EPT[A] Starbow - Page 120
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Trotim
Germany95 Posts
| ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
Also, people need to stop thinking in ladder terms for this one, it's much different from vanilla and I, while being in possession of brand new and shiny ten wooden fingers, can take a game from players supposedly far, far away from me on the skill spectrum. | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
@the new patch I forgot to mail the patch to NA yesterday before I went to sleep. And now I´ve been busy all day long. Sorry about it. My bad. I can mail it to you now Decemberscalm. Or maybe you already have it uploaded on NA? A new version will be released anyways on sunday, probably. I will obviously not get angry or upset if anyone "sneaks" the new patch up on NA - as long as things do not get messed up, multiple versions remains uploaded or that the guerilla patch contains changes that are not in the the "real" patch. I can obviously not stop anyone from doing it, but for the sake of development it would be good if all players played on the same version. So if guerilla uploads are handled "professionally", feel free to do it. (If you don´t have patience to wait for the real patch ^^) I consider to buy an NA account myself. When I update the patch I can do it on both EU and NA simultaneously, so there is no delay. I´ve head SC2 accounts are rather cheap these days? @icon errors on NA. THIS.MUST.GET.FIXED!!! I still see that a lot of icons are messed up for NA players. It can´t be like this. You can´t read the decription on certain buttons. It must be painful for newcomers to not benefit from the information the game is suppose to provide you. I have followed the advice from skilled mapmakers about mixturing with the Locales. Nothing seems to work. I really need help with this matter since I am so busy with school and work these days. CAN SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME INVESTIGATE HOW THIS CAN BE FIXED? @Banelings To make the answear short: Zerg has been robbed from so much stuff already so I see no reason to remove even more features from the race. I neither consider Banelings a problem or something that makes the game worse, and I don´t think they necessarily overlap with Lurkers. They offer two different play styles and can be used in different situations. IF Banelings is a huge problem (and I just dont realize it) I will rather adjust the unit to make it a more appealing unit that adds somethingto the gameplay, instead of being a problem. @New maps. Thanks for posting suggestions for new maps. I will try to add some new ones and maybe replace some of the old maps. The problem is that so many maps I try are designed for SC2 - compact expansions, wide choke points, large ramps. I would prefer to use maps that goes against the common SC2 lay out. Instead I would prefer if expansions were futher apart to make it harder to kill lot of close bases with the deathball in no time, more narrow choke points all over the map to really let area control units shine and make deathballs less effective as the optimal formation. But I will look at the suggestions you have provided. @Mineral patches require more minerals I think John Madden has a good point. A higher amount of minerals per base WILL allow players to win the game from 1-2 bases more often than from a low mineral amount per base. We will see the low number-of-needed-bases-play that is present in SC2 and actually in BW too. (Watch VODS or Streams. P and T sits on 2-3 bases, macros like crazy, and expand when the bases start to run out at ca 20 minutes into the game.) I try to get away from that and it seems to work. Personally I expand a lot more than players are used to. As P and T I get my third base up at the 10 minute mark, fourth base up at the 13 minute mark etc. IF THE MAP ALLOWS FOR IT. This seems to work in PvT, TvP or TvT.Vs Zerg stuff gets harder since T and P can´t really defend vs the hordes of the Zerg armies. (I am only a rusty Diamond player and my playstyle can´t determine whether a system is good or not. I am just saying that it requires a different play style) But if the maps allowed for easier defence OVERALL at all expansions, players would be more safe to expand and defend with smaller armies. We would see more harassment, skirmishes, rather than a huge Zerg ball attacking and killing a base with ease. (If the ramp is very narrow so only a few Zerg units at a time can get up a ramp and die from the cannons, bunkers, siege tanks, etc. Simply put, swarming a base would not be as easy in the mid game, as it is right now. A-move and win ^^) But I have to be realistic. If the 1000 mineral thing continues to cause frustration and headaches, and indeed only makes the game worse, I will obviosuly change it. I actually think we get some good games on EU with this system. Players just don´t win