EPT[D] "Perfect" Map Symmetry
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Imperfex
Canada5 Posts
Witness chess: White has a slight advantage, but it's one of the highest-regarded "thinking man's games" in the world. Further, since start positions are randomized in Starcraft, it provides Yet Another Thing that you have to consider when you spawn in on a map, and can lead to really long-term interesting matches. There was one map I remember (though not the name) from SC1 where zerg could use the unburrow trick to sneak Zerglings inside the bottom player's base. Very situational, and it meant that the bottom player had something else to keep in mind while playing. Provided the map imbalances aren't huge (top player starts with gold, bottom starts with 1/2 size blue), I find they just make the game more interesting. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
| ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
To some extent, I like how people can radically change their plans on the basis of spawn positions, and how, say, close spawns change how a player has to expand, etc. You'd lose all of that if all maps were VARS maps. | ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
In order to remove as much positional imbalance as possible you need a mix of the above (and other features which I haven't outlined but are common in most maps) and to achieve this mix oftentimes symmetry is not required. I can see where you are coming from and like I said earlier in my post I agree that it can remove positional imbalance in some circumstances, however, confining oneself to strict VARS would result in all maps looking very similar, and matching would become bland. Half of the fun of watching Proleague or Starleague (and so on) from Korea comes from the wide variety of VARS HARS (horizontal), none-mirror symmetry, and even completely non-symmetrical maps to keep not only the fans but the players guessing. BO5s exist for high-profile matches for a reason after-all. | ||
|
Heat_023
Canada160 Posts
laser beams and explosions  | ||
|
OPSavioR
Sweden1465 Posts
I dont get the trapezoid thing. | ||
|
USn
United States376 Posts
On July 19 2010 10:12 Barrin wrote:To clear things up, this thread is not about map "balance"; this thread is about Map Symmetry. The thing is, balance is so much more significant than symmetry that it swamps the microscopic positional stuff you're discussing. | ||
|
triumph
United States100 Posts
| ||
|
pzea469
United States1520 Posts
with the minerals, i agree. Why not make them square? with addons, most definitely agree. Its just dumb that one player can do a wall in and the other one can't because he spawned on a different location. If these issues aren't fixed, well its not gonna be that bad. People will still play and watch and it will still be amazing. But if these things were fixed, the game would be that much better, although probably just as popular as it is without them. But as a player i would definitely appreciate these changes. Thanks for a great read | ||
|
Hamster1800
United States175 Posts
| ||
|
VirtualAlex
41 Posts
It looks like this M | W Pretend the M and W look the same but just flipped. Maps like Blistering Sands and Desert Oasis have this kind of symmetry. There is no line of reflection, but both players have identical features (not considering map angle of course). | ||
|
funcmode
Australia720 Posts
On July 19 2010 11:36 VirtualAlex wrote: There is another kind of symmetry. Actually I am not even sure if it could be defined as symmetry... but most of the currently blizzard maps are like that. It looks like this M | W Pretend the M and W look the same but just flipped. Maps like Blistering Sands and Desert Oasis have this kind of symmetry. There is no line of reflection, but both players have identical features (not considering map angle of course). You're talking about rotational symmetry (and yes it is a type of symmetry). And while using it leads to some "issues" such as with terran addons, and hiding units as the OP describes I don't think they're significant enough to totally gimp map design to achieve "perfect balance". The issue with terran addons is incredibly minor and even on a 1v1 map has far smaller significance in terms of the strength of spawn positions than many other factors, most obviously the strengths of different spawns for different races on 4 player maps. If you wanted to remove this problem entirely you'd not only have to use VARS but you'd have to use vertical and horizontal ramps only - which are hella ugly and also different sizes than the diagonal ramps used in all of the current ladder maps. Hiding units behind doodads like trees can be more balanced simply by more careful use of doodads. Don't put trees in places where they will block LOS to anywhere important or even pathable - particularly in one main base and not the other, etc. Hiding units behind cliffs will still exist even with VARS, so