• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
TeamLiquid Liquipedia LiquidDota LiquidLegends
EDT 04:32
CEST 10:32
KST 17:32
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Lore of the Nexus: The Angiris Council0DHM Valencia: Power Rank43[TSL9] Prize Pool & Talent18Code S RO10 - Group B, Day 1 Preview (Season 2)7Code S RO10 - Group A, Day 1 Preview (Season 2)11
Community News
2022 AfreecaTV Challengers Starleague Season 210BSL 2v2 ProLeague x ShieldBattery - SIGN UP NOW!14Code S RO10 Groups announced, RO20 final results1ESL Open #128: ByuN, MaxPax, Scarlett win3Artosis to leave Korea after GSL Season 3, possibility of online GSL casts?87
StarCraft 2
General
Vidalista 20mg | Generic Tadalafil: Best ED Cure DHM Valencia: Power Rank Rogue & Trap out for DHM Valencia? Forbidden Ground buildings Shopify TeamLiquid StarLeague 9
Tourneys
DreamHack Masters: Valencia 2022 - Day 1 What Is The Price Of Chillwell Portable AC Reviews [GSL 2022] Code S:Season 2 - Ro10 Group A [NationWars 7] Ro8 thread [Alpha Pro Series] Rogue v TIME
Strategy
Hero's pvz Simple Questions Simple Answers What should I try to work on to improve my TvZ [G] YAKS LOTV: Yet Another hotKey Setup - zerg
Custom Maps
Simple Questions/Answers [A] SC Real Scale
External Content
Mutation # 323 Well Trained Mutation # 322 Warp Zone Mutation # 321 Rise From Ashes Mutation # 320 Retribution
Brood War
General
YellOw wins poker tournament for $696,000 USD Future Cup 4 Under 18 ¿BSL U18? Titan Reactor - Year 2 [Update]ShieldBattery: New Ranked System BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[BSL15] - RO16 Group C - Friday 17:00 CEST [BSL15] - Ro16 Group D - Sunday 17:00 CEST The Casual Games of the Week Thread Artosis vs Gauntlet of the Apes
Strategy
ZvT Guardian Hydra Optimized Strategy before the gosus Project: Strat Update [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Diablo Immoral The PlayStation 5 Crossfire: Legion - A new RTS combining C&C and SC Final Fantasy XIV Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official Dota and Chess General Discussion TL.net migration megathread + LiquidDota archive [DPC 21-22] Tour 3 Discussion/LR LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net LiquidDota Site Rules
League of Legends
[Patch 12.7] Arcana Skins Release Discussion LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net [Summer Split] LoL Esports General Discussion [Patch Notes] Release General Discussion
Heroes of the Storm
Lore of the Nexus: The Angiris Council HotS: WP and Funny Moments Mapping Heroes: Battleground Stats Last Flight To Paris: MCC Group Stage
Hearthstone
TL Mafia
British Empire Mini Mafia II TL Mafia Community Thread Chezinu streak(s) Mafia Sengoku Mafia Survivor II: The Amazon
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Coronavirus and You Summer Games Done Quick 2022! Trading/Investing Thread Kashmir - Article 370 revoked
Fan Clubs
Day[9] Fan Club soO Fan Club Zest Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [TV] HBO Game of Thrones Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece [Manga] Berserk
Sports
2021 - 2022 Football Thread 2021 NFL/CFB Season NBA General Discussion Formula 1 Discussion McBoner: A hockey love story
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread The Ultimate Mouse Thread Simple Questions Simple Answers
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
On Radicalization and S…
plasmidghost
Bravery and cowardice…
Starlightsun
My daughter wants to pla…
JoinTheRain
On gun violence in America…
MrBitter
First time having "S*X".
Garnet
Gomorrah
Broodwar4lyf
Getting Back to it..!.20 years…
FuDDx
Age
AmericanUmlaut
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1015 users

[D] Alternative to neutral supply depot

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next All
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-11-24 20:09:03
August 08 2012 02:55 GMT
#1
UPDATE November 24, 2012
This discussion has now been rendered moot, with Blizzard's inclusion of the "unbuildable rocks" and "unbuildable debris" neutral units in Heart of the Swarm, which provide a ladder-friendly version of what the neutral supply depot did. Feel free to read through if you're interested anyway, though.

