EPTwhat's the advantage of asymmetrical maps?
doesnt certain spawn positions favour | force certain strategies due to the maps being asymmetrical?
if so, what do you think about that?
User was temp banned for this post.
[Q] Asymmetrical Maps
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
InsertUsername
12 Posts
what's the advantage of asymmetrical maps? doesnt certain spawn positions favour | force certain strategies due to the maps being asymmetrical? if so, what do you think about that? User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
green.at
Austria1459 Posts
| ||
|
RiotSpectre
United States163 Posts
On a sidenote...us terran players feel like some maps are asymmetrical when the other guy can use an add-on to wall-in from his barracks while we can't, based on ramp positioning! Oh the horror! | ||
|
413X
Sweden203 Posts
| ||
|
Befree
695 Posts
They're all asymmetrical to some extent of course, but I'd say that is the most asymmetrical of the current map pool. As for my opinion, I think it makes for more interesting game play/strategies and more aesthetically pleasing maps. While I do think a completely symmetrical map would be a better indicator of skill and more fair so we wouldn't have to deal with the randomness/luck of spawn locations, I still would rather we stick with the current asymmetry. I value the entertainment of the aesthetics of the map and the differing strategies more than the small increase in overall fairness we'd gain. | ||
|
InsertUsername
12 Posts
On December 24 2010 03:19 green.at wrote: give an example for such a map. there are really not many of them. I would appreciate if you didnt reply when you dont know what you're talking about. | ||
|
Gimpb
293 Posts
| ||
|
Smurfz
United States327 Posts
Let's look at Metalopolis. It's symmetrical. However, spawning cross positions feels like a totally different map than playing close positions. Even though it's the same map, you have to adjust your play based on your spawn position and the opponents. | ||
|
Faze.
Canada285 Posts
Delta Quadrant: | | 1 | 2 ________|_________ | | 4 | 3 | 1>4>3>2>1 On some maps the angle make it harder to wall off on certain spawn points. | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
| ||
|
BnK
United States538 Posts
On December 24 2010 03:19 green.at wrote: give an example for such a map. there are really not many of them. afaik. DQ, meta, xelnaga, scrap are not PERFECTLY symmetrical | ||
|
zerglingsfolife
United States1694 Posts
Fantasy I + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images/thumb/d/d0/FantasyMap.jpg/400px-FantasyMap.jpg) Fantasy II + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/167_Fantasy%20II_thumbnail.jpg) Alchemist + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images/thumb/2/22/Alchemist.jpg/400px-Alchemist.jpg) Baekmagoji + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images/thumb/0/0b/160_Baekmagoji.jpg/400px-160_Baekmagoji.jpg) Fantasy II produced some of the most memorable and great games for BW. | ||
|
green.at
Austria1459 Posts
On December 24 2010 03:47 InsertUsername wrote: I would appreciate if you didnt reply when you dont know what you're talking about. aww. you mad now? really stupid if you thought about maps like scrap station being asymmetrical xD but hey good job! quality OP and very nice dude overall - all that with 10 posts. I did reply cause i wanted to, i just wasnt sure what YOU are talking about. but hey, merry christmas. | ||
|
Misoza
Australia571 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
| ||
|
green.at
Austria1459 Posts
On December 24 2010 23:55 mierin wrote: Green...please play zerg then talk about how Scrap is perfectly symmetrical. you're funny... i play random. i know that the maps are not perfectly symmetrical. duh. but asymmetrical is something else. see zerglinsfolifes post. some people need to learn that this is not the bnet forum ... show some respect and put effort in your OPs. I asked what he meant with asymmetrical, all i got was an insult. | ||
|
Goolpsy
Denmark301 Posts
So I would also like to know which maps you are refering to, if any? theoretical answer: I would love to see some assymetrical maps, that will inspire different strategies depending on starting location and ensure (given a reasonal balance) that the map will be entertaining for a longer period of time. | ||
|
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
On December 24 2010 21:25 green.at wrote: aww. you mad now? really stupid if you thought about maps like scrap station being asymmetrical xD but hey good job! quality OP and very nice dude overall - all that with 10 posts. (<- Nice Sarcasm) I did reply cause i wanted to, i just wasnt sure what YOU are talking about. but hey, merry christmas. some people need to learn that this is not the bnet forum ... show some respect Oh the irony. -------------------------------- A lot of the maps are asymmetrical and there are no benefits at all to it. It creates imbalanced gameplay, because at the end of the day one side is more favorable than the other, even if slightly and it becomes a roll of the dice who gets to spawn on that side. It's a complete joke, and needs to be fixed in my opinion. | ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45686 Posts
On December 24 2010 03:13 InsertUsername wrote: dear Team Liquid, please enlighten me and share your opinions what's the advantage of asymmetrical maps? doesnt certain spawn positions favour | force certain strategies due to the maps being asymmetrical? if so, what do you think about that? Yes, asymmetrical maps *can* offer some advantages to certain starting locations and some detriments to others positions. This is because the map designers are purposely making different areas of the map different from one another. There are multiple things to take into account that can cause even the slightest imbalances between two starting locations. Here are four problems (though there are many others): -How easy it is to wall of a chokepoint -Mining distance for workers -Position of bridges -High ground vs. low ground advantage Therefore, it would be ideal (because it would be the most fair) for maps to be perfectly balanced... which doesn't mean symmetrical, necessarily. As Blizzard introduces more and more ways to make maps interesting (destructible rocks, watchtowers, etc.), perfectly balancing the maps based on starting locations makes it harder and harder. I don't think it ever really becomes impossible though, and so I'm definitely happy that Blizzard adds these new things. EDIT: I like the idea of Scrap Station and its asymmetry (despite the fact that I don't play as Zerg), but there are a few problems to iron out before it becomes perfectly balanced based on starting locations. Asymmetry =/= Not balanced. | ||
|
Zocat
Germany2229 Posts
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). | ||
|
Mofisto
United Kingdom585 Posts
| ||
|
Pulimuli
Sweden2766 Posts
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 | ||
|
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
On December 25 2010 00:23 Pulimuli wrote: 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. | ||
|
Pulimuli
Sweden2766 Posts
On December 25 2010 00:24 Fruscainte wrote: 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" | ||
|
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
On December 25 2010 00:32 Pulimuli wrote: 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! | ||
|
Pulimuli
Sweden2766 Posts
On December 25 2010 00:47 Fruscainte wrote: 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 | ||
|
TheGiz
Canada708 Posts
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. | ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
| ||
| ||