that's irrelevant. Mineral placement can also be pretty much completely balanced without VARS if you place them correctly and sensibly. The camera perspective is also practically a non-issue. The difference in visibility is incredibly minimal, and when the only players this would affect are already achieving hundreds of APM, is having to move the camera a tiny bit when your opponent didn't going to cost you the game? Very doubtful. Very rarely, if ever, do pro players ever complain about spawn positions because games rarely are so close that it becomes a factor in who actually wins. Some positions are without a doubt more beneficial than others, but any situation on any of the current maps is winnable, and thus the players don't complain. Instead games are won or lost because of mistakes or superior strategy or skill, not positional (spawn) advantage. Using VARS also totally kills creative map design. Honestly all the maps would be so similar, there might as well only be one map that ever gets used competitively. If someone told me, as a map maker myself, that if I ever wanted my maps to be used competitively I had to make them all completely symmetrical using VARS, I think I would cry a little, and then give up making maps entirely. My last point, and I think the biggest reason this shouldn't ever become the status quo, is because it also practically kills much of the variety that makes playing (and watching) this game so interesting. I'm fairly sure that Lost Temple, a 4 player map which is actually pretty far from symmetrical in a lot of places, is one of the most popular maps used in tournaments. The obvious reason is cause of it's 4 spawns, no-one could ever truly predict how a game might turn out. The variety in viable strategies changes drastically based on the spawns, and this, in my opinion, makes for much more intense and exciting games. Using VARS only maps would just destroy this aspect of the game. In short, no, VARS doesn't make maps significantly more balanced, but it does significantly kill both creative map design and a lot of creative play, so no thanks, rotational symmetry for 1v1 specific maps works just fine =) | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
| ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
1. Hiding/Shadows are imba on the horizontal axis as well, so there's just no perfect balance. Players should learn to press the buttons for changing the camera angles often enough. 2. Terran addons are imba in BW too. Walling the same ramps on symmetric maps depends on the o'clock position. It didn't break the game too much. It seems to make it more interesting. 3. Again, symmetric Mineral lines are imba under other game engines as well. It's a minute difference, but it's there and people just live with it. 4. The trapezoid view should even out, as long as there's enough action on both fronts. Compare it with outdoor sports and the direction of the sun light. 5. Maps are not supposed to be perfectly balanced. That would be boring. They have to be pretty balanced, with a little bit of imba flavors of different sorts. 6. I even advise map-makers after they implement the perfect symmetry of their maps, to manually break it a bit, and make each position unique. That's how Blizzard's official maps are. | ||
|
monitor
United States2409 Posts
After all, this is a "game" meant for fun  ! | ||
|
dogabutila
United States1438 Posts
Hatcheries spawn from the bottom only, and terran addons build on one side only. So, even if you could minimize the impact of positional imbalance as much as possible, it will still exist to an extent. | ||
|
Illva
Sweden137 Posts
| ||
|
psion
106 Posts
Still, I would have made it so that terran addons build under the structure 1x3, and cut out a little bit under the structures to make it obvious what addon is under it. I'm afraid it's too late for such ideas though, and I'm kind of disappointed that Blizzard didn't seem to try anything to fix the issue. | ||
|
Anxiety
United States650 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + http://www.repdepot.net/img/minimap/1024/1384.jpg I know that the 3d effect is MUCH less in BW than SC II, but that makes the game more creative, and exciting. If one player hid a small group of units behind a cliff, and then after the other players units passed, wouldnt that be awesome (to view)? And some maps are so unsymmetrical, yet they still get in some League usage, even if the time is short.See Fantasy (Map): + Show Spoiler + http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Fantasy_(Map) And: In short, no, VARS doesn't make maps significantly more balanced, but it does significantly kill both creative map design and a lot of creative play, so no thanks, rotational symmetry for 1v1 specific maps works just fine =) ^This. Ill use it to summerize mine too. EDIT: Meh, the image didnt work. Can someone link me to someway how to post images on TL, or tell me? | ||
| ||