from 1-2 base play. Mostly. Players grab the map and we see combats all over the maps. I want to give it a little bit more time. Atleast after I have adjusted the Zerg macro. Hm, have I missed to respond to anything now? Gotta check @Zerg macro I will continue to look in the editor tomorrow and see if the Zerg macro can become more interesting and challenging. SmileZerg posted some nice ideas a few days ago that I have experimented with, but I am starting to doubt that his ideas will not work in practice, for a couple of reasons. You can read hs suggestions here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=114#2272 (Basically I am looking for ideas that will give a huge potential for good and interesting play. Its not about balance at this point. I want to add something that allows Zerg to do more stuff than just Inject and spam units. Something that adds more depth, challanges, decisions and preferably makes Zerg funnier to play. Not an easy thing.) So I throw the question out again: How can Zerg macro become more interesting? Another approach to the question: What is wrong with Zerg macro? + Show Spoiler + In my opinion, the problem is that Zerg has to do nothing to get a gosu macro. You don´t "need" inject in Starbow and you don´t have the building selection limit as in BW, which was frustrating, but it did indeed give a skill cap to the Zerg macro. And Inject gives a "skill cap" to SC2, even though Inject is a very mechanical skill with a limited boring purpose. Now Zerg can just have a load of hatcheries and spam units and rally point them to a location. Its good for newcomers, since they can enjoy the game too. I just wish there was something more in it. There is nothing interesting about it for a higher level player - no choices to be made, a low skill cap in the execution. Compare it to Chrono Boost - you can use it on so many different buildings and situations all game long. It seperates a noob from a pro. Terran has Calldown SCV and the choices between reactors and tech labs, which leads to some decision making and execution atleast. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
| ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
I will try and do that. It needs to be done for each indivdual map or just for the MOD file? @Laertes I have never been a fan of the way Zerg can instantly reinforce new armies in no time, as in SC2. With a couple of clicks they can get 30-50 Zerglings,Hydras,,Roaches, Mutas, whatever, rally pointed to a location within 30 seconds. Maybe it would be too drastic to double the build time of every unit. If Inject is adjusted in some way to NOT save up larvas in hatcheries, Zerg will not be able to instantly reinfroce as good. They build units in many smaller waves more often, rather than in extremely huge waves more seldom. (In SC2, Inject allows Hatcheries to save up to 19 larvas. In Starbow I have set that limit to 5. Preferably it can be 3. But is so, Inject probably needs to work in an other way, since there won´t be no room for new larvas.) | ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
If you have an enGB.SC2Data folder included in the mod files, copy the contents over to enUS.SC2Data and you are set. And hi, that's me. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
| ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
 edit: Literally all I did was delete the entire En(US) localization. Re-added it which forced theGerman files to be copied to be used for En. Stupid easy fix x.x. | ||
|
makmeatt
2024 Posts
On October 20 2012 10:32 decemberscalm wrote: Kabel, I fixed it. Wow that was easy. Gimme the latest patch and I'll upload it. I don't mind getting the entire EU map pool either so NA isn't bored. edit: Literally all I did was delete the entire En(US) localization. Re-added it which forced theGerman files to be copied to be used for En. Stupid easy fix x.x. Huh, funky. The US locale had to add itself at some point to the map/mod files and remained unupdated for a long while. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
Classic maps: Sacred sands Match Point Breaking Point Oakshire additional maps I try: Fighting Spirit (version by purakushi) Astro Haze - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=371331 Hunting Grounds - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=373502 They are all good and well made maps, but from the few games I´ve seen with them, they don´t seem to fit so well with Starbow for a few reasons. ... Anyways, you sure the button shows up all of a sudden? Was that so easy to fix? O_o | ||
|
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
