic matchmaker (avoids wintrading). - No rematch option (avoids wintrading). - Team matchmaking is coming this year. - Clan systems coming eventually, not anytime soon. - Unsure about how to support racepicking because it's possible to get into a situation where you're constantly counterpicking the counterpick (we already figured out a solution to this on ShieldBattery, and it's not that complicated! ???) - The matchmaker will support skill rating decay (if I'm interpreting "MMR auto drop" correctly) There were also some funny things like "a starting value of 1500 MMR is too high" which... huh?? It makes absolutely no difference... | ||
MarcoJ
Germany146 Posts
| ||
TelecoM
United States10665 Posts
| ||
bovienchien
Vietnam1152 Posts
| ||
bovienchien
Vietnam1152 Posts
Player don't scare strong opponent, player scare to wait a long time. In the Starcraft, different mmr but not different level much. | ||
-NegativeZero-
United States2141 Posts
| ||
![]()
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
An interesting list of stuff. I'm still not satisfied with the SD graphics. I hope they can add resolution options because that will help fix the problem. | ||
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
![]() Damn, this is amazing. BW is in good hands. This is gonna take brood war to new great heights. So good to hear that they are listening and constantly improving. I'm looking forward to placement matches. Sick. | ||
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 04 2018 23:59 TT1 wrote: PTR for possible mining changes? :o https://i.gyazo.com/ef8bd17af62ee96dd9b8edb79241351a.png Looks like a KR dev is replying to a bunch of popular requests? this is google chrome's translate: + Show Spoiler + Mentors, Commanders, Executives Hello. I sincerely thank all those who gave feedback during the talk with the development team last March. Community Your feedback is very helpful to us. Since StarCraft is a very special game for a lot of people, the classic game team will do their best to get feedback from the community and to continuously improve the StarCraft play experience. Below you will find answers from the development team on the key feedback you've received from your previous development team. Reported issue: Lek (delayed phenomenon) First, I apologize for those who have recently experienced the Rake phenomenon. We have recently identified bottlenecks in proxy servers, which have caused problems with in-game leaks, and we were able to significantly reduce the burden on proxy servers through server-wide patches over the weekend. We have been able to confirm that the number of reports on game in-rack phenomenon has greatly decreased since the patch, but we will continue to look at this issue and improve it. In addition, in January, support for STUN decreased the incidence of waiting room and game in-rack phenomenon (aka "overlapping") due to network conflicts between players. We will continue to improve our network experience, and we strive to quickly identify and correct the cause of network related issues. If you are experiencing network problems with StarCraft, please feel free to leave a comment on the current status of your environment by visiting the information request post posted on the latest tech support bulletin. Your feedback is a great help in identifying the root cause of network-related problems and finding specific solutions. User Interface Performance The performance of the user interface over the last few months has been greatly improved, especially after the game is over, the profile screen, the leaderboard screen, and the account panel. Most recently, Battle.net player profile performance optimization was done through patch 1.21.5. I've put a lot of effort into improving user interface performance for quite some time, and I hope that your experience has improved significantly over the last year. Game Latency (Latency) StarCraft: Since the release of Remaster, we are working to improve the network code. This improvement is part of the optimization work to support STUN no longer requiring 6112 port opening (port forwarding), and to support turnaround 20 and 24. Turn-around 24 is the same turn-around rate as the LAN play environment, and we are pleased to be able to experience the same experience with LAN on Battle.net. Finding opponents Latency in games (latency) In Korea, 75% of the opponent match games are played with a turnaround of 24, and 97% are played with a turnaround of 16 or more. One of the difficulties in finding a global battlefield is the fact that the majority of Starcraft: Remaster's playable population is in Korea, and there are occasions when players in Korea play against players other than Korea occasionally. In this case, This can be increased. In recent months, the algorithm for finding opponents has been able to reduce latency by changing to favor opponents between geographically close players, but balancing is still ongoing. We strive to find the right balance, and constant feedback from our community is very helpful to achieve this. Custom game latency (latency) Proxy servers and STUN servers have been added to make Starcraft more playable than ever before, without worrying about 6112 ports. StarCraft: Because Remaster's network system uses P2P (personal-to-personal), there will be more latency if there are more players in the game. We recommend that you use the Dynamic Reaction Rate Support setting when creating a custom game to get the best latency in your game. Custom game "network conflict" (aka "overlapping") Within a customized game, network conflicts, or "overlaps," are understood to mean that players in the game are either not connected well or not connected at all. The current version of the delay bar shows the connection status between the local player and another player, but it does not show the connection status between all players. Therefore, we are looking at a user interface that allows you to see all player-to-player connections via the delay bar. In addition, STUN support has been added and the frequency of this "overlapping" phenomenon has dropped significantly. After clicking on the Join Game button, the game waiting list will be displayed late . We will investigate this issue further. The delay of whispering (Iamarag) Let me investigate this issue in more detail. SD graphics after remaster are not as bad as before StarCraft: At the time of Brood War, the game ran at 640x480 resolution. When you were playing a game with a CRT monitor (or a memorable time!) Or LCD monitor, the way to display this small image on the monitor screen was determined by the monitor. Most of the time, I used the way the images were enlarged to fill the screen. There are a number of algorithms that hardware uses to enlarge images, and at the time of Brood War, the algorithm used depends on the monitor brand and model. In addition, the algorithms differ depending on the type of launcher or launcher you use. In other words, this means that players may have different experiences and that not everyone will remember the same old SD graphics. To alleviate this, we've applied some of the most popular algorithms to let you choose from the options menu in the form of filters, and most players seem to be satisfied with this. However, there are still other possibilities open and you can consider adding more algorithms to the options menu if you tell us in the form of a screenshot that compares the previous and current views. Bug where workers can pick minerals faster at a specific starting location During the remake of StarCraft, we decided not to change the gameplay aspect of StarCraft. This is evident in the fact that StarCraft: Remaster can still run the 1.16.1 version of the replay and that the gameplay remains exactly the same as before. We think it is very necessary to approach the StarCraft: Remaster's game play in any form of change very carefully. However, if you think that the majority of players should make a difference in gameplay, they will listen. We have recently created a public test server (PTR) environment and will begin the process of applying experimental builds to this environment so that players can connect and play and then provide feedback. I think the gameplay changes you have asked are things you can test through this open test server environment. Valkyrie sometimes stops attacking Historically, StarCraft has always had certain limits on sprites, units, and bullets. Valkyrie (and Photon Cannon) will stop the attack if the bullet limit is exceeded. We have increased the bullet limit from 2500 to 5000 with StarCraft: Remaster. We believe that the current figures are sufficient because we are unlikely to reach these limit values in one-on-one matches (though, of course, this may still occur in 4-to-4 customized games with many units) . However, if our judgment differs from the actual result of your game, please ask us to let us know with a replay so we can investigate. Profile statistics are incorrectly displayed There have been some statistics issues since launch, but we've recently fixed various statistics issues. If you are still experiencing statistics issues, please let us know about the BattleTag and its symptoms so that we can verify it. Mouse sensitivity is inconsistent in windowed mode We will investigate this issue further. Please let me know a little bit more information about your operating system and so on. Replay is not running The EUD and Super Speed (2x, 3x etc) replay will not work properly. If you are having trouble with an EUD or non-EU environment, please send us a replay. Random disconnects Please let us know BattleTag and we will investigate further. Feature Requests: Formal ladder (league level) One of the top goals of the development team is to end the system frontier league and start an official new season with the league tier system. We are working on this in full swing and we expect to be able to apply it soon. New ladder system placement game The new ladder system will have to be added to the system to complete the placement game. New Ladder System Statistics / Statistics Initialization In the new season, statistics / statistics initialization will be done, and the records of the previous season (Frontier League) will be kept. Please add rewards such as portraits to the ladder. A compensation system will be added as part of the new ladder. Add a Map of the Week system to the ladder. It's a good idea, and I think it's a feature you can consider adding in the future. Prior to this, it would seem that changing the map to a very short cycle would have an impact on the overall performance of each ladder season. I think this is a feature that we can look at as a feature that allows a random player to only play against a random player . Options for playing the player and rating on the chat channel This function can be used to give victory to a certain player, etc., so that the competence of finding opponent can be deteriorated. I hope the ladder map list is updated more frequently. The list of maps will be updated regularly. We plan to have three seasons each year, and the map list will be updated every season. Add ASL map to ladder map list. It