------

UPDATE August 9, 2012
I've refined how the alternative solution works, to better accommodate FFE and anti-"ling run-by" walls.

------

Feedback from the thread

(Discussing outdated version) ESV's Diamond weighs in, and my response:
+ Show Spoiler +
On August 08 2012 16:18 Diamond wrote:
ESV literally spent 100% of our resources for like 3 weeks trying to find a replacement for the depot, nothing acts the same while allowing itself to be destroyed for "OH SHIT, LING RUNBY!" walls. Also no visual indication I think will confuse more people than a depot.

There is literally nothing that works as well as the neutral depot, too bad Blizz won't implement it.

Regarding walls, I think this is more of a terrain development issue. Why is there an assumed requirement for walls to connect right against the ramp? Why not just in front of the ramp, or some other solution? Regarding visual indication, this is building pathing; this is shown as a grid for people who have building grid turned on, and for those who don't you still get the visual indication that you cannot place a building there when attempting. It's more than just a temporary fix; it's about re-adjusting pathing behaviour at the bottom of a single-width ramp.

Perhaps the best argument against it in terms of confusion would be that building pathing at your main base ramp would behave differently at the bottom than any other ramp on the map. I'm not sure if that's a really big deal, though, as who tries to deliberately construct buildings at the bottom of any other ramp to block it off?

-----------

Also keep in mind that small adjustments can be made -- I just posted what's in the OP as an example. Here's an alternate example that reduces how far the unpathable terrain extends by 1 unit, and a demonstrative Protoss FFE wall at the ramp, without the need for any major terrain adjustments.

[image loading]

[image loading]


Pardon my sim-city skills; I cooked this up in 2 seconds. I'm sure a sturdier wall could be devised.


-----------------

Hey there. So the point of this thread is to discuss a possible alternative solution to using neutral supply depots in tournament maps. Before I get into that, let's review exactly what that problem is, and what the current "tournament standard" solution happens to be (and why).

The Problem
The way single-width ramps work in StarCraft 2, it's possible for a Protoss or Terran to completely block the bottom of a single-width ramp with just two or three structures. This is particularly painful when the victim happens to be a Zerg player, as they become unable to get that early expansion they need to remain competitive -- or worse, find themselves walled off from their natural hatchery, and helplessly watch as it is destroyed, putting them irreparably behind their opponent.

[image loading]
The cries of Zerg players could be heard echoing across the Koprulu Sector


The Current Solution
To prevent this from happening in tournament-level matches, mapmakers came up with the creative solution to add neutral lowered supply depots at the bottom of single-width ramps which lead into a main base. The cheesy tactic is no longer viable, and the neutral depot can be later destroyed so it no longer has any impact on the game.

[image loading]
The great saviour of Zerg, ironically of Terran origin.


For all practical purposes, this solution works well. However, it can have the negative aspect of confusing the uninitiated (I mean, we have a random Terran building sitting at the base of your main ramp -- and it's especially out of place if neither player is Terran), whether they be players or spectators. For this reason, we don't see this solution implemented on the ladder, much to the detriment of everyone who ladders 1v1 competitively. You can't entirely blame Blizzard for this. They have to take into consideration even the people who are still in the practice league, let alone Bronze.

Like I already mentioned, it can also be confusing to newbie spectators watching these tournament-level games. So, what do we do about it?

An Alternative Solution
So if we can't use neutral race buildings as a universal solution, even if it works well enough for tournaments, what could we do? It's obvious the standard single-width ramp on its own is fundamentally broken if left on its own. I figure, why not use our old friend the pathing tool? There is a specific options for painting unbuildable pathing onto the map. Making use of it opens up some creative possibilities.

[image loading]
A modified single-width ramp, courtesy of the pathing tool.


Adding unbuildable pathing in this manner completely shuts down the possibility of blocking the ramp, while having minimal to zero impact on gameplay. As a bonus, it also doesn't require use of interactive objects like racial structures that create visual noise and confusion to the uninitiated. Because of this, it might even be possible to convince Blizzard to adjust their ladder maps in a similar fashion, fixing the ramp block issue for the ladder as well.

