|
On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote:
How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous.
I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot.
Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal.
I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW.
Ofc it is a skill, i know someone else implied it it not. But honestly that's not even the question which is important here, the real question is:
Is it a skill/task which adds somethign positive to the game?
I really don't think it does. All it does is place an obstacle between a new player and the game. It's a burden of knowledge.
There are lots and lots of these cases in any "strategy game", things people have to memorize to play the game in a more effective way. Usually these add actual decisionmaking to the game though.
An example would be knowing different builds and being able to adapt during a game depending on the scouting information.
The black fog of war doesn't really add anything outside of having to learn the map though. Any player playing the map often enough will simply memorize the important parts and that's it. The only real positive value this would have is if learning the map in itself would be fun. Think of adventure games where not everything is shown on the map, simply because discovering it is part of the fun. That's hardly the case here though.
About your statement that you don't wanna remove skills. Imagine a bw version where you would have to answer a quiz question every 2 minutes for some benefit. That surely would be another skill which isn't in the current version of bw, but i doubt you would argue we should "keep" it right? Does it add anything positive to the gaming experience is the important part after all.
|
On May 21 2018 04:37 Gorgonoth wrote:
I actually think the SC2 FoW detracts. In BW its another skill facet of having intimate map knowledge. It is tough on new players, but I like the challenge, and the upper hand you can have when you have that lazer like precision clikcing into the black, and knowing the expansion pattern.
It works exactly as the question mark in mario kart 64 illiteracyhasdownsides talked about : it fucks up newbies who don't know the mechanic, and once they know it, they deal with it just fine 100% of the time. No strategic play comes from expecting your opponent to not now where to click his scout.
I support SC2 FoW.
|
I agree with the SC2 style. It improves the accessibility of the game. I don't think it lowers the skill ceiling.
|
I actually like the black fog since you have to study the maps but I agree that not everyone wants this,especially newer players or casuals. I would remove it from ladder but just let the tournaments turn it on in created games. Simple.
|
On May 21 2018 09:18 Golgotha wrote:
I actually like the black fog since you have to study the maps but I agree that not everyone wants this,especially newer players or casuals. I would remove it from ladder but just let the tournaments turn it on in created games. Simple.
Why would you want it in tournaments, in which player usually know the maps anyway? This mixed up rules is usually a bad idea. Ladder is as official as it gets and those rules should be carried over
|
On May 21 2018 09:27 10dla wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 09:18 Golgotha wrote:
I actually like the black fog since you have to study the maps but I agree that not everyone wants this,especially newer players or casuals. I would remove it from ladder but just let the tournaments turn it on in created games. Simple. Why would you want it in tournaments, in which player usually know the maps anyway?
Because if that's how the pros want it and the pros get what they want.
|
On May 21 2018 09:29 Golgotha wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 09:27 10dla wrote:On May 21 2018 09:18 Golgotha wrote:
I actually like the black fog since you have to study the maps but I agree that not everyone wants this,especially newer players or casuals. I would remove it from ladder but just let the tournaments turn it on in created games. Simple. Why would you want it in tournaments, in which player usually know the maps anyway? Because if that's how the pros want it and the pros get what they want.
Can you post that pro survey? Pretty sure the pros arent allin on that wrist destroying playstyle and would prefer a smoother experience
|
On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote:
How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous.
I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot.
Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal.
I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW.
Introducing custom hotkeys also removed a skill facet. Some players had better hand coordination, and spent hours practicing macroing patterns.
I don't see anyone complaining about it now.
Of course there's skill to both. But we could introduce a bunch of other, retarded, skill facets that wouldn't at all make BW a better game. So there's no point in assuming that BW is as good of a game due to ALL of it's current characteristics.
There's room for improvement to the current system of FOW.
On the other hand, placing buildings on unexplored territory is a solid candidate for an argument against making it completely SC2 like.
|
All black is good. It gives a clear distinction between parts of the map you've scouted, and parts you haven't. This makes it easier for people to realize the possibility of a hidden expansion, or the location of a cheese.
On May 21 2018 09:32 niteReloaded wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote:
How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous.
I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot.
Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal.
I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW. Introducing custom hotkeys also removed a skill facet. Some players had better hand coordination, and spent hours practicing macroing patterns. I don't see anyone complaining about it now.Of course there's skill to both. But we could introduce a bunch of other, retarded, skill facets that wouldn't at all make BW a better game. So there's no point in assuming that BW is as good of a game due to ALL of it's current characteristics. There's room for improvement to the current system of FOW. On the other hand, placing buildings on unexplored territory is a solid candidate for an argument against making it completely SC2 like.