is already underway, and we will consider adding community-generated match maps to the ladder in the future. Please add clan system and clan tournament system. We plan to add the clan system to the game, but it is not scheduled for the nearest roadmap. Suggested list of maps: How to use Touhon and Circuit Breaker as fixed ladder maps We also agree to use Touhon and Circuit Breaker as fixed ladder maps. Improved wait time when disconnected (disconnected) from other players At present, StarCraft allows 45 seconds of response time when connection is bad. However, I think it is possible to greatly reduce the waiting time in this age. Improving Artificial Intelligence Now that we are dealing with artificial intelligence through the planned BWAPI integration, we believe more options will be available. Other than that, there is no plan for near-term work to improve artificial intelligence. Options that increase the maximum number of people in a custom game You might be able to add it as a custom game option, but it is not included in the roadmap in the near future. Please increase the maximum number of players available to 10, 12, etc. Taking into account the current phenomena we are trying to improve and the P2P network framework StarCraft is using, it will be difficult to increase the maximum number of players that can be involved unless we are reorganizing the entire network framework. As the maximum number of players increases, the lag phenomenon will also increase. Please add Team Match Match (2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4). Yeah! We plan to add this feature in 2018. Please add a re-match option to match opponents. If this option is added, it may be possible to eliminate the integrity of the opponent's opponent by repeatedly defeating the opponent in order to win the victory, but this is an option that can be considered sufficiently. Please update your 20th anniversary console skin. I am happy with the 20th anniversary console skins, but if you have any specific feedback, you are welcome. Please add 16 resolutions to SD graphics . We wanted SD graphics to be as compatible with the remaster as possible and to keep the original Brodwar experience as good as possible,Adding a resolution can have a negative impact on this pure experience. There is no "absolute" of course, but it is not included in our roadmap at this time. Please add an option to adjust the resolution in the window mode. I think the 'resolution' that you gave me is the size of the window mode. Please allow the race to change when a match (before the mirror) occurs. What player should change their tribe if a match-up occurs? When both players are given the right to change, what if they change to the same race? Should we change the race again? It may happen that the two players continue to change to the same race and the game does not start. So, before we add this feature, we'll have to look carefully at what is going to be the best way. Race by Race in Profile This feature is currently being added to the user interface along with a new ladder (league level) system. Customize Make your game classification (filter) easier in the user interface of the game. Let's take a look at this. Please add an option to auto-save the waiting room name. Yes, this feature has been added with the 1.21.5 patch! Ability to play on only one selected ladder map except for other maps This feature will be difficult to apply because it changes the way players interact in ladder games. Please make a blizzard production map. We also want to add a Blizzard production map, but this is a lower priority than other feature requests. Ability to ignore in-game conversations is now available via the / dnd <player name> command. Make a dedicated channel for people who are interested in team-play games. We are currently looking at ways to reorganize your channel list, and the features you mentioned may be part of this reorganization. MMR auto drop function is required. The current roadmap includes adding some sort of MMR auto-drop system. Minimap scaling for large maps (over 128 * 128 sizes) is an interesting comment and we'll take a closer look. I would also like to hear from others about this feature. Add a magistrate mode to the ladder (aka "saint") You can consider it from a long-term perspective, but it is not included in the roadmap in near-term days. Others: I do not want to change the balance. We also agree! I have been looking at ways in which a player with a high MMR can create a new identity and play at a lower skill level to solve the problem, and there were many good ideas out of the comments you left. There is a lack of punishment for inappropriate language use such as profanity. I agree that I need a better interface and system for this. There are too many maps in the ladder map list. At this time, we will not change the number of 7 ladder maps and 3 map exclusions, but you can continue to check the overall community feedback and adjust if necessary. Match your opponent too much in finding opponents. At this time, there is no separate system that prevents you from meeting the same person again. You might consider adding these features, but some players who like to re-engage with their talented counterparts may not welcome these features. Therefore, I think that this is a problem to think about. Starting MMR (1500 points) is too high. The starting MMR is only a central point in the rating system. If you lower the starting MMR, it will simply lower the MMR of all players. Please let us play all EUD maps. Unfortunately, it is not possible to apply all