Behold, no more 2 bunker or 3 pylon blocks:

[image loading]
Bunker blocks work so poorly, a depot has to come in to pick up the slack


[image loading]
If you're a Protoss and you find yourself actually trying this, you might want to rethink your PvZ


And of course, minimal impact on current FE trends for Terran and Protoss vs. Zerg:

[image loading]
A Terran anti-ling wall


[image loading]
A Protoss FFE wall


+ Show Spoiler [Protoss FFE on Antiga Shipyard] +

[image loading]

The weird top-right spawn:
[image loading]

Compare to the FFE example given in Liquipedia for this spawn:
[image loading]



Thoughts and/or opinions?
Twitter: @iamcaustic
GDR
Profile Joined July 2011
Canada407 Posts
August 08 2012 03:31 GMT
#2
I think the problem with blocking building placement is that it can cause confusion. There is no way to signify that you can't build buildings there. In addition, at least from your picture, it would block ramp to nexus wall offs.

I think the solution needs to be temporary. Something we see the importance of in the early game, but loses it's relevance in the mid-late game. I think the depot fits this purpose perfectly.
SigmaFiE
Profile Blog Joined October 2011
United States333 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 03:47:55
August 08 2012 03:46 GMT
#3
On August 08 2012 12:31 GDR wrote:
I think the problem with blocking building placement is that it can cause confusion. There is no way to signify that you can't build buildings there. In addition, at least from your picture, it would block ramp to nexus wall offs.



To expand on this. The problem with using the no-building pathing tool to paint out that area is that is generates zero information to the player that that particular area is non-buildable. This can seriously hinder the players as they need to be able to read, recognize, and make decisions based on the information they see in front of them. If they see that they can't build there but there is no obvious informational identifier (i.e. a structure or other building blocker) placed there, than their ability to perform is hindered. This is compounded if it is a newer player or a player that chooses not to enable the build grid. At the basis of everygame is the key condition that players are assessing information and making decisions based on that information (whether perfect or not). We should strive to give them as much information as possible without giving undue advantage such that they are not hindered.

The neutral supply depot fits this. That is not to say there are not other possible solutions, just that this one works particularly well. And lets not forget the possibility of players using the drone drill -- which works just fine to circumvent this particular issue.
https://johnemerson.artstation.com/
-NegativeZero-
Profile Joined August 2011
United States2119 Posts
August 08 2012 04:21 GMT
#4
On August 08 2012 12:46 SigmaFiE wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2012 12:31 GDR wrote:
I think the problem with blocking building placement is that it can cause confusion. There is no way to signify that you can't build buildings there. In addition, at least from your picture, it would block ramp to nexus wall offs.



To expand on this. The problem with using the no-building pathing tool to paint out that area is that is generates zero information to the player that that particular area is non-buildable. This can seriously hinder the players as they need to be able to read, recognize, and make decisions based on the information they see in front of them. If they see that they can't build there but there is no obvious informational identifier (i.e. a structure or other building blocker) placed there, than their ability to perform is hindered. This is compounded if it is a newer player or a player that chooses not to enable the build grid. At the basis of everygame is the key condition that players are assessing information and making decisions based on that information (whether perfect or not). We should strive to give them as much information as possible without giving undue advantage such that they are not hindered.

The neutral supply depot fits this. That is not to say there are not other possible solutions, just that this one works particularly well. And lets not forget the possibility of players using the drone drill -- which works just fine to circumvent this particular issue.

I don't know about this - BW maps are full of random unbuildable terrain, often with almost zero visibility (you can usually tell if you look closely enough that the tiles have been specifically chosen and edited to be unbuildable), but this doesn't really hurt players at all.

In fact, it might be interesting if it became accepted for certain textures to be associated and used only with unbuildable terrain - it might make for some interesting map design, such as limiting the possible locations for proxy pylons, etc.
vibeo gane,
Ktk
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Korea (South)753 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 04:25:02
August 08 2012 04:22 GMT
#5
400HP 2x2 Destructible rocks on a 3minute timer.
Edit: they'd have to be burrowed.