Rofl. You expect people to keep complaining for years about something they can't change any more? Most likely the people that hate the custom hotkeys, like myself, refuse to use them, and possibly refuse to play with people that use them.
I personally would like to be part of the second group as well, but that would mean I would never be able to play ladder. Not that I'm playing the game much anyway, maybe 5 games every 5 months. I've got Blizzard to thank for that!
|
Why don't we clear up the terminology first.
Fog of war = graying out areas where your units/buildings do not have vision
Unexplored = blacking out areas where your units/buildings have not visited
Fog of war is definitely needed. No one disputes that.
Making maps fully explored at the beginning of a match is an interesting idea. We should not reject it outright. For example, pros have enjoyed pre-explored versions of foreign maps previously.
That said, I would not want pro matches to be on pre-explored versions because the unexplored areas are nice visual cues for viewers on what is going on in the game. Also, for middle-level players, the black areas also serve as memory devices about where their units have been.
Maybe if Blizzard ever introduced a "map of the week" system where a new foreign map is featured, it might be nice to play it pre-explored.
|
On May 21 2018 09:09 TwiggyWan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 04:37 Gorgonoth wrote:
I actually think the SC2 FoW detracts. In BW its another skill facet of having intimate map knowledge. It is tough on new players, but I like the challenge, and the upper hand you can have when you have that lazer like precision clikcing into the black, and knowing the expansion pattern. It works exactly as the question mark in mario kart 64 illiteracyhasdownsides talked about : it fucks up newbies who don't know the mechanic, and once they know it, they deal with it just fine 100% of the time. No strategic play comes from expecting your opponent to not now where to click his scout. I support SC2 FoW.
Not even slightly true. The SC2 FOW allows someone to place buildings across the map instantaneously. I assume you mean that because you say you support SC2 FOW. . But as it is now, it adds a layer of mechanical complexity.
It isn't a mechanic to ""know"" its something that require a bit of APM and attention.
That said, the idea of a revealed grey but still unbuildable FOW isn't as bad, but I still prefer the way things are.
|
And many people suggested how that oh we could add dumb surveys just to make it harder, and more skill. I dont think anyone is seriously thinking that we should just add as many weird skills to make it as hard as possible for new players.
That aside, This is my reasons why the skill of black maps(for lack of a better phrase) is one that should stay.
1.Revealed bases in SC2 keep the players mind thinking about possible hidden bases, or just opponets bases for that matter. IE it does the thinking for you. BW dosen't hold your hand. All the awareness you need to have about your opponent is 100% in your brain.
2.Non build able FOW is extra APM and attention that you have to juggle when you are placing buildings faraway.
3.If you are planning attacks or future engagements, in SC2 one could scan the area and form a mental picture. In BW this could be done in revealed areas, but if it wasn't you'd be in the dark which makes it challenging. The Black forces people to think more about the map and what things are in the way.
|
On May 21 2018 11:16 Gorgonoth wrote:
And many people suggested how that oh we could add dumb surveys just to make it harder, and more skill. I dont think anyone is seriously thinking that we should just add as many weird skills to make it as hard as possible for new players.
That aside, This is my reasons why the skill of black maps(for lack of a better phrase) is one that should stay.
1.Revealed bases in SC2 keep the players mind thinking about possible hidden bases, or just opponets bases for that matter. IE it does the thinking for you. BW dosen't hold your hand. All the awareness you need to have about your opponent is 100% in your brain.
2.Non build able FOW is extra APM and attention that you have to juggle when you are placing buildings faraway.
3.If you are planning attacks or future engagements, in SC2 one could scan the area and form a mental picture. In BW this could be done in revealed areas, but if it wasn't you'd be in the dark which makes it challenging. The Black forces people to think more about the map and what things are in the way.
You do realize that a pitch black area could also trigger a: "Hey, i havent been there yet....maybe i should do something!"? And since when is it a good idea to start a building sequence with a worker across the map? Especially when you have to stay above X minerals.
"The Black forces people to think more about the map and what things are in the way.". Once again: You can simply have a map layout picture on a second screen
|
Pre-explored map is...
