|
6m1g= 6 minerals, 1 gas.
6m1hyg= 6 minerals, 1 high yield gas.
This is very much just straight 1 gas. Also, much of the strategy of SC2 is built around the principle of how many gas geysers you get at what time, since this produces more options for managing economies, and thus, more varied and diverse gameplay options. With 1 gas per base, every race is pretty much constantly starved for gas, resulting in much less interesting gameplay. And with 1 high yield gas per base, there's pretty much a choice between gasless play and very gas-heavy play, since the middle options have been removed. More options = more interesting gameplay, which is why 2g was put in the game in the first place.
|
On March 21 2012 09:20 -NegativeZero- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 09:04 ChristianS wrote:
I thought you were advocating for 6m/2g? 8m may be replaceable in Starcraft II, but 2g is essential to pretty much everything in the development of SCII up to this point. And honestly, 2g generates a lot of interesting strategy that wasn't present in brood war. In your other article you were advocating for 7m/2g shifting towards 6m/2g to reduce the suddenness of transition, and I'm all in favor, but a sudden jump to 6m/1g just won't happen (and maybe shouldn't). Pro players won't do such a drastic change just to play in tournaments that won't switch to them, and tournaments won't switch and alienate all their players that practiced for 8m/2g. A tournament might consider announcing 7m/2g beforehand and then playing on it (a 12.5% reduction in minerals), maybe transitioning to 6m/2g later (a 25% reduction in minerals), but I don't see any transition to 1g (a 50% reduction in gas!) in the near future.
tl;dr:
IMHO, 7m2g and/or 6m2g are both a viable change in the future and a good change in the future. 7m1g or 6m1g are both not viable and not necessarily good for the game. All the same, good luck to you, Barrin, as I'm certain you know more about map-making than me.
I'm pretty sure on the 1g maps it's a high yield gas (6 gas per trip), creating a 25% reduction in gas which is exactly proportional to the removal of 2 mineral patches.
This is true. ^
I will say though that right now there is a lot more flexibility with the 2 gas set up, like stretching out gas income by only taking one at a time or taking gases at different times to suit build orders neatly. I think though people will just have to get used to counting how many drones they put in gas (2 or 1) if they want to fine tune their gas income. Overall I'm just really interested in how this style of mapping will affect gameplay. I'll have to watch some of those handy replays there...
|
On March 21 2012 09:54 ChristianS wrote:6m1g= 6 minerals, 1 gas. 6m1hyg= 6 minerals, 1 high yield gas. This is very much just straight 1 gas. Also, much of the strategy of SC2 is built around the principle of how many gas geysers you get at what time, since this produces more options for managing economies, and thus, more varied and diverse gameplay options. With 1 gas per base, every race is pretty much constantly starved for gas, resulting in much less interesting gameplay. And with 1 high yield gas per base, there's pretty much a choice between gasless play and very gas-heavy play, since the middle options have been removed. More options = more interesting gameplay, which is why 2g was put in the game in the first place.
lol in the very picture you quoted it specifically says gas = high yield...
|
|
|
oh it would be really cool if balanced for 6/2 maps would come out of this. I always had fun on 6/2 modded maps (though i switched the gas return time so 2 workers are optimal, not changing up the mineral/gas income ration but keeping the 2 geyser mechanic and reducing workers needed too). Only switched up a few Blizzard maps for personal use though.
Will be fun to play on maps build for those resources, so thanks alot for this map <3 and any future one !
|
I just wanted to say that infestors may become partcularly formidable to the 1hyg version of this map. I will check back with a more exact build, but basically you 10 pool, 9 gas, drone back up to 10, put three on gas as soon as it pops, pop an overlord, start lair, drone up to 15 (12 on minerals), plant infestor pit, 3-5 spines (re-droning back to 12 with each one), get a queen and 3 infestors by the time the Very Hard AI pops it's attack with any race. This pretty using destiny's "fungal field" you can pretty much wipe up this initial attack force and expand at will. Again, this is just messing around with funky timings with AI so it might not matter against another player, but it seems like the really fast infestors are not very punishable.
I think two geysers will help to fix this, but I like the idea of making them low yield as FoxyMayhem mentioned in the BoGiSC2 thread. Also, 1875 per geyser, but that's just nitpicking. 