Now they're neutral, not from a race, and timed. You could even eliminate the timer.
SoulFilcher
Profile Joined August 2012
Brazil43 Posts
August 08 2012 05:28 GMT
#6
What about another lowered structure, such as the Zhakul'Das library? It can be resized to be 2x2 if necessary. It would remove the feel caused by a known structure like the Supply Depot and have the exact same effect.
digmouse
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
China5934 Posts
August 08 2012 05:37 GMT
#7
Simply change it to something more fitting the map's athetics, i.e. supply depot on daybreak or antiga is acceptable since the map itself is a human space station, and on whirlwind or ohana, rocks works just fine.
TranslatorIf you want to ask anything about Chinese esports, send me a PM or follow me @nerddigmouse.
Insomni7
Profile Joined June 2011
667 Posts
August 08 2012 06:09 GMT
#8
Frankly this seems it would cause more confusion than a depot. At least a depot has a visual indicator of its presence. I think what is really needed is a new model of the blocking object, something which is not connected to any race but makes sense in its context. What does that look like? not really sure yet.
Never Forget.
Salivanth
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Australia1071 Posts
August 08 2012 07:01 GMT
#9
This idea would hurt Protoss Forge Fast Expanding on some maps, as well: Note the gap that stops you from blocking off your own ramp with a building. I like the idea of finding an alternative, but this isn't it.
<@Wikt> so you are one of those nega-fans <@Wikt> that hates the company that makes a game and everything they stand for <@Wikt> but still plays the game <@Wikt> (like roughly 30% of blizzard's player base, maybe much more...)
Euronyme
Profile Joined August 2010
Sweden3804 Posts
August 08 2012 07:08 GMT
#10
On August 08 2012 13:22 Ktk wrote:
400HP 2x2 Destructible rocks on a 3minute timer.
Edit: they'd have to be burrowed.

Now they're neutral, not from a race, and timed. You could even eliminate the timer.


This seems like the best idea so far. Just make it destructible rocks instead of a supply depot. Problem solved.
I bet i can maı̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̨̨̨̨̨̨ke you wipe your screen.
Diamond
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States10796 Posts
August 08 2012 07:18 GMT
#11
ESV literally spent 100% of our resources for like 3 weeks trying to find a replacement for the depot, nothing acts the same while allowing itself to be destroyed for "OH SHIT, LING RUNBY!" walls. Also no visual indication I think will confuse more people than a depot.

There is literally nothing that works as well as the neutral depot, too bad Blizz won't implement it.
Ballistix Gaming Global Gaming/Esports Marketing Manager - twitter.com/esvdiamond
Xapti
Profile Joined April 2010
Canada2473 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 08:00:08
August 08 2012 07:56 GMT
#12
You have to be kinda stupid for people to think that with this new advanced map editor that people haven't thought of better ways to block things than a lowered supply depot.

Unbuildable pathing is a problem because it's PERMANENT. The purpose of the depot is so that it's destructible, so that it's still possible to wall later on.

I think the best solution would be a small and/or short doodad placed in the middle of the area that would vary depending on the map (such as a bush, crystal, small boulder bones, tree, or debris).
That's not all; The doodad would have 1 health, and be unselectable, untargettable, and invulnerable for the first 3 or so minutes of the game. It would either have a small movement-blocking footprint (static doodads can have very small footprints) that wouldn't hinder unit movement much, or even no movement-hindering footprint at all (which would be less realistic to have units moving through them though). Regardless, it would still have at least 1 square blocked for building placement.

By doing it this way it:
• would not distract new players. As the OP pointed out, new players may get confused at the sight of a neutral building, especially with the name "supply depot"
• would not be permanent, making for less impact on the game than it's intended purpose
• would not waste any significant amount of time for the players to get rid of once it's timer is elapsed.

Problems: It kinda goes against "standard melee rules", but I don't think this is an issue? At least the only people who might have a problem with it is Blizzard, since they may not like having custom units or triggers in ladder maps. Aside from that I don't think it's an issue because as far as I know unlike in SC1 melee maps can have all sorts of special units and triggers.
"Then he told me to tell you that he wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire" — "Well, you tell him that I said that I wouldn't piss on him if he was on Jeopardy!"
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 08 2012 09:52 GMT
#13
On August 08 2012 13:21 -NegativeZero- wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2012 12:46 SigmaFiE wrote:
On August 08 2012 12:31 GDR wrote:
I think the problem with blocking building placement is that it can cause confusion. There is no way to signify that you can't build buildings there. In addition, at least from your picture, it would block ramp to nexus wall offs.



To expand on this. The problem with using the no-building pathing tool to paint out that area is that is generates zero information to the player that that particular area is non-buildable. This can seriously hinder the players as they need to be able to read, recognize, and make decisions based on the information they see in front of them. If they see that they can't build there but there is no obvious informational identifier (i.e. a structure or other building blocker) placed there, than their ability to perform is hindered. This is compounded if it is a newer player or a player that chooses not to enable the build grid. At the basis of everygame is the key condition that players are assessing information and making decisions based on that information (whether perfect or not). We should strive to give them as much information as possible without giving undue advantage such that they are not hindered.

