|
Hey guys!
For a while I sometimes will think to myself "How is it that I can make a balanced map but I can't balance anything in the races?" The question might have popped up for some of you at least once or twice, and at first it feels like a contradiction. I mean, if you know how to balance the game of starcraft, then surely you would know how to make a balanced map, right? But it's the complete opposite. I can present a well-tested, properly-balanced map, but I can't tell you how to fix the marine, and yet somehow I'll know how a marine can be used, or how the marine will benefit more or less to every piece of terrain I create in the map editor.
Why is this? For us map-makers, do we just overlook gameplay balance, look at the everyday use of each race, and say "okay, protoss will usually clump their army up and use force fields, so how do I make this piece of terrain work for them but also for zerg and terran?" Sometimes it boggles me and confuses me a little.
We might take other obvious facts into account, like golds are terran-favored, so don't add golds to your map. Or, don't make the map too open, because that favors zerg, or don't make the map too chokey because it favors protoss. When thinking generally about the overall gameplay on everyday basis, it feels like there are so many restrictions, and therefore makes all oncoming maps extremely standard, generic, and often repetitive (that's a mapping discussion which I will not go into).
Moving on....
So what is the difference between the two perspectives regarding map balance and gameplay balance? Do they have any relationship with each other? Do they inter-connect or correlate in any way? Does one benefit over the other? Does being in diamond, masters, or grand masters really make a significant difference in how you create a map? Does playing really matter at all? I mean, there are a handful of exceptionally balanced maps that were created by bronze and silver players.
So I thought i'd bring this topic to the table of mappers and see what the minds of map-makers have to say about it. When you create a map, how is it that you somehow know that what you're making is balanced? Do you think about how the game is played to further your map-making decisions? Do you play regularly and use replays or your own playing abilities to guide you in your map-making? Or, is it just common to believe what high level players say because somewhere in the back of our minds, they must be correct and therefore that's how we should make maps?
This is an open discussion, and i'd be glad to see what both experienced and novice map-makers have to say.
|
I'm not entirely sure I follow what you're saying.
When I make a map, I follow the general outlines in my head of what is good and what is bad, completely seperating that from balance. Coming from both a BW mapping background and playing at a relatively high skill level, I consider myself pretty good at just knowing what will work and what won't. Of course, I don't know everything but I can generally figure out when a map is good or bad.
|
I think of it this way.
1. Know how each race reacts to each map feature.
2. Know how balanced the game is with the maps currently used.
3. If race X is doing bad, do maps that favor race X more than the current maps.
Map balance follows game balance. Map makers job is (among some other things) to follow game balance with as little desync as possible.
When the game was released zerg was under powered at the maps played at that time. That meaned that map makers had to do maps that favor zergs more that the maps at the time. Had Blizzard made zerg a stronger race, kulas ravine and steppes of war could have very well been balanced.
|
When it comes for maps i like the try and error system, to add and test new features. Right now i feel most people just try to do a balanced map with the things they know are balanced (its getting better though, but most innovations come from blizzard maps, oddly enough and the esv map making team yay).
Because if you want balance to much you end up with a 4 player, cross spawn only, 4 base per player map, which might be balanced to play on, but is totally boring. But i like map features you have to look out for, like a sneak path onto a cliff that goes to your natural, but is blocked by 10 0 mineral patches, so a worker needs to poke at that point for quiet some time till its open.
But it is really hard in sc2 to introduce maps, because most players don't adapt. Having a map is totally shut up for air play, mass mutas are still used, even though it should be obvious for anyone that its bad to use those units. Another reason is that any race can go deathball mode or mass units or even mass air units in every matchup. Well pvt is a bit of an exception since the tank nerf. (which makes map terrible hard to balance that way)
Oh and i liked the gold setup on kulas, its pretty nice idea to deny greedy 3rds if you have drop, but its pretty easy to defend if you have air vision, since range 4 units are enough to snipe everything from it. But since lost temple, every high ground seems to be banned near expansions. and if there are high grounds they are blocked with plants.
Well it was bad on lt. But its still something that favors drop play and makes games more exciting (and in the current state make toss stronger against greedy zerg play, since they could prism canon rush the zergs fast 3rd  ) Well its something i liked in bw alot, all the high grounds they had behind the naturals, such awesome ideas.
But its slowly getting better ^.^ and maps really start to look good . Though a good example of removing something rather then editing it till it works, are the golds. Terran can lift early game to the golds, zergs can take it against an expanding toss and free win, rocks would solve that sort of problem hehe. But its sadly not the only problem with golds, lategame if someone fell behind the opponent can take a gold and get more ahead by doing nothing really. (as terran i actually move one base to a gold if i feel like i managed to get a contain)
Soooo ... sad to see golds go, but they are comeback killers.
|
maps intrinsically balanced
nearly every mapper follows the guidelines set forth by blizzard maps
there are certain things people shouldn't add to their maps but these are small details in the grand scheme of things
the real problem are the players (read: babies), and tournament organizers to an extent as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
