| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On November 27 2011 22:43 Barrin wrote:It's not only the distances from the nat entrance to each base, it's also the distance from each tertiary base to each other tertiary base (obviously with emphasis on which is who's). Way too spread out. Could you explain what this [effect] has to do with anything? | ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
| ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uAo0a.jpg) | ||
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
| ||
|
Namrufus
United States396 Posts
On November 27 2011 12:47 Barrin wrote: <3 IronManSC I'm just gonna be blunt here, because I feel really strongly about this. I choose to write about this here because this map is a ridiculously prime example. There is a particular style/combination of proportions, base flow, and distances that I feel is profoundly hindering balanced, defenders-advantage-oriented but back-and-forth macro games. I can probably think of a better name, but for now I will call it "Circle Syndrome". Every symptom in the following picture adds to the problem (indeed it is all synergistic, all of them together is IMO basically a formula for disaster - interestingly enough this map has all of them together). However, most maps that have the Circle Syndrome don't have all of the symptoms. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rQh9h.jpg) Use this picture as a guideline for diagnosing the Circle Syndrome. + Show Spoiler [...] + didn't want to quote the rest of those images, see previous page for full text OK, so I don't think I am completely understanding this. Is the situation you are trying to avoid (by eliminating "circle syndrome") something like this?: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/66tEG.jpg) red and blue circles are bases (for players red and blue) lines to defend are red and blue, lines to attack are green. late game situation, all bases have been taken. because the distance to attack accross the map from any point are so short and the distances of defense are so long, it will be very unlikly for a player to attack or defend the farthest bases without severely endangering their main-nat-third, making such a lategame scenario very unstable. when you say that the cure for circle syndrome is an easy third base, you want mappers to include an easy third base far away from the enemy expansion pattern as a "core" main-nat-third of bases that can be easily defended, even as the number of taken bases grows large. or am I completely not getting the point? | ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
 Stream Thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=285931 | ||
|
Meltage
Germany613 Posts
I was a bit disappointed seeing Barrin enter our skype chat to discuss this syndrome (even though I wasn't awake at that early hour) and his last comment was "dont hurt me plz i am harmless" - Andrew C*******n, Today 4:51 AM And then the chat went dead, appearently. And now he is offline. Are you planning to show off his corpse on stream tonight? | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
??/??/???? - 11/29/2011 | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
This thread has some of the most analytical discussion of a map ever. I'm very impressed. | ||
|
Wi-Fi
Korea (South)7 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
@Chargelot: It's what we do! There are a few other map threads that have the same amount of analytical discussions and suggested changes/screenshots. Without this type of feedback, map-makers are doomed. @Wi-Fi: Welcome to teamliquid! Odd comment, but welcome nonetheless! @Barrin: Thanks for asking the question for me  | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0Dqea.jpg) The difference is obvious. The bases are removed and there is now low-ground blocked by rocks. Why do I feel this is better? For one, the bases are removed, so the distance between the central 3rd to the enemy's 4th (or 5th) is significantly longer. Secondly, you can re-inforce that base. If I went with your idea on just removing the ramp, the base is still vulnerable to reapers/drops/colossi/blink stalkers who can simply walk up the cliff, destroy the base, and run back down, and there is nothing you can do about it - you can't even chase them. In my new image, and my new design, this seems like it would make more sense. To me, this now looks like a XNC/Typhoon peak map. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
lovablemikey
264 Posts
It's time for crazy amounts of testing. Theory only goes so far. | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
But BW also had [Z/P] players who actually set up defence, walls, etc at their expos ... still waiting to see that in sc2. | ||
|
DE4DhunTer
22 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
StarCraft2.fi
WardiTV 2025
RSL Revival
StarCraft2.fi
IPSL
Sziky vs JDConan
RSL Revival
Classic vs TBD
herO vs Zoun
WardiTV 2025
IPSL
Tarson vs DragOn
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