The neutral supply depot fits this. That is not to say there are not other possible solutions, just that this one works particularly well. And lets not forget the possibility of players using the drone drill -- which works just fine to circumvent this particular issue.

I don't know about this - BW maps are full of random unbuildable terrain, often with almost zero visibility (you can usually tell if you look closely enough that the tiles have been specifically chosen and edited to be unbuildable), but this doesn't really hurt players at all.

In fact, it might be interesting if it became accepted for certain textures to be associated and used only with unbuildable terrain - it might make for some interesting map design, such as limiting the possible locations for proxy pylons, etc.

This was along my line of thinking as well. I don't think enough time has been spent on these sorts of alternative possibilities, despite there being a lot of precedence in Brood War. Kind of strange IMO.

Most of the arguments against seem to be along the lines of "but it won't work because players are used to X and some maps will lose the ability to wall like Y". However, what players are used to is dependent on what's currently out there -- if this were to be implemented across the board, suddenly this would be what players become used to. As for wall-offs, we need to ask ourselves the question: do we make maps assuming ramp-to-townhall walls, or do we adjust the terrain to encourage/make possible wall-offs in a different manner?
Twitter: @iamcaustic
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 08 2012 09:59 GMT
#14
On August 08 2012 16:18 Diamond wrote:
ESV literally spent 100% of our resources for like 3 weeks trying to find a replacement for the depot, nothing acts the same while allowing itself to be destroyed for "OH SHIT, LING RUNBY!" walls. Also no visual indication I think will confuse more people than a depot.

There is literally nothing that works as well as the neutral depot, too bad Blizz won't implement it.

Regarding walls, I think this is more of a terrain development issue. Why is there an assumed requirement for walls to connect right against the ramp? Why not just in front of the ramp, or some other solution? Regarding visual indication, this is building pathing; this is shown as a grid for people who have building grid turned on, and for those who don't you still get the visual indication that you cannot place a building there when attempting. It's more than just a temporary fix; it's about re-adjusting pathing behaviour at the bottom of a single-width ramp.

Perhaps the best argument against it in terms of confusion would be that building pathing at your main base ramp would behave differently at the bottom than any other ramp on the map. I'm not sure if that's a really big deal, though, as who tries to deliberately construct buildings at the bottom of any other ramp to block it off?
Twitter: @iamcaustic
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 08 2012 10:02 GMT
#15
On August 08 2012 16:08 Euronyme wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2012 13:22 Ktk wrote:
400HP 2x2 Destructible rocks on a 3minute timer.
Edit: they'd have to be burrowed.

Now they're neutral, not from a race, and timed. You could even eliminate the timer.


This seems like the best idea so far. Just make it destructible rocks instead of a supply depot. Problem solved.

Why is there a requirement to design maps to FFE off of the ramp? Why not design terrain to allow FFE without the need of the ramp (like on BW maps)? I do, however, agree that this wouldn't be a viable solution for some current maps in the ladder/tournament map pools, such as Antiga Shipyard. There are plenty of problems with maps like that anyway though, and should probably be rotated out of pools.
Twitter: @iamcaustic
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
August 08 2012 10:14 GMT
#16
On August 08 2012 16:56 Xapti wrote:
You have to be kinda stupid for people to think that with this new advanced map editor that people haven't thought of better ways to block things than a lowered supply depot.

Unbuildable pathing is a problem because it's PERMANENT. The purpose of the depot is so that it's destructible, so that it's still possible to wall later on.

I think the best solution would be a small and/or short doodad placed in the middle of the area that would vary depending on the map (such as a bush, crystal, small boulder bones, tree, or debris).
That's not all; The doodad would have 1 health, and be unselectable, untargettable, and invulnerable for the first 3 or so minutes of the game. It would either have a small movement-blocking footprint (static doodads can have very small footprints) that wouldn't hinder unit movement much, or even no movement-hindering footprint at all (which would be less realistic to have units moving through them though). Regardless, it would still have at least 1 square blocked for building placement.