EUDs in StarCraft: Remaster. In particular, EUD maps that change graphics are currently not available in the emulator. There are players who use nuclear programs. At present, StarCraft is using the best anti-nuclear software (even the best in the game industry) among the Blizzard games. If you witness a player suspected of using a nuclear program, please inform us with the replay and we will take corresponding action. StarCraft: There have been no reports of actual use of the nuclear program since the release of the remaster. However, some players have exploited gameplay-related bugs that could be unfair, so we will focus on preventing this behavior in the future. Illegal Websites Spam Messages Illegal Websites Some progress has been made in the prevention of spam messages, and we will continue to do so in the future. The rak phenomenon has disappeared. Fortunately, the! Thank you all for your support! We would like to thank all the Korean players who have provided support and support to StarCraft. We will continue to do our best to further improve StarCraft with the community. I doubt engine-side mining bug fixes will ever be a a thing. The reason is just that they are just the tip of an iceberg which is the BW pathfinding algorithm. There is no quick, isolated fix for that. You'd have to rebuild a completely new pathfinding engine from scratch. This would obviously be a huge intervention into game mechanics that would have all kinds of hared to predict and balance changing implications. On the other hand, these issues are pretty much solved on the editor and map making side, it's just that the Korean map making scene and Afreeca still haven't fully caught up on some of the finer details, but that'll happen sooner or later. So what's left is players who do not really understand the underlying mechanics playing old maps without pathfinding optimizations and complaining about it to Bizzard. Just update the maps (current ladder maps at least). It's easier. Sprite-limit related changes, on the other hand, are easy to implement and test (and then revert if deemed necessary). So they'd go on with that. I don't understand how Valk freeze bug is still a thing to be honest. It's litterally just a number. The 2500/5000 limit is not the weapon sprite limit, however, but the overall sprite limit (including everything from map sprites to units to spell effects to weapons). I agree that players running their own nuclear programs might pose some potential problems ![]() | ||
SuGo
United States681 Posts
They're just fixing that. It's not going to change anything. I think, specifically, if you're at 11 or 7 on FS, the bottom most mineral patches allegedly "mine faster" or "boost." I'm not saying I agree or ever could notice this, but according to koreans these type of things are prevalent. That's all the mining fix will do if I'm correct. Obviously no game play change. To us foreigners we wouldn't ever notice or abuse it (because we aren't good enough to use that minor advantage). And I think there's more maps than just FS that have this type of "glitch" But at a top level, if 1 mineral patch does indeed mine faster, that's a big deal, even if it's marginally faster. | ||
Alpha-NP-
United States1242 Posts
| ||
integral
United States3156 Posts
On edit: to clarify, the mining animation is the same length for every single worker unit on every single mineral patch. However, certain return angles are simply much faster than others due to the way workers accelerate and decelerate. Test it with stacked minerals and adjust worker placement to certain angles and you can see how it's not even the patch to nexus placement that matters so much as the worker's placement when it begins mining the patch. I'm just a casual/UMS player and we've known this about the stacked minerals on spawn defense since at least 2006, certain starting positions have to adjust a worker's placement on the patch in order to achieve optimal mining speed. I'd be shocked if pro players didn't know this stuff already with the number of times they practice their build orders. I can easily make a video on this if people need to see it. | ||
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On May 05 2018 07:17 GGzerG wrote: Well zergs [usually] try to at least get to minimum saturation [1 crystal = 1 drone] so they should get the full impact of the mining efficiency decrease, whereas races that get an excess amount of workers would see the efficiency dropoff, but in all cases, it would just be a universal [very slight] increase in the mining rate. I dont think there anyway for it to be discrepant, whatever the ratios of workers to mining rate there was before, will remain, but just with a better efficiency [for everyone, in the same ratios].Wouldn't this mining bug affect a certain race more so than others? Like Zerg for example generally doesn't have as many workers, are they absolutely sure this isn't going to affect the gameplay as in like Zerg or another race being able to collect minerals faster or I guess it wouldn't matter since it would affect all races, it would basically stay the same? I'm really curious to know what exactly would change... | ||
