|
On June 14 2010 23:18 slimshady wrote:What happened to maps with 9 mineral patches? Why only 8? 
Holy crap you want more than 8 ? srsly? 8 patches on both the main and natural is already heavily into the scrub friendly departement, macro ? just spam workers and win lol, atleast with
6-7 you hit saturation pretty fast and mine out at a pretty decent rate. 9 would take forever to mine out Just look at how long 8 patches last.
On June 14 2010 23:10 Logo wrote:
1 Gas would favor zerg heavily as they can play pretty independent of gas with lings/blings and roaches.
As for map size, I like to see variety in map sizes. I don't think there's anything wrong with having a 35-45s rush distance map and a desert oasis sized map.
so steppes is too short, oasis is too long somewhere in the middle is just riiiiiiiiiight?
On June 14 2010 23:10 Logo wrote:
1 Gas would favor zerg heavily as they can play pretty independent of gas with lings/blings and roaches.
As for map size, I like to see variety in map sizes. I don't think there's anything wrong with having a 35-45s rush distance map and a desert oasis sized map.
this i can agree with somewhat, at least for the main it should have two, but expansions? im feel 4x geyser running off one expansion is too much gas.
|
Everyone should feel free to mess around with melee designs. It's all about variety! That's why we switch the map in best-of matches!
|
@Madkipz
Yeah I suppose 1 gas expos could work, but again it still might favor zerg. A roach/hydra on 3 gas from zerg would be really hard for a 3 gas Protoss to stop. Without a heavy force of templars or colossi they'd get overrun pretty easily.
Anytime you cut gas you are putting more favor on zerg who can use mineral heavy units and superior drone production to power out to another expansion.
Most mid game threats to zerg involve heavy gas unit compositions (colossi, tanks, thors, etc.) so delaying gas gives them more time to power economy and early game threats to zerg are countered with low gas units anyways.
It's also a little riky to be experimenting this early. There's no harm in it, but you can't be sure balance will be maintained. Blizzard is probably going to balance around 8minerals/2 gas so minor tweaks and changes to balance that setup could break things like 1 gas expansions.
Also as a side, what about 1 rich gas expansions instead of 2 gas? Would it be less gas overall, but more than 1 normal gas. Something to think about at least.
|
lol@graph, not even close to the real thing
|
On June 14 2010 23:10 Logo wrote:
1 Gas would favor zerg heavily as they can play pretty independent of gas with lings/blings and roaches.
As for map size, I like to see variety in map sizes. I don't think there's anything wrong with having a 35-45s rush distance map and a desert oasis sized map.
Can't Terran play as independent with bio army? Marines costs only gas and marauders cost 25 gas just as roaches and they share almost all of their upgrades.
Protoss might have a little problem but they should be able to build a decent low gas army with zealots and stalkers.
I would welcome some diversity. Do all maps need to have the same base setup? Can't there be some maps with single gas geyser at base, some with double gas geysers and maybe maps with even more gas geysers? Having different looking maps would force us to use different build orders and not to have a standard 2-3 build orders which we can use in every game.
|
How do we go from stepps of war to desert oasis? Poll is rigged. It's pushing maps to be too big with DO.
|
On June 14 2010 23:22 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 23:18 slimshady wrote:What happened to maps with 9 mineral patches? Why only 8? Holy crap you want more than 8 ? srsly? 8 patches on both the main and natural is already heavily into the scrub friendly departement, macro ? just spam workers and win lol, atleast with 6-7 you hit saturation pretty fast and mine out at a pretty decent rate. 9 would take forever to mine out Just look at how long 8 patches last.
Maybe you shouldn't be asking questions if you're only going to ridicule the answers that disagree with you. Some of the polls only have ridiculous options too.
Anyway, some time ago I measured rush distances for all the ladder maps (IZ wasn't out yet at the time) with a marine walking from main building to main building, real life time on faster:
Steppes of War: 40 sec
Metalopolis: 32/42/48 sec
Lost Temple: 35/44/47 sec
Kulas Ravine: 42/45/47 sec
Scrap Station: 49 sec
Blistering Sands: 52 sec
Desert Oasis: 70 sec
Note the big difference between different positions on Metalo/LT. Most of these maps seem to fall between 40-50 sec, and I'd say increasing that to 45-55 sec wouldn't be such a bad idea.
|
On June 14 2010 23:53 CagedMind wrote:
How do we go from stepps of war to desert oasis? Poll is rigged. It's pushing maps to be too big with DO.
Desert oasis is relativly small compared to how huge you CAN make a melee map.
Steppes of War: 40 sec
Metalopolis: 32/42/48 sec
Lost Temple: 35/44/47 sec
Kulas Ravine: 42/45/47 sec
Scrap Station: 49 sec
Blistering Sands: 52 sec
Desert Oasis: 70 sec
wouldnt ramp to ramp be a more accurate assessment of just exactly how fast a control group of MMM etc would reach you? if you measure from main to main it easily adds 5 seconds of traveltime on both ends.
lol@graph, not even close to the real thing
its not meant to be accurate, its meant to prove a point in the saturation departement and be pretty, everyone likes graphs.
Maybe you shouldn't be asking questions if you're only going to ridicule the answers that disagree with you. only the unreasonable and relativly stupid ones, i dont see you defending his 9 mineral statement 
|
Sometimes you defend on the ramp, sometimes you defend at your mineral line. Feel free to post numbers ramp to ramp, with reapers, natural to natural, air route and so on if you test those.
|
I was forced to vote for 4. because my junk is big....