Edit: Also, archons.
|
i think its too early to decide between 1hyg and 2g. i personally feel reverting to 2g is counter intuitive; i thought the original point of this all was to force more strategic gameplay into the game? i dont believe ending up with only a reduction of 160-180mineral/min/base is that much of a change from vanilla.
|
I still would like to see a 6m map with bases with 2 gas but 25% further away.
Yes that means you can put 4 drones in them and still get the same amount of gas.
But drones are costly, with fewer mineral patches, so that's an extra strategic choice, allowing more flexibility
|
EDIT: I felt bad for being off topic, so I moved my post to the appropriate thread here.
As for the map itself however, there isn't too much I can say about it. You can't really argue the map is too chokey, too big, etc because the game is entirely different. Thus you really just don't know what needs to be done to the map itself to suit the new gameplay until we understand it well enough. Again, great idea Barrin. Cheers! 
|
On March 21 2012 08:41 emc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 07:57 EatThePath wrote:On March 21 2012 06:46 Natespank wrote:First impressions: 1- awesome awesome awesome critique: 2- gas steals. Specifically, in PvP, a protoss who gas steals and follows up with a 4 gate would be terrifying, or a terran gas stealing a protoss and then 5rax marine rushing him. The only way to defend such strategies is to use gas units. Might be fine, just saying, it's the first thing that comes to mind for me 3 gate is the max amount of production you can do on 1 base. I'm not sure what the best response would be for a gas steal, but I have a feeling it might be expand with cannons. Really you shouldn't let it happen because it's so important. Terran couldn't steal effectively because you can kill the scv as it builds, but it'd be worth testing as a cheese option. You should go try it out! So many things to check. ;D Oh, and Barrin, the version of 6m1hyg Devolution up now has a doodad malfunction at the natural in the bottom left. There's a giant floating mar sara dead tree. It's spooky! And also distracting. I'm going to gas steal every game as zerg, see how fun it is
Sounds good, I'll be FFEing.
About 1hyg vs 2g, I don't think it's possible to choose yet. If you maintain 6m, 2g skews the game a lot farther towards tech based. Part of the appeal for me thus far in 6m1hyg is that I feel like I'm still in the development stages of the game with a saturated natural base. I need a 3rd before I can start any freewheeling multi-teching. (As protoss I should say.) This does put protoss in a pinch sometimes, but maybe there are ways to adjust how you play the matchups?
I'll definitely be willing to test 6m2g as well to compare, but I don't like it on paper. If you were going that direction, I'd prefer something like 7m2g with geysers that require 3.5 harvesters to saturate, and some distance mineral patches (5 squares) that require 3 harvesters to saturate.
I can imagine an SC2 landscape with maps that vary these things somewhat freely in order to play up certain map features later in the game further out on the map, or just to adjust how the early game is played. I think it's completely reasonable to expect competitive players to know how to open off 6m1hyg, 6m2g, and 7m2g, with a natural that could be any of those as well. This style of mapping creates a higher burden of game knowledge to create balanced maps without getting lucky, but the variation it would provide would be great for spectators! And the dimension of innovation would be much more highly rewarded in a pro player, something I've always missed, coming from the competitive MTG scene.
Oh, I also wanted to mention that extra geysers covered with rocks might be a useful way to modulate potential vespene income. Of course this would be much harder to use and unelegant for the main base. The starting vespene situation is probably the most important for basic balance.
|
On March 21 2012 14:09 a176 wrote:
i think its too early to decide between 1hyg and 2g. i personally feel reverting to 2g is counter intuitive; i thought the original point of this all was to force more strategic gameplay into the game? i dont believe ending up with only a reduction of 160-180mineral/min/base is that much of a change from vanilla.
I agree with this. Plus, wouldn't changing the ratio of minerals to gas by using 6m/2g upset the balance even more, favoring tech and gas heavy units? It seems the game is balanced heavily around the current ratio, hence the reason there aren't min only bases and other unusual arrangements. Although, this problem could be solved if the nat has 1 gas or if either the 3rd or 4th is min only.
|
so what are the changes between 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 just for interest
|
On March 21 2012 13:52 HypertonicHydroponic wrote:I just wanted to say that infestors may become partcularly formidable to the 1hyg version of this map. I will check back with a more exact build, but basically you 10 pool, 9 gas, drone back up to 10, put three on gas as soon as it pops, pop an overlord, start lair, drone up to 15 (12 on minerals), plant infestor pit, 3-5 spines (re-droning back to 12 with each one), get a queen and 3 infestors by the time the Very Hard AI pops it's attack with any race. This pretty using destiny's "fungal field" you can pretty much wipe up this initial attack force and expand at will. Again, this is just messing around with funky timings with AI so it might not matter against another player, but it seems like the really fast infestors are not very punishable. I think two geysers will help to fix this, but I like the idea of making them low yield as FoxyMayhem mentioned in the BoGiSC2 thread. Also, 1875 per geyser, but that's just nitpicking. Edit: Also, archons.
