|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
Current Version
Old Version
1. The tileset is now Jungle, instead of Twilight. Why? Because...
2. Only Jungle has a tile called "raised jungle." Raised jungle is important because it is the only tile in all of Starcraft that is a) higher than ground yet b)does not impede vision
... and this tile was used to make the borders for the mains in the new Longinus.
Thus, Longinus has Guillotine/Cultivation Period - like same-level chokes created by walls, except units have vision as if it were flat land.
As far as I know, this is the first time a main was constructed like this, so it should be interesting. Sorry Terrans.
3. There are now 10 mineral clumps in the main, instead of 9 from before. Sorry Zergs.
4. The expansions at 12, 5, and 9 are now only accessible by small units (like 815) and are not connected to the middle ground.
5. The middle ground is now mostly un-buildable terrain.
Two other bits of important map news
1. The neutral warp gates that were at each expo spot in Arkanoid have been replaced by four zerg cocoons with 250hp each(Kerrigan's cocoon from old missions). Who knows how this changes gameplay.
2. Changes made to New Peaks of Baekdu:
a) one of the two ramps to the main is blocked by a small patch of minerals
b) there is now gas at the nat (!!!)
c) the ramp to the cliff that leads from the nat to the middle has been enlarged.
|
wow neat. i thought terrans would own up longinus so maybe not as much now ;-!
|
Longinus looks interesting. Hopefully it won't be yet another P>T>Z>P map.
|
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ?
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ?
Usually, the problem is if a map is somewhat balanced PvZ, then it'll be horribly T>>Z
Terrans just have the best map adaptability... those stim-addicted bastards.
|
nice.
sick of Luna tileset 
|
On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ?
Mercury, Bifrost
|
lance pierces moon! moon no jungle!!111
|
|
|
On August 10 2006 06:50 IamLove wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ? Mercury, Bifrost
PvT on these maps is as ugly as PvZ :/
|
On August 10 2006 06:59 SP)diQ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2006 06:50 IamLove wrote:On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ? Mercury, Bifrost PvT on these maps is as ugly as PvZ :/
If that's the case then the answer has not yet been found. I don't understand every aspect of this game, I don't think anyone does, and I'm not an experienced map creater either, but what I'm getting at is that if the reasons for P>T on a map are the same for Z>P on a map, then if we make a map which is completely balanced PvT we won't have such Z>P imbalances. I'm probably wrong, but this P>T>Z>P scenario must have a reason...
All responses welcome.
|
On August 10 2006 07:05 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2006 06:59 SP)diQ wrote:On August 10 2006 06:50 IamLove wrote:On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ? Mercury, Bifrost PvT on these maps is as ugly as PvZ :/ If that's the case then the answer has not yet been found. I don't understand every aspect of this game, I don't think anyone does, and I'm not an experienced map creater either, but what I'm getting at is that if the reasons for P>T on a map are the same for Z>P on a map, then if we make a map which is completely balanced PvT we won't have such Z>P imbalances. I'm probably wrong, but this P>T>Z>P scenario must have a reason... All responses welcome.
It usually just comes down to travel distances between expansions and large center area battleground and flanking opportunities. P wants that against T just like Z wants that against P. So I think 3 player maps are -in theory- bad for PvZ, since zerg can get the extra main and not protoss etc.
But games on this map may turn out cool anyway so.
|
in general p>t and z>p tend to come together because the same map styles account for both. large open spaces good for mass unit maneuvering and flanking. not too easy for t (in pvt) and p (in zvp) to secure econ safely, but easy enough for the opposing races to get enough econ to get their large masses going.
|
Wait, on second thought, I forgot about the narrow ramp, so protoss may treat the highground expansions like islands and secure their third gas (for PvZ). This may very well be a greatly balanced map for all matchups, only question remaining then TvZ, since terran should be able to use those ramps and highground for something TvP. Awesome.
|
|
|
Min only is there 2 allow P double expo PvT as a counter 2 T fast CC.
|
On August 10 2006 08:19 SP)diQ wrote:
Min only is there 2 allow P double expo PvT as a counter 2 T fast CC.