(*) Good for new players (won't lose workers in weird corners of the map, will more easily see strategic options)
(*) Bad for spectators (shape of revealed area reflects the course of the game so far)
(*) Irrelevant for pros
Therefore, I'd support it as an option for the game host, which should likely be set to "no" in tournament games. I'd use it in casual games.
|
On May 21 2018 12:28 Djabanete wrote:
Pre-explored map is...
(*) Good for new players (won't lose workers in weird corners of the map, will more easily see strategic options)
(*) Bad for spectators (shape of revealed area reflects the course of the game so far)
(*) Irrelevant for pros
Therefore, I'd support it as an option for the game host, which should likely be set to "no" in tournament games. I'd use it in casual games.
ASL uses Starcraft 2 minimap settings for months. It cant be that bad, otherwise they or Blizzard would have changed it by now. Or have you seen negative feedback on that one in here?
|
I've actually thought about it every now and then over the last few years.
I would support a pre-explored map with unbuildable FoW.
When I was back to the game, It also stopped me from playing maps on non-FS or maps I don't generally know because it's annoying to not know where to expand or some intricaties like where are entrances or ramps to bases before you actually expand.
I don't think unexplored maps require any more skill than explored ones, they just require more grind.
Explored maps would have definitely helped in having people play more maps, but honestly it's kind of too late already.
|
On May 21 2018 12:43 10dla wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 12:28 Djabanete wrote:
Pre-explored map is...
(*) Good for new players (won't lose workers in weird corners of the map, will more easily see strategic options)
(*) Bad for spectators (shape of revealed area reflects the course of the game so far)
(*) Irrelevant for pros
Therefore, I'd support it as an option for the game host, which should likely be set to "no" in tournament games. I'd use it in casual games. ASL uses Starcraft 2 minimap settings for months. It cant be that bad, otherwise they or Blizzard would have changed it by now. Or have you seen negative feedback on that one in here?
Oh wow, I hadn't realized that at all. Is that only for spectators though?
|
On May 21 2018 08:06 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2018 07:05 Freakling wrote:
FOW free map versions are one of the main features requested by players whenever new (foreign) maps are used in a tourney. So there is definitely a demand, and on any level of play it is definitely good if players have a way to familiarize themselves with a map by just playing it and not having to worry about getting their scouts lost and not knowing where to expand.
It would be pretty easy to add it as a feature for standard melee/ladder play and a proper implementation could fix some of the issues, such as the need to keep mains blacked out to prevent initial enemy buildings and creep from being automatically revealed and giving away one's opponent's starting position, that preplaced buildings and resources can still be rightclicked, or the fact that already scouted areas cannot be distinguished from unscouted ones (by adding a darker FOW, like in SC2).
Just make the feature optional and require both players to agree on using it, and every one should be happy. Tourney hosts can then decide on their own whether they want to allow it for their games or not. You know those maps with the checkboard-style fog-of-war? That seems like a good compromise because you can see the map, but can't place buildings in spots you haven't explored.
Yes, that's one thing I thought about and why I think a proper implementation is needed. First of, checkerboard style actually appear as a chackerboard on the minimap, so appearance is not optimal, secondly, it is incredibly laborious to actually make a checkerboard style map version (for a normal 128² map you have to set ~128² / 2 = 8192 tiles in the FOW layer by hand – ideally you do it once and then just reuse the template map by copying in Terrain and units from the desired map, changing map description and triggers accordingly etc. That's a lot less work).
On May 21 2018 08:20 Uldridge wrote:
1. Maps are symmetrical (broadly speaking), so you should know the general vicinity of where to click to scout
You need to know the specific kind of symmetry beforehand, though. And on odd-spawn (3/5/7-player) maps people still tend to click at the wrong spots and get lost while scouting. And while symmetry can hep you guess the ṕotential spawns of your opponent, you'd still have to do a lot of extra scouting just to find out where to get a good third (especially in ZvP you want to know that before scouting).
2. You frequently revisit your scout while you're scouting in order to know what's up with your scout But knowing in time that you fucked up your scouting does not really solve the issue…
3. Why is it such an issue anyway? Both players have incomplete knowledge, it's not a one way street. Your point?
I really don't understand why this is an issue anyway. What does it actually gain you when knowing the exact terrain set? Are you going to cheese the first (few) time(s) you're playing the game without scouting? Is this what bothers you? Then you probably aren't aware of the effect that many players tend to cheese on maps unknown to them precisely because they don't know anything about the map and thus want to avoid more complex strategies. Having full disclosure of terrain and expansion locations from the start makes it easy to do an ad-hoc adaption of any standard build (unless the map is very nonstandard in some way – and even then actually seeing the map can help you determine what might work and what not, shifting the problem from screwing up players from the get-go, thus making them hate, fear and avoid an experimental map without ever really having explored its potential, to having to make up a creative strategy on the go, which is actually a worthwhile skill for a player to have).