No, but seriously I would like to play around with the map editor and see the affects of 1 geyser per base. I don't know how this would adversely affect the MU's. One thing that comes to mind is that if it encourages primarily 1.5 tier play then terran might be at an advantage since so many of their units are not gas heavy. We might see nothing but MM w/stim.
On the other hand (as a toss player) if I mass gate units (against a terran) I typically lose unless its a timing push or the other player screwed up...
I am always going robo bay and once in a while stargate play....
This does all make me wonder what data Blizz originally used to decide 2 geysers per base...
|
As someone mentioned, I think you underestimate how quickly you max out your army.
|
On June 15 2010 00:00 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 23:53 CagedMind wrote:
How do we go from stepps of war to desert oasis? Poll is rigged. It's pushing maps to be too big with DO. Desert oasis is relativly small compared to how huge you CAN make a melee map.
255x255 maps don't really factor into what competitive size maps should be. DO is too fucking huge when you consider the layout.
|
On June 15 2010 00:24 CagedMind wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 00:00 Madkipz wrote:On June 14 2010 23:53 CagedMind wrote:
How do we go from stepps of war to desert oasis? Poll is rigged. It's pushing maps to be too big with DO. Desert oasis is relativly small compared to how huge you CAN make a melee map. 255x255 maps don't really factor into what competitive size maps should be. DO is too fucking huge when you consider the layout.
Not in my oppinion, its huge compared with the rest of the map pool presented to you at this current time. DO sized maps might very well end up becoming standard.
|
On June 14 2010 13:58 JaspluR wrote:
i duno i havent tested or didnt play brood war i was too young but dont you get less gas per trip?
someone said its equal gas off 2 geysers anyway, but if so, this only means that you need MORE probes to get an equal amount
Actually Blizzard stated that even with the reduced rate of gas collection, 8 gas takes as long to get in SC2 as in BW due to improved peon AI.
On June 14 2010 15:33 jalstar wrote:
Huge maps please. With MBS and automine there needs to be some other way of rewarding good macroers.
And yet with a massive map, you don't believe your opponent would have more time to get more units? MBS and Automine only make your life easier, they don't macro for you: you still have to make the units somehow.
On June 14 2010 15:43 slowmanrunning wrote:
personally I think the pop cap's a bit screwed up atm, because compared to broodwar you have a lot more pop taken up by workers, late game you have 40-60 workers, which all take up 1 pop while you would have almost 1/2 that in broodwar because they would pick up 8 minerals not 5, and twice as much gas, from only 1 geyser.
You hit pop cap fast because 1/3rd of your army is drones/probes/scv's also the addition of spawn larvae, reactors, and chrono boost allows you to power economy and get an army really fast with no setbacks if you time it right. This coupled with the fact that compared to broodwar;
- queens are cheaper than hatcheries for more larvae
- a reactor is essentially another barracks for 50/50, instead of 150/0
(your going to build some with tech labs definately, but your also going to build some with reactors, so the point still stands)
- warpgates once researched speed up the production of gateways
Your cash is more streamlined into army, and less of it goes towards buildings, this coupled with workers taking up a large portion of your army, and acellerated unit production you hit 200/200 far faster than you ever did in broodwar.
Simple answer would be to increase the pop cap to 225 or something, or maybe even 250.
but that would look a little weird.
Really? Raise the supply limit? Balance-wise that isn't right. That would mean a Terran player could have up to 50 extra Marines while a Protoss would only get 25 Zealots. Couple that with Stim-Packs and 255-unit control groups and you have a serious mess on your hands. 200/200 is just fine. In Brood War you'd have, what, maybe 3 less peons per expansion? It's not that much of a difference, especially when peons mine faster in SC2.
|
How about maps where there are Gas only Expansions? Like 3-4 geysers.
|
what's wrong with some variety?
|
On June 15 2010 01:21 Krowser wrote:
How about maps where there are Gas only Expansions? Like 3-4 geysers.
oddly enough players seem to want high yield stand alone gas expansions, it never occured to me that people would feel inclined to waste 400 minerals just for high yield vespene and it intrigues me.
On June 15 2010 01:36 TheElitists wrote:
what's wrong with some variety?
there is nothing wrong with variety, im simply trying to establish (for myself) what some of the TL.net users precieve as positive development and negative development within the decition departement when regarding macro.
On June 15 2010 01:56 Kralic wrote:
I do not think making maps super big will help this game at all. My #1 reason would be mobility of the races.
Zerg: Nydus worm can be made anywhere on the map.
Protoss: Proxy pylons can be made anywhere on the map.
Terran: March those troops across the map.
I just do not think it would be fair to Terran. Like most have said the pop cap is the big issue. Sure you can make a tank line of mech units going from your base to their base, but 3 food per tank is harsh.
Lo and behold mech has been nerfed without touching a single unit ;D
|
I do not think making maps super big will help this game at all. My #1 reason would be mobility of the races.
Zerg: Nydus worm can be made anywhere on the map.
Protoss: Proxy pylons can be made anywhere on the map.
Terran: March those troops across the map.
I just do not think it would be fair to Terran. Like most have said the pop cap is the big issue. Sure you can make a tank line of mech units going from your base to their base, but 3 food per tank is harsh.
|
Broodwar 1 gas>SC2 2 gas. In SC2 you no longer get gas after geysers are depleted, this makes gas more important. Having two gases thus gets you less gas in longer games, making Broodwar 1 gas much more valuable, so having mineral only expansions in standard maps would not work in SC2 like it did in BW.
|
I want a poll option saying "I like maps to be unique. Different rush distances, chokes, etc. I love Desert Oasis, Steppes and even Incineration zone if Terran isn't involved."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
