|
I think the base/expansion layout should be identical for all spawning locations. Like number of buildings needed to wall of, number of creep tumors to get down the ramp and similiar stuff.
I personally do not care that different spawn positions need a different strategy like it is on Metalopolis (close ground, close air, cross). That's benefitial for the strategy imho.
On December 25 2010 00:08 Goolpsy wrote:
So I would also like to know which maps you are refering to, if any?
Almost everyone for spawn location inconsitencies. LT, Scrap Station, Xel'naga, Metalopolis come to my mind 
This thread gives a good overview about the stuff (maybe ignore the suggestions but you should get the point).
|
personally i prefer spawning on the left side of any map. the reason being, i dont wall in, instead i prefer to sim city, and its much easier when my production buildings are to the right of my cc.
|
On December 24 2010 23:55 mierin wrote:
Green...please play zerg then talk about how Scrap is perfectly symmetrical.
you shouldnt consider scrap station asymmetrical, sure its not perfectly symmetrical but still considered as a symmetrical because it looks the same on both sides. Asymmetrical maps should be like Fantasy l and Fantasy ll where the start locations are completely different
|
On December 25 2010 00:23 Pulimuli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2010 23:55 mierin wrote:
Green...please play zerg then talk about how Scrap is perfectly symmetrical. you shouldnt consider scrap station asymmetrical, sure its not perfectly symmetrical but still considered as a symmetrical because it looks the same on both sides. Asymmetrical maps should be like Fantasy l and Fantasy ll where the start locations are completely different
That's the very fucking definition of Asymmetrical. One side is not exactly the same as the other.
"The two sides are not the same, but they're still symmetrical!"
No, stop. Just please stop. There are enough noticeable differences to "deem" it Asymmetrical.
|
On December 25 2010 00:24 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2010 00:23 Pulimuli wrote:On December 24 2010 23:55 mierin wrote:
Green...please play zerg then talk about how Scrap is perfectly symmetrical. you shouldnt consider scrap station asymmetrical, sure its not perfectly symmetrical but still considered as a symmetrical because it looks the same on both sides. Asymmetrical maps should be like Fantasy l and Fantasy ll where the start locations are completely different That's the very fucking definition of Asymmetrical. One side is not exactly the same as the other. "The two sides are not the same, but they're still symmetrical!" No, stop. Just please stop. There are enough noticeable differences to "deem" it Asymmetrical.
i know what asymmetrical is. But scrap station has a very small flaw. I think they ment to make it symmetrical and just screwed up a tiny bit. Its not ment to be an asymmetrical map like some maps are (Fantasy and Fantasy ll)
How would you descripe Scrap Station to someone who has never played it?
"asymmetrical as hell, the sides look nothing like each other and its complete chaos"
or
"the sides are mirrored, however the ramp is slightly further away in the top spot"
|
On December 25 2010 00:32 Pulimuli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2010 00:24 Fruscainte wrote:On December 25 2010 00:23 Pulimuli wrote:On December 24 2010 23:55 mierin wrote:
Green...please play zerg then talk about how Scrap is perfectly symmetrical. you shouldnt consider scrap station asymmetrical, sure its not perfectly symmetrical but still considered as a symmetrical because it looks the same on both sides. Asymmetrical maps should be like Fantasy l and Fantasy ll where the start locations are completely different That's the very fucking definition of Asymmetrical. One side is not exactly the same as the other. "The two sides are not the same, but they're still symmetrical!" No, stop. Just please stop. There are enough noticeable differences to "deem" it Asymmetrical. i know what asymmetrical is. But scrap station has a very small flaw. I think they ment to make it symmetrical and just screwed up a tiny bit. Its not ment to be an asymmetrical map like some maps are (Fantasy and Fantasy ll) How would you descripe Scrap Station to someone who has never played it? "asymmetrical as hell, the sides look nothing like each other and its complete chaos" or "the sides are mirrored, however the ramp is slightly further away in the top spot"
Classic case of "I'm going to make one side look totally bad and immature, and the other respectable and informative to try and exaggerate my point further. "
It's not just the ramp, it's the rocks as well. One side can have the rocks pathway blocked with one supply depot, the other takes far more than that. That's called imbalance and asymmetrical Johnny, sorry to bust your chops about that.