As a previous poster said: lost game because he didn't know exactly where the minerals were (but don't you check up on your unit you want to harass with?). Sure, certain stuff of the game will be demanding (like harassing at a semi-safe part of the map and guiding the harasser there + fending off an attack + macro), but that's the brutal nature of the game: you need to fully rely on yourself in order to win. As you said, it's pretty demanding to play BW, dozens of things demand your attention and management, so having to form a mental model of the map on top of that can be pretty hard. You only get glimpses of certain spots at a time, can't really process all the details. Even knowing "minor" details like whether the main has a ramp or where the natural is located and how its choke looks before you send out a scout can make a lot of difference (for example when determining the build order and when to send out the first scout).
On May 21 2018 08:23 Gorgonoth wrote:
How is extremely intimate map memorization not a skill? This is the dictionary definition of skill: The ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance If player A knows Fighting Spirit so well that he basically has a map in his head without even having to look at the minimap, down to the trees and small doo-dads, then he has a skill. Removing the black fog of war means that it is easier for people to memorize maps and think about bases their opponents has. I'm not saying that knowing a map is a crucial or even really impressive skill, but to blanketly say it isn't a skill is preposterous.
I also totally agree with starecat, seeing the minimap is a visual aid that keeps people thinking about hidden expansions and whatnot.
Also placing buildings in places you can't see is actually quite a big deal.
I would not want these things go away, because removing skils is one of the primary reasons I dislike SC2 in comparison with BW.
And how do people develop that "skill", i.e. forming a detailed mental image of the map? By going into single player and using "black sheep wall" and/or building a few buildings, by staring at a map picture, by going into ScmDraft and using its fabulous analyzer tools and ability to place buildings quick and easy, or by having very quick and dirty cheese games full of trivial errors and disorientation.
Non-black fog of war allows you to learn a map just by playing it and, by providing a lot of important info in-game, to develop more mature strategies quickly, which is a lot more fun than the alternatives.
You should not just look at the problem from the perspective of a high level player, playing competitive games on a relatively small map pool.
Non-black FOW is…
- … good for new players who don't know any maps, players who want to learn new maps, players who want to play on diverse maps, players who just happen to play on a new map for the first time.
- … good for map makers to promote their maps and make them more attractive to players by lowering the entry hurdle, thus helping to diversify and evolve the map pool.
- … good for tournament organizers, casters, spectators and replay watchers, who gain additional presentation tools (you could simply make the feature toggleable in replay/observer mode).
Now what really matters is proper implementation, to find the best compromise to meet every one's demands:
- Of course the new unexplored FOW would have to be distinguishably darker than normal FOW, both in the map and minimap.
- It would have to solve the issues of normal prerevealed FOW (revealing opponent's buildings and creep, allowing building placement, allowing right-clicking on neutral buildings and resources)
- It would have to be optional and both players would have to agree to use the option before the game starts (so no one feels cheated, it's would be mostly meant a convenience option for players trying out maps they don't know well).
- If the feature is activated, make it an additional tap-toggle option, so players can idividually set it however they want.
- Ideally replays should give away the FOW settings used in some way, so tourney hosts have a convenient way to enforce their own rules regarding this (this could be problematic with the replay format, though, even though only a single flag would have to be added somewhere).
|
Its a good idea for improvement of the game, there can be done many other things, but bw community is full of old school purists which sort of hinders the game from development. Bw is my favorite game, i play it since 2001, but i welcome any positive change because everything has room for improvement.
About FoW map being part of skill or strategy. Its simply not true, thats just obstacle. Let me explaing why. Having map visible is actually way more beneficial to strategy and skill, because you can plan your strategy, tactic and expand pattern ingame by seeing the map all the time, you will play more precise and better games will be delivered on less known maps, how is that hurting the game? Its also is great for new players and saves you time which is a HUGE benefit. We are in 2018, i think time for praising some primitive standarts and obstacles that just hinders the players from experiencing the game in its full potential had already passed.
|
On May 21 2018 10:01 B-royal wrote:
Rofl. You expect people to keep complaining for years about something they can't change any more?
Have you read this forum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