Terran can't fast expo here easily or at all. There's no ramp to defend main.
|
wow, seem to be very interesting, btw, what will pgt map pack be next season?
|
The amount of minerals that has been placed on Longinus is much higher than any other map I can think of. 10 at main, 8 at nat, 7 at min only and 8 at 2nd gas expo is alot and this will definately favour toss players imo. Just compare it with LT for example (8+8+6) or Luna (9+7+6) or some other map.
And also this is only the 2nd map after Neo Forte with 10 minerals at the mains.
Things like these do have an impact on the game, and I don't see many people taking this into consideration when judging a map for balance. Just my opinion.
|
It looks like a really fun map. I hope it's included in PGT10
|
On August 10 2006 08:31 Luhh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2006 08:19 SP)diQ wrote:
Min only is there 2 allow P double expo PvT as a counter 2 T fast CC. Terran can't fast expo here easily or at all. There's no ramp to defend main.
I disagree, I think games on this map will use build orders very similar to the ones we saw at Blizzcon , Signal really comes to mind. A depot and a rax looks like it would make a semi-wall (big enough to let units walk through, but only in line formation). So I think you would be safe for the most part. At a closer look, mutalisks look like they are at a serious disadvantage when it comes to harrassing workers, there is really no inaccessable terran behind any of the naturals, and the mains are situated quite safely.
edit: I was talking about TvZ  , but I think on TvP you will be safe as well, as the base distance looks quite far to begin with, and you can probably position tanks behind the wall that surrounds your main to snipe units setting up for an attack.
|
I'm afraid the gas at nat on Peaks of Baekdu will make it a greatly zerg favouring map, especially in ZvT
|
On August 10 2006 08:37 Death-Link wrote:The amount of minerals that has been placed on Longinus is much higher than any other map I can think of. 10 at main, 8 at nat, 7 at min only and 8 at 2nd gas expo is alot and this will definately favour toss players imo. Just compare it with LT for example (8+8+6) or Luna (9+7+6) or some other map. And also this is only the 2nd map after Neo Forte with 10 minerals at the mains. Things like these do have an impact on the game, and I don't see many people taking this into consideration when judging a map for balance. Just my opinion.
Yeah, I remember seeing a highlight on the old version of Longinus, it was a PvT and very much a macro game terrant trying push and protoss trying to rebutt keeping his expansions alive. The toss won in the end in that game.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ?
Bifrost, P=T Z>>>P
|
On August 10 2006 06:28 HonestTea wrote:
1. The tileset is now Jungle, instead of Twilight. Why? Because...
2. Only Jungle has a tile called "raised jungle." Raised jungle is important because it is the only tile in all of Starcraft that is a) higher than ground yet b)does not impede vision
R-Point? Aren't the islands on R-point higher ground yet you can still see them.
|
On August 10 2006 09:14 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ? Bifrost, P=T Z>>>P
unless FA is playing then its definately P >> Z
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On August 10 2006 10:36 [X]Ken_D wrote:
R-Point? Aren't the islands on R-point higher ground yet you can still see them.
Bingo. Yep.
On Longinus though, it's the first time that they used that terrain for the main.
|
On August 10 2006 09:14 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2006 06:40 Reason wrote:
Is there a possible correlation between a map where P>T and the Z>P?
Could those imbalanced be present for the same reasons?
Could a map perfectly balanced PvT be extremely imba ZvP ? Bifrost, P=T Z>>>P
Yeah, I was about to say....
|
|
|
Why exactly do map makers change the number of mins in main? Can anyone tell me what effects this has on balance. I know some builds are only possible with 9 min blocks etc, and that with 10 blocks you can support 4 gates
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On August 10 2006 11:08 ShabZzoY! wrote:
Why exactly do map makers change the number of mins in main? Can anyone tell me what effects this has on balance. I know some builds are only possible with 9 min blocks etc, and that with 10 blocks you can support 4 gates
Think of it this way.
A marine is 50 min. One min cluster has 1500 min. In TvZ, that's 30 extra marines, which will make a big difference. On the other hand, 1500 extra minerals is 60 zerglings, but in ZvT against MnM+tank those extra zerglins won't make a big difference. Zerg needs to counter mmf with lurkers or defilers, which take gas gas gas.