On October 20 2012 10:38 Kabel wrote: Works when testing it locally, uploading it to see if it works for b.net.Latest patch sent to you. The EU map pool is not so much bigger than NA. Classic maps: Sacred sands Match Point Breaking Point Oakshire additional maps I try: Fighting Spirit (version by purakushi) Astro Haze - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=371331 Hunting Grounds - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=373502 They are all good maps, but from the few games I´ve seen with them, they don´t seem to fit so well with Starbow for a few reasons. ... Anyways, you sure the button shows up all of a sudden? Was that so easy to fix? O_o | ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
If you want to do exerperiments, make sure to publish it with a very different name!!! "Testbow" or something, so players do not confuse your testmap with the real maps. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
I am not saying it must be a bad thing to make Zerg units spawn slower. I just mean that it in itself will not fix Zerg macro, since the same mechanics, abilities etc remain. Such a huge change would effect balance quite a lot and would require lots of adjustments. The positive effects it has on the gameplay gotta be a lot better than the negative effects, to make such a huge change worthwhhile. I gotta sleep. Be back tomorrow. | ||
|
Deleted User 97295
1137 Posts
| ||
|
Freeze967
United States230 Posts
Yea, in the US it's $10 right now at Bestbuy/Toys R Us. I'm not sure about the pricing over there in EU, but maybe you can figure something out with someone in the US? I don't know. @About minerals All this talk I have been doing is from the standpoint of vZ. In the other matchups it's fine, as no one is as mobile and wonky as zerg. TvP, PvT, TvT, PvP is all fine expansion wise. While I have only played a few games as P, and only a couple TvT's, it seems fine expansion wise. PvP might be a bit wonky, but that just might be because no one is used to playing it. This really is just to help vZ. @SmileZerg, yea I kinda did screw up that chart. I forgot about some stuff, didn't know others did splash (No idea viking did, that will help later). @about AoE I'm not to sure why viking has splash. Let's look at which air units could get massed at the moment. Corsair (I guess?) Void Ray Carrier Mutalisk Guardian (I doubt it minus broodlings) Battlecruisers So only the Mutalisk/Guardian are biological and get effected by Irradiate. But mass mutalisk is generally the big problem that people face. Irradiate can somewhat solve this problem. Admittinly, it is easier to deal with in Starbow then Brood War, but it will still cause a huge issue unless the opponent micros. This is something we like in Starbow. Guess what doesn't make them micro? Splash attacks. So this would mean that Irradiate > Viking splash for the point of our needs. As for the argument that is just won't do enough vs the mutalisks, that's why they got nerfed, we got cheap good turrets. And we have a stimmable t1 unit that noms mutas. If we remove viking splash, what other stuff might it affect? Void Ray - Viking is still faster, so it will be able to micro to win. (Notice, less spash = more micro but a realistic amount, able to be done by non-pro players) Corsair - You shouldn't be making Vikings vs mass corsair anyway. That's why Turrets/Marines/Goliaths exist. Carrier - Same result as Void Ray, might be harder to do as Carrier has a very long range but it still possible to do. Also Goliath or marine is still probably optimal vs Carrier instead of Viking. Especially since Marine/Goliath can be used vs things other than the Carrier. Guardian - Same as Carrier, except irradiate could hypothetically be used. Battlecruiser - Same as Carrier. So obviously, Viking splash isn't an issue, but it is something that has no real use into the game except to make the game easier. I'm sure if we saw more mass mass muta, we would see Viking. But it might be better without it. @ About maps I think we've mentioned before, but if some of these new maps go well, could we please remove maps such as Breaking Point/Oakshire. Apparently some people like Match Point but I think they are just being silly. Currently, the only map I see being used on NA is Sacred Sands. Personally, I would like to make a few changes about Sacred. The first one really screws with wall-offs. The little statue on the map, is attackable. Also when it gets destroyed it leave a giant pile of blocking terrain that is possible to walk over. So suddenly if the zerg spends a couple seconds, they get a free bypass of a wall. It's really annoying to play against. Secondly would be the removal of the rocks. This would encourage more moving around, and make it easier to make both teams multi-task (aka raising the skill ceiling). I don't really see how they do to much right now because of the little path around. Why I want them removed is late-game, if they have a big army right infront of that path to their natural, I can't send a pack of marines to their base without going through the rocks or that army. So suddenly I am limited because of these rocks. It decreases the possibility of the game. | ||
| ||