There are multiple things on both sides that are not symmetrical, then that makes it, guess what:
Asymmetrical!
|
On December 25 2010 00:47 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2010 00:32 Pulimuli wrote:On December 25 2010 00:24 Fruscainte wrote:On December 25 2010 00:23 Pulimuli wrote:On December 24 2010 23:55 mierin wrote:
Green...please play zerg then talk about how Scrap is perfectly symmetrical. you shouldnt consider scrap station asymmetrical, sure its not perfectly symmetrical but still considered as a symmetrical because it looks the same on both sides. Asymmetrical maps should be like Fantasy l and Fantasy ll where the start locations are completely different That's the very fucking definition of Asymmetrical. One side is not exactly the same as the other. "The two sides are not the same, but they're still symmetrical!" No, stop. Just please stop. There are enough noticeable differences to "deem" it Asymmetrical. i know what asymmetrical is. But scrap station has a very small flaw. I think they ment to make it symmetrical and just screwed up a tiny bit. Its not ment to be an asymmetrical map like some maps are (Fantasy and Fantasy ll) How would you descripe Scrap Station to someone who has never played it? "asymmetrical as hell, the sides look nothing like each other and its complete chaos" or "the sides are mirrored, however the ramp is slightly further away in the top spot" Classic case of "I'm going to make one side look totally bad and immature, and the other respectable and informative to try and exaggerate my point further. " It's not just the ramp, it's the rocks as well. One side can have the rocks pathway blocked with one supply depot, the other takes far more than that. That's called imbalance and asymmetrical Johnny, sorry to bust your chops about that. There are multiple issues with Scrap Station alone, stop trying to back pedal away from this. There are multiple things on both sides that are not symmetrical, then that makes it, guess what: Asymmetrical!
Just saying its not ment to be asymmetrical, i do however hate the map myself and think it should be removed from the pool!
also didnt know about the rocks, only complaint ive heard has been about the ramp on the top pos which zerg players usually whines about
|
The advantage of having them is that depending on where players spawn, the map can take on whole different aspects of gameplay for just one map. I realized this when designing a map myself two days ago. I'm specifically talking about 4-player maps that support 1v1.
Just look at Delta Quadrant, which is identical all the way around. The only variety that map has is when players spawn in cross positions. Close position spawns do not change regardless of what side each player is on. One player's backdoor is closer to the other, but the rush distance is the same no matter what.
Now consider asymmetrical maps like Lost Temple and Metalopolis:
If you spawn 12-3 or 6-9 (o'clock), you will have close air positions but longer rush distances.
If you spawn 12-9 or 3-6, you will have short rush distances but longer air distances. You will also have a Gold and third in between (the island on LT). This is much different.
If you spawn cross positions, but air and rush distances are long, and the game is set up to go much longer.
2-player maps have to be symmetrical, or else one player will gain an advantage over the other player due to the nature of the map. Scrap Station, Blistering Sands, Steppes of War, Jungle Basin, etc. are entirely symmetrical in layout, because if they were not then one player would have a favorable position.
If you are complaining specifically about Scrap Station, then it is more likely because it is a terrible map. The air positions are entirely too close and the shared island and gold bases are completely ridiculous. The relatively short initial rush distances, close 3rds, and bridge to make the rush gap even shorter are terrible features, and they do not support any kind of long gameplay.
I've never seen a game go long on Scrap Station. You and your opponent are just too in each others' faces for some truly long games to take place. The 4th bases on Scrap Station are NEVER taken, similar to the 4th bases on Steppes of War, which despite the rush distances is actually a good map in my opinion. I saw a game in the Beta that went 2 hours to a DRAW before.
|
United States12607 Posts
Terrible OP. Worse replies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