In TvP, Tosses usually get the most milage out of extra minerals because zealots, goons, and shuttles are all very important units but they are mineral-intensive. To counter that, Terran needs tanks, so he has to worry about gas.
|
Baltimore, USA22254 Posts
I get the feeling this map will make for some very interesting games. Can't wait to see it in action. ^_^
|
|
|
Braavos36375 Posts
(sorry) OFF TOPIC
every time i look at this thread i just crack up, it always reminds me of the word "longina" which means a large, loose vagina
so when the topic is like "massive changes to longinus"
its just a word that is inherently dirty
|
|
|
On August 10 2006 11:08 ShabZzoY! wrote:
Why exactly do map makers change the number of mins in main? Can anyone tell me what effects this has on balance. I know some builds are only possible with 9 min blocks etc, and that with 10 blocks you can support 4 gates
HonestTea explained it well, so I'd just add to his the fact that both terran and protoss almost always goes for continuous worker production while zerg must balance with unit and larvae. So zerg not only prefers gas instead of minerals, but also their lower worker count means their benefit compared to 8 only patches is less than the benefit protoss and terran receives.
|
|
|
Oh god why do they keep adding the amount of minerals in the mains? now you can make as much shit off of one base as you can on hunters, which is a gay map.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
hm well there are more reasons why hunters aint too good a map, other than mineral patch #s so...
|
It's possible to play a low tank / high vult game TvP, but it's kind of tricky to do on Bifrost, so you have to take that 2nd gas base.
|
On August 10 2006 12:12 thedeadhaji wrote:
hm well there are more reasons why hunters aint too good a map, other than mineral patch #s so...
hm well there are even more reasons why hunters indeed is a good map.
|
I think the change of adding gas to the nat on Peaks will really help toss vs Zerg, weaken Toss vs T and strengthen Z vs T. ; [
|
Taiche
France1963 Posts
On August 10 2006 06:28 HonestTea wrote:
1. The neutral warp gates that were at each expo spot in Arkanoid have been replaced by four zerg cocoons with 250hp each(Kerrigan's cocoon from old missions).
 I loved how the neutral Gateways looks, replacing them with some slimy zerg is too bad.
|
will someday be a map that is p>z z>t and t>p simultaniously?
=/
|
I like the new changes. Hopefully this will be a part of WGT/PGT mappacks, as it looks quite fun.
|
I'm predicting a lot of FE on Longinus, especially 14 CC. A quick barracks after CC can block the choke pretty well, eh? In PvZ, looking at the space outside of the nat, I'd imagine we're in for some bitchin' lurk contains. Check out the arc you get compared to the tiny opening!
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On August 10 2006 17:14 Aileon wrote:
I like the new changes. Hopefully this will be a part of WGT/PGT mappacks, as it looks quite fun.
If it can be downloaded from somewhere, then sure.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
i know we can extract maps from replays...
now all we need is a prog that turns images into maps!
|
Terran can tank the hall of the small-ramp expos fromt he middle. This will be telling.
|
|
|
About arkanoid:
Does anyone know if cocoons come with creep under them? It's been a long time since I played the campaigns and I don't play UMS maps, so I wouldn't really know.
If it is true that cocoons come with creep under them, then it provides a distinctive advantage to Zerg in terms of expansion timing and IMO is necessary for balance purposes.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On August 11 2006 10:32 Mortality wrote:
About arkanoid:
Does anyone know if cocoons come with creep under them? It's been a long time since I played the campaigns and I don't play UMS maps, so I wouldn't really know.
If it is true that cocoons come with creep under them, then it provides a distinctive advantage to Zerg in terms of expansion timing and IMO is necessary for balance purposes.
No worries, I know for sure, no creep
|
Well, then what's the point of the change? I don't get how it will effect balance.
And IMO it would be a good thing to have creep there, because a P or T with 2 base right off the bat will stomp all over a Z with only 2 base. Fast expo every game gogo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://kr.img.dc.yahoo.com/b6/data/game_newstar2/1155195209/ct.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.columbia.edu/~kml2013/Longinus2.jpg)