Personally until it is explored more i don't think we should worry about balance too much, because we have to remember that we will be playing the game WRONG. In small scale battles the way that units can be split up is completely different, units like the stalker, that are fast, heal and long ranged become SO powerful. I fear for a terran against HerO on this map, with his stalker micro...
I'd like to note that it should be mandatory for posts to finish like this:
Also, archons.
|
This is a very chokey map compared to your normal style  Nice tho, needs some crisp paint
|
This is finally a big reason to support FRPB - it leads to wonderful maps! SO many bases, everywhere, so much space to conquer... I know that SC2 is supposed to be and RTS, but I still like the exploration feeling from this kind of maps.
|
On March 21 2012 13:52 HypertonicHydroponic wrote:I just wanted to say that infestors may become partcularly formidable to the 1hyg version of this map. I will check back with a more exact build, but basically you 10 pool, 9 gas, drone back up to 10, put three on gas as soon as it pops, pop an overlord, start lair, drone up to 15 (12 on minerals), plant infestor pit, 3-5 spines (re-droning back to 12 with each one), get a queen and 3 infestors by the time the Very Hard AI pops it's attack with any race. This pretty using destiny's "fungal field" you can pretty much wipe up this initial attack force and expand at will. Again, this is just messing around with funky timings with AI so it might not matter against another player, but it seems like the really fast infestors are not very punishable. I think two geysers will help to fix this, but I like the idea of making them low yield as FoxyMayhem mentioned in the BoGiSC2 thread. Also, 1875 per geyser, but that's just nitpicking. Edit: Also, archons.
It seems logical that infestor builds will be OP with 1hyg, but I just watched a diamond zerg who was rushing to infestors get absolutely murdered by early marine aggression from a platinum terran. The AI does not know how to build off 6 minerals, and furthermore the AI has the worst micro ever, which is more important on this kind of map so testing things vs the AI is not a good benchmark.
In general, as Barrin stated in is original post, teching is generally slowed down because you need to expand more often, and teching opens you up to getting overwhelmed by T1 units. I really dont think rushing to gas units is going to be an issue on 6m 1hyg maps, but I DO think it could be an issue on 6m2g maps because you will have an abundance of gas units some of which are countered by mineral units/buildings. of course, this is my completely untested opinion.
|
|
|
On March 21 2012 15:18 EatThePath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:41 emc wrote:On March 21 2012 07:57 EatThePath wrote:On March 21 2012 06:46 Natespank wrote:First impressions: 1- awesome awesome awesome critique: 2- gas steals. Specifically, in PvP, a protoss who gas steals and follows up with a 4 gate would be terrifying, or a terran gas stealing a protoss and then 5rax marine rushing him. The only way to defend such strategies is to use gas units. Might be fine, just saying, it's the first thing that comes to mind for me 3 gate is the max amount of production you can do on 1 base. I'm not sure what the best response would be for a gas steal, but I have a feeling it might be expand with cannons. Really you shouldn't let it happen because it's so important. Terran couldn't steal effectively because you can kill the scv as it builds, but it'd be worth testing as a cheese option. You should go try it out! So many things to check. ;D Oh, and Barrin, the version of 6m1hyg Devolution up now has a doodad malfunction at the natural in the bottom left. There's a giant floating mar sara dead tree. It's spooky! And also distracting. I'm going to gas steal every game as zerg, see how fun it is Sounds good, I'll be FFEing. About 1hyg vs 2g, I don't think it's possible to choose yet. If you maintain 6m, 2g skews the game a lot farther towards tech based. Part of the appeal for me thus far in 6m1hyg is that I feel like I'm still in the development stages of the game with a saturated natural base. I need a 3rd before I can start any freewheeling multi-teching. (As protoss I should say.) This does put protoss in a pinch sometimes, but maybe there are ways to adjust how you play the matchups? I'll definitely be willing to test 6m2g as well to compare, but I don't like it on paper. If you were going that direction, I'd prefer something like 7m2g with geysers that require 3.5 harvesters to saturate, and some distance mineral patches (5 squares) that require 3 harvesters to saturate. I can imagine an SC2 landscape with maps that vary these things somewhat freely in order to play up certain map features later in the game further out on the map, or just to adjust how the early game is played. I think it's completely reasonable to expect competitive players to know how to open off 6m1hyg, 6m2g, and 7m2g, with a natural that could be any of those as well. This style of mapping creates a higher burden of game knowledge to create balanced maps without getting lucky, but the variation it would provide would be great for spectators! And the dimension of innovation would be much more highly rewarded in a pro player, something I've always missed, coming from the competitive MTG scene. Oh, I also wanted to mention that extra geysers covered with rocks might be a useful way to modulate potential vespene income. Of course this would be much harder to use and unelegant for the main base. The starting vespene situation is probably the most important for basic balance.
