|
Dear Team Liquid.
I was wondering what the reasoning behind not knowing where your opponent spawns on three and four player maps was. I searched on teamliquid and couldnt find anything. If you happen to have any insight on the matter, please share.
I know it's like this in a lot of games (e.g. SC:BW) but I don't get it. Is a point to it? (+1 if you get the last reference)
Thank you in advance.
EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION: my question is what's the point of denying players the vital piece of information that is knowing which positions you spawned (cross or close ground or close air or whatever) and forcing players to rely on luck as to which position you scout first (e.g. Tel'darim).
|
i can't get the reference, because i cant even understand the question
You mean to dont need to scout to know where he is? like you know right whe the game start where your oponnent is?
|
It's so you don't know where they are? Lol.
If you always knew where they were at the beginning you could just send your scout there immediately. You would know that you are close ground positions right off the bat, and prepare for a bunker rush right away as Terran. You would know that you can FE easily if you see that they are cross positions.
I think it's a good thing because it adds a little element of surprise.
+ Show Spoiler +
Kind of a weird question to ask, not really sure how to answer it. Lol.
|
I think the reason they incorporate this is so that there's more expos.
Also, this means that you have the opportunity to execute riskier, more greedy builds. For example, on a 4 player map, you'd be more likely to 14cc (BW build order) than on a 2 player map.
|
Having to scout your opponent on maps that has more than 2 spawn spots is a vital element of StarCraft. If it's not there, it's not StarCraft.
|
Yah, I believe he is asking why 4 player maps (such as the majority of the 1v1 map pool) exist opposed to just 2 player maps with similar sizes (IE: shakuras being exact same but with top right and bot left spawns guaranteed, essentially making it 2 player)
I don't have any kind of statement from blizzard or any other game designer, but from pure speculation, i would guess that its to add just one more layer of interactivity and forcing you to work for something rather than being fed the information.
|
On April 06 2011 10:28 ZenDeX wrote:
Having to scout your opponent on maps that has more than 2 spawn spots is a vital element of StarCraft. If it's not there, it's not StarCraft.
how do you say "apart from retarded opinion, I would love to hear your reasoning" in a polite way?
|
Random spawn locations put variation into the kinds of builds used and the kind of tactics that go on in 4 player maps. Plus it gives all sorts a meaning and emphasis on early scouting. I'm sure you're aware that 2 rax works a whole lot better in close positions then it does cross positions, etc.
|
It adds another layer of intricacy to maps. If I play a ZvP on Metal close positions, it is a completely different game than ZvP on Metal cross positions. The varying spawn positions force you to have a dynamic game plan if you want to be successful.
There isn't really a right answer to your question. Why does the alphabet go A-Z? It's not a perfect metaphor, but it's close.
|
On April 06 2011 10:42 GregoRoach wrote:
There isn't really a right answer to your question. Why does the alphabet go A-Z? It's not a perfect metaphor, but it's close.
I was hoping some RTS game designers would share their insight or that someone could link something to shed light on my question.
|
Its strategy. Scouting and countering win games.
(This is said in the narrow context of this post)
Tactics are beating up units Y with X
Strategy is finding out what units ?? are, then once discovering them to be Y, building X.
Less possible spawn locations=less scouting. You can assume a few build orders will not happen and you can ascertain more information on your scouting trips just by preknowledge of where they spawned. On Slag Pits (vetoed) I never know what an opponent is doing until I scout it and their location. On Xel Naga Caverns I'm almost always certain exactly how he will build and where he will go.
Because of random/fixed spawn.
|
If you had certain knowledge of where your opponent was, that would make some super early aggression builds like 6 pool be pretty powerful.
|
On April 06 2011 10:49 Probe1 wrote:
Its strategy. Scouting and countering win games.
(This is said in the narrow context of this post)
Tactics are beating up units Y with X
Strategy is finding out what units ?? are, then once discovering them to be Y, building X.
Less possible spawn locations=less scouting. You can assume a few build orders will not happen and you can ascertain more information on your scouting trips just by preknowledge of where they spawned. On Slag Pits (vetoed) I never know what an opponent is doing until I scout it and their location. On Xel Naga Caverns I'm almost always certain exactly how he will build and where he will go.
Because of random/fixed spawn.
How is this a good thing?
Edit: on another note, what has Slag Pits got to do with anything? no major tournament uses that map
|
On April 06 2011 10:51 FinestHour wrote:
If you had certain knowledge of where your opponent was, that would make some super early aggression builds like 6 pool be pretty powerful.
I'd argue the exact opposite of this. Zerg can easily send and overlord to close by air, as a drone scout to close by ground and immediately deduce where you are in time for their cheesy shenanigans to come to fruition. However, as Protoss, if you scout them last on 4 player maps (assuming you don't send out double scout after not finding them at the first base) then you are royally boned.
I can't remember the last time I've posed to 6 pool on 2 player maps, but I definitely can lose to it if I scout it last on a 4 player map.
|
Strategies vary between 2-base and 4-base maps. Fast-expands are often more viable on 4-base maps, for example, because it usually takes longer to get them scouted. Rush builds are often less viable because they rely on quickly ascertaining your opponent's position. 4-base maps also usually have more complex 3rd and 4th expand options. Variety is good, so having a mix of 2-base and 4-base maps is good.
|
Because close positions are really really imbalanced(close position shattered temple tvz) lol?
Until strategies and better maps(ala the GSL maps) are put into more tourneys then forcing crossmap spawns to prevent retarded imbalance thats there if they dont crossmap spawn is essential
imo
|
United States991 Posts
Shakuras plateau: he will never spawn in the closest clockwise position
Example: Never in bottom left to top left or top right to bottom right. So I tend to scout cross positions first and then the longer of the 2 close positions. I have never had a match that was close positions on Shakuras.
|
Generally, it is the luck/randomness factor.
Like others said, this makes the strategy deeper and more diverse.
Of course, in the end, it is a bit of luck, but that is why you do "safe" builds, and that is why some people instead go for all-ins or risky builds.
|
United States991 Posts
I honestly think that all maps should have a default spawn cross positioning if possible, that would lead to the Macro games that happened in Brood Wars and SC1, or at least, so I've heard. I never actually played the game, but my friends (online and in real life) who have played the game said that they were amazing.
|
Reverse question. Why can't you have 4 and 3 player maps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