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 05 2018 22:58 ProtossGG wrote: Guys, the mining thing they're talking about is, for instance, on FS; there are mining patches in certain positions that "mine faster" or have a "boost" -- The korean community has talked about this for a while now, since 1.16 days actually on Fish. I've seen it brought up in videos in the past before. They're just fixing that. It's not going to change anything. I think, specifically, if you're at 11 or 7 on FS, the bottom most mineral patches allegedly "mine faster" or "boost." I'm not saying I agree or ever could notice this, but according to koreans these type of things are prevalent. That's all the mining fix will do if I'm correct. Obviously no game play change. To us foreigners we wouldn't ever notice or abuse it (because we aren't good enough to use that minor advantage). And I think there's more maps than just FS that have this type of "glitch" But at a top level, if 1 mineral patch does indeed mine faster, that's a big deal, even if it's marginally faster. You are wrong to assume that this would change nothing else though. Pathfinding, collision detection and unit properties and movement iscripts all play into this. You could try to change either of these, but assuming that it would affect nothing else is just naïve. On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to create mineral formations that have at lest 3 very fast mining patches (important for avoiding delay on the 6th worker) and average mining rate deviation of 2% or less for any game situation (depending on race and saturation mostly). Gas mining is a lot more problematic, actually, as you can generally only balance 3 worker mining rates within 10% for different map positions, if you really know what you're doing. Still, clever geyser and doodad placement can go a long way. Apart from that, the biggest source of slowed down mining is actually the Comsat Station getting in the way of workers on right-hand-side minerals. Would you want to change that as well? By doing what? And again, it is very easy to mitigate this almost completely just through map making by using the right kind of mineral formation (have been doing it for years on my maps). On May 05 2018 07:17 GGzerG wrote: Wouldn't this mining bug affect a certain race more so than others? Like Zerg for example generally doesn't have as many workers, are they absolutely sure this isn't going to affect the gameplay as in like Zerg or another race being able to collect minerals faster or I guess it wouldn't matter since it would affect all races, it would basically stay the same? I'm really curious to know what exactly would change... Well, you are still thinking in too simple terms as mining between races is not equal to begin with (because of the different collision sizes of their respective resource depots – which you cannot make equal just like that because if would completely screw up building placement and wall-ins players are used to). Zerg is probably the race that profits the most from idiosyncratic worker behaviours (metastable mining paths with minimized deceleration on return in most cases). However, good mineral layouts can again help. Pathfinding region layout will always remain a big joker, however, as good or bad regions can completely screw up, or in some cases improve, worker pathfinding. And no one is going to create a new pathfinding engine from scratch, as balance implications are too severe. | ||
zerglingling
131 Posts
Since workers already rely on a dirty hack to work at all (no collision when mining), I don't think that adding some extra exceptions to mining movement towards nearby patches will affect much, maybe you'll have to do some adjustments to micro when harassing workers with zealots or lings, I could live with that. Unlike other BW quirks, this bug adds nothing of value to the game. | ||
Freakling
Germany1526 Posts
On May 05 2018 23:46 integral wrote: Adding on to what freakling said about mineral patches that mine faster: this isn't a bug, it's specifically related to the position of the worker on the patch and the angle of return to the worker building. Mapmakers are aware of this and able to compensate for it, pro players should be expected to learn which patches are the best to mine early and even how to place their workers for optimal mineral return speed, and a saturated mineral line shouldn't see significant differences for any spawn position on any well-balanced map. If there's a mining difference for any spawning position on any map then something went horribly wrong in testing, or it needs to be modernized. On edit: to clarify, the mining animation is the same length for every single worker unit on every single mineral patch. However, certain return angles are simply much faster than others due to the way workers accelerate and decelerate. Test it with stacked minerals and adjust worker placement to certain angles and you can see how it's not even the patch to nexus placement that matters so much as the worker's placement when it begins mining the patch. I'm just a casual/UMS player and we've known this about the stacked minerals on spawn defense since at least 2006, certain starting positions have to adjust a worker's placement on the patch in order to achieve optimal mining speed. I'd be shocked if pro players didn't know this stuff already with the number of times they practice their build orders. I can easily make a video on this if people need to see it. Whether it's a bug or not is a matter of perspective. It's definitely a quirk (or rather a whole collection of little quirks), and one that players who understand it can derive advantage from through some worker micro and clever building placement. However, a major problem is that during the whole of the Kespa era maps underwent no systematic testing at all for mining efficiency. Mains are usually reasonably balanced, in most cases, because players have nothing else to do than watching their workers during early game