Even if you FFE gas steal will be pretty powerful if you only have one gas geyser. It would take a hell of a lot longer for you to get your cyber core out with no increase in cost to me (still only 25 minerals and Zerg is going to FE too, btw).
That said, my concern is that these changes also make inject larva much less powerful throughout the early and mid game because you wouldn't be able to use all of that larva anyway. Inject larva might not stack up very well to chronoboost and MULE.
|
On March 22 2012 01:19 Vul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 15:18 EatThePath wrote:On March 21 2012 08:41 emc wrote:On March 21 2012 07:57 EatThePath wrote:On March 21 2012 06:46 Natespank wrote:First impressions: 1- awesome awesome awesome critique: 2- gas steals. Specifically, in PvP, a protoss who gas steals and follows up with a 4 gate would be terrifying, or a terran gas stealing a protoss and then 5rax marine rushing him. The only way to defend such strategies is to use gas units. Might be fine, just saying, it's the first thing that comes to mind for me 3 gate is the max amount of production you can do on 1 base. I'm not sure what the best response would be for a gas steal, but I have a feeling it might be expand with cannons. Really you shouldn't let it happen because it's so important. Terran couldn't steal effectively because you can kill the scv as it builds, but it'd be worth testing as a cheese option. You should go try it out! So many things to check. ;D Oh, and Barrin, the version of 6m1hyg Devolution up now has a doodad malfunction at the natural in the bottom left. There's a giant floating mar sara dead tree. It's spooky! And also distracting. I'm going to gas steal every game as zerg, see how fun it is Sounds good, I'll be FFEing. About 1hyg vs 2g, I don't think it's possible to choose yet. If you maintain 6m, 2g skews the game a lot farther towards tech based. Part of the appeal for me thus far in 6m1hyg is that I feel like I'm still in the development stages of the game with a saturated natural base. I need a 3rd before I can start any freewheeling multi-teching. (As protoss I should say.) This does put protoss in a pinch sometimes, but maybe there are ways to adjust how you play the matchups? I'll definitely be willing to test 6m2g as well to compare, but I don't like it on paper. If you were going that direction, I'd prefer something like 7m2g with geysers that require 3.5 harvesters to saturate, and some distance mineral patches (5 squares) that require 3 harvesters to saturate. I can imagine an SC2 landscape with maps that vary these things somewhat freely in order to play up certain map features later in the game further out on the map, or just to adjust how the early game is played. I think it's completely reasonable to expect competitive players to know how to open off 6m1hyg, 6m2g, and 7m2g, with a natural that could be any of those as well. This style of mapping creates a higher burden of game knowledge to create balanced maps without getting lucky, but the variation it would provide would be great for spectators! And the dimension of innovation would be much more highly rewarded in a pro player, something I've always missed, coming from the competitive MTG scene. Oh, I also wanted to mention that extra geysers covered with rocks might be a useful way to modulate potential vespene income. Of course this would be much harder to use and unelegant for the main base. The starting vespene situation is probably the most important for basic balance. Even if you FFE gas steal will be pretty powerful if you only have one gas geyser. It would take a hell of a lot longer for you to get your cyber core out with no increase in cost to me (still only 25 minerals and Zerg is going to FE too, btw). That said, my concern is that these changes also make inject larva much less powerful throughout the early and mid game because you wouldn't be able to use all of that larva anyway. Inject larva might not stack up very well to chronoboost and MULE.
But creep tumours do!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UlkJe.jpg)