By doing it this way it:
• would not distract new players. As the OP pointed out, new players may get confused at the sight of a neutral building, especially with the name "supply depot"
• would not be permanent, making for less impact on the game than it's intended purpose
• would not waste any significant amount of time for the players to get rid of once it's timer is elapsed.

Problems: It kinda goes against "standard melee rules", but I don't think this is an issue? At least the only people who might have a problem with it is Blizzard, since they may not like having custom units or triggers in ladder maps. Aside from that I don't think it's an issue because as far as I know unlike in SC1 melee maps can have all sorts of special units and triggers.

Of course it's permanent. This alternative is more than just a band-aid fix, it's about re-thinking the behaviour of pathing and terrain between the main and natural bases. As a number of people in the thread have mentioned, certain solutions for openings like FFE utilized on some current maps (such as Antiga Shipyard) would not work with this. However, if we're looking at a modern solution to a problem, is it reasonable to expect it to fit perfectly within old maps for it to be a true solution? Or rather, should we consider that perhaps a slight adjustment to terrain design might be more reasonable?

It's like in software development, if you create a new feature or update underlying concepts, you can't possibly make it 100% backwards-compatible. With patch 1.5, there was a recent controversy over Blizzard dropping support for Mac OS X 10.5.8 despite it being part of the original minimum requirements.

Perhaps we can't use this method for some current/older maps, but what about maps that are made going forward that take this concept into consideration?
Twitter: @iamcaustic
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 10:32:53
August 08 2012 10:32 GMT
#17
Also keep in mind that small adjustments can be made -- I just posted what's in the OP as an example. Here's an alternate example that reduces how far the unpathable terrain extends by 1 unit, and a demonstrative Protoss FFE wall at the ramp, without the need for any major terrain adjustments.

[image loading]

[image loading]


Pardon my sim-city skills; I cooked this up in 2 seconds. I'm sure a sturdier wall could be devised.
Twitter: @iamcaustic
XenoX101
Profile Joined February 2011
Australia729 Posts
August 08 2012 11:23 GMT
#18
It would need to be done by Blizzard otherwise people will create their own non-standard unpathable terrain patterns around ramps, and it would be a disaster for competitive gaming. Blizzard are the only ones who can force all ramps to have a particular set of unpathable terrain. The reason the neutral supply depot sort of works is because it is idiot-proof, there are only 3 places you can put it and they all work well enough to prevent the wall.
iamcaustic
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada1509 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 11:32:42
August 08 2012 11:30 GMT
#19
On August 08 2012 20:23 XenoX101 wrote:
It would need to be done by Blizzard otherwise people will create their own non-standard unpathable terrain patterns around ramps, and it would be a disaster for competitive gaming. Blizzard are the only ones who can force all ramps to have a particular set of unpathable terrain. The reason the neutral supply depot sort of works is because it is idiot-proof, there are only 3 places you can put it and they all work well enough to prevent the wall.

For maps made by random amateur mapmakers, yes this could be an issue. However, for premier tournaments and mapmaking teams I'm not sure why a de-facto standard can't be agreed upon; everyone seems to have agreed upon the neutral lowered supply depot pretty easily.

Frankly, I don't see it as too difficult to figure out and agree upon a specific pathing setup. In this regard it'd only be 1 pattern to be had, rather than the 3 possible placements for the neutral depot. The trick is just coming up with what pathing pattern is the best solution.
Twitter: @iamcaustic
XenoX101
Profile Joined February 2011
Australia729 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-08 12:47:10
August 08 2012 12:43 GMT
#20
On August 08 2012 20:30 iamcaustic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2012 20:23 XenoX101 wrote:
It would need to be done by Blizzard otherwise people will create their own non-standard unpathable terrain patterns around ramps, and it would be a disaster for competitive gaming. Blizzard are the only ones who can force all ramps to have a particular set of unpathable terrain. The reason the neutral supply depot sort of works is because it is idiot-proof, there are only 3 places you can put it and they all work well enough to prevent the wall.

For maps made by random amateur mapmakers, yes this could be an issue. However, for premier tournaments and mapmaking teams I'm not sure why a de-facto standard can't be agreed upon; everyone seems to have agreed upon the neutral lowered supply depot pretty easily.

Frankly, I don't see it as too difficult to figure out and agree upon a specific pathing setup. In this regard it'd only be 1 pattern to be had, rather than the 3 possible placements for the neutral depot. The trick is just coming up with what pathing pattern is the best solution.