while doing regular playtesting, but nothing more. On May 06 2018 00:43 zerglingling wrote: Differences in mining efficiency make it harder to balance a map, as if the fake-iso graphics didn't make it difficult enough already. If I recall correctly, gas is also affected by this, making you sometimes choose between making a geyser require 4 drones, or making the geyser more vulnerable than its mirror on the other side of the map. Since workers already rely on a dirty hack to work at all (no collision when mining), I don't think that adding some extra exceptions to mining movement towards nearby patches will affect much, maybe you'll have to do some adjustments to micro when harassing workers with zealots or lings, I could live with that. Unlike other BW quirks, this bug adds nothing of value to the game. So what would be the solution? Giving mining workers air-pathfiding? That would have them always travel at direct angles, but also ignore unwalkable terrain, you could mine over cliffs (or get workers tuck on them when distance mining). Maybe (just maybe) workers could be made excempt from long-range pathfinding when mining and near enough a resource depot, but that would only fix issues caused by bad region layout, which is only a small percentage. Speaking about pathfinding regions: If you are looking for a major source of positional variety/imbalance, this is it. And you cannot really fix it, unless you consider a complete switch to FPM-style non-isometric maps an acceptable price. Again, map making has advanced far enough by now that mineral mining imbalances should be a non-issue, and fixing it is hard only in the sense that it requires some in-depth knowledge on the part of the map maker. The main issue is that the knowledge has not really spread far yet. Gas mining is another pair of shoes, though. As I said, we can only balance that within about 10%, which is a deficit of ~30 gas/minute on three workers. Some of it (though not all, and the rest is mostly still a mystery, as far as I can tell) is related to worker respawn locations (clever building placement, or alternatively doodad/unwalkable terrain placement by the map maker) can fix some of that. But I guess rewriting the function that guides respawn positions (or writing a new one specifically for geysers, as, if I understand it correctly, the current one is also linked to units spawning from buildings or via triggers) could improve some of the issues without affecting anything else. | ||
wimpwimpwimp
167 Posts
On May 05 2018 23:46 integral wrote: Adding on to what freakling said about mineral patches that mine faster: this isn't a bug, it's specifically related to the position of the worker on the patch and the angle of return to the worker building. Mapmakers are aware of this and able to compensate for it, pro players should be expected to learn which patches are the best to mine early and even how to place their workers for optimal mineral return speed, and a saturated mineral line shouldn't see significant differences for any spawn position on any well-balanced map. If there's a mining difference for any spawning position on any map then something went horribly wrong in testing, or it needs to be modernized. On edit: to clarify, the mining animation is the same length for every single worker unit on every single mineral patch. However, certain return angles are simply much faster than others due to the way workers accelerate and decelerate. Test it with stacked minerals and adjust worker placement to certain angles and you can see how it's not even the patch to nexus placement that matters so much as the worker's placement when it begins mining the patch. I'm just a casual/UMS player and we've known this about the stacked minerals on spawn defense since at least 2006, certain starting positions have to adjust a worker's placement on the patch in order to achieve optimal mining speed. I'd be shocked if pro players didn't know this stuff already with the number of times they practice their build orders. I can easily make a video on this if people need to see it. Trying to clarify this even further: Not only can you increase mining speed by noticing which mineral patches mines the fastest and keeping your workers mining these in low worker count scenarios, you can also increase mining speed by optimizing the path taken by individual workers to individual mineral patches. For example, the second (from the top) mineral patch at the 12 o clock starting position in python mines quite slowly if you just casually send your worker to it, but if you manually set up the worker to mine it from a more horizontal angle, it will mine it very fast. This is just another fun part to study about Brood War and I hope Blizzard doesn't try to change it. | ||
| ||
![]() StarCraft 2 Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations
StarCraft 2 • HeavenSC StarCraft: Brood War![]() • musti20045 ![]() • davetesta27 • Dystopia_ ![]() ![]() • LaughNgamezSOOP • sooper7s • AfreecaTV YouTube • intothetv ![]() • Migwel ![]() • Kozan • IndyKCrew ![]() League of Legends Other Games |
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
Maru vs TriGGeR
Rogue vs NightMare
The PondCast
Replay Cast
OSC
Online Event
SOOP
DongRaeGu vs sOs
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
SC Evo League
[ Show More ] WardiTV Invitational
Chat StarLeague
PassionCraft
Circuito Brasileiro de…
Online Event
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Chat StarLeague
Circuito Brasileiro de…
Wardi Open
PiGosaur Monday
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
|
|