We still don't even have a universal map pool that all tournaments agree on, so the chances of every single tournament adopting the standard are slim to none. It will only cause further complications about map versions if one version has un-pathable terrain and another has a neutral supply depot, hardly worth the slight visual improvement of not having the depot. And you can always tell when a map has been modded with a neutral supply depot, not so with unpathable terrain. It's a nice idea, but it's far too ambitious for the map framework or lack-thereof that we have now.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
ESL Pro Tour
08:00
DH Valencia 2022 - Day 2
ESL.tv2276
Esl_sc22276
IndyStarCraft 1226
ESL_sc2b638
TaKeTV 404
ALGaming 400
Crank 370
Maincast Studio 202
ESL_sc2c169
OGamingTV SC2 143
ESL124
HorussTv 58
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
IndyStarCraft 1226
Crank 370
ROOTSuperNova 216
ProTech61
StarCraft: Brood War
Rain 16641
Horang2 3276
PianO 764
Shuttle 294
ToSsGirL 249
Leta 203
ggaemo 177
Shinee 101
Stork 96
Terrorterran 72
[ Show more ]
scan(afreeca) 59
zelot 55
sSak 54
CadenZie 36
Rush 21
Jumperer 20
Beast 9
Dota 2
resolut1ontv 1365
Attackerdota710
XcaliburYe640
XaKoH 551
febbydoto135
Super Smash Bros
Westballz52
Other Games
summit1g21947
tarik_tv21482
singsing1612
WinterStarcraft580
m0e_tv475
Livibee291
mouzStarbuck89
KnowMe63
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick64723
Dota 2
BeyondTheSummit18442
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
ESL CS:GO266
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
[ Show 19 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Bosshoore 3
• Gussbus
• Laughngamez YouTube
• Poblha
• Alpha X_
• aXEnki
• Migwel
• intothetv
• CSOeSports
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamez Trovo
StarCraft: Brood War
• sscaitournament1
• STPLYoutube
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• WagamamaTV1546
League of Legends
• Rush8911
• Stunt381
Upcoming Events
DPC 2021/2022 Tour 3
1h 28m
Team Bald Reborn vs Nigma
OG vs TBD
CSO Contender
7h 28m
DPC 2021/2022 Tour 3
10h 28m
Evil Geniuses vs TBD
ESL Pro Tour
18h 28m
ESL Pro Tour
23h 28m
Ultimate Battle
1d 2h
Soulkey vs Rush
BSL: ProLeague
1d 6h
ESL Pro Tour
2 days
ESL Pro Tour
2 days
DPC 2021/2022 Tour 3
3 days
Evil Geniuses vs TBD
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Endless Battle 3: Mihu vs KuKu
DHM Valencia: EU
PSISTORM HC 2022
Roobet Cup

Ongoing

BSL Season 15: GosuLeague
STL37
RCG 2021
KCM Ladies Race Survival 2022 Season 2
Nine-Tathlon Invitational
HoneyCai Friendlies Season 4
GAN Race Survival Season 4
CWCL Season 4
FS Mania
Big Baby Popularity Contest
KCM Race Survival 2022 Season 2
BSL Season 15
TOP Challenge Qualifier
2022 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
Deathfate Pro Team League
WTL 2022 Summer
2022 GSL S2: Code S
StarCraft II: NationWars 7
DH Masters Valencia
Community Clash League S4
X-Cup Summer 2022 - Quals.
Masters Clash Champ. 2022
ESL Challenger Valencia 2022

Upcoming

BSL Season 15: HasuLeague
Future Cup 4 (U18)
Luck Over Strength
TOP Challenge
2022 ACS Season 2
WSL Season 3
Ultimate Battle: Soulkey vs Rush
2022 GSL: ST 2
DH Masters Atlanta
2022 GSL S3: Code S
TSL 9
HomeStory Cup XXI
X-Cup Summer 2022
X-Cup Summer 2022 - Qual. 7
X-Cup Summer 2022 - Qual. 6
X-Cup Summer 2022 - Qual. 5
IEM Rio Major 2022
ESL Challenger Melbourne 2022
ESL Pro League Season 16
BLAST Premier Fall Groups
ESL Challenger League S42 NA
ESL Challenger League S42 EU
ESL Challenger League S42 AP
IEM Cologne 2022
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2022 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.