|
So as I was making a map today, I realized that there was no place in my map for a watchtower.
The map, which is fairly small, has no obvious place for one, nor could I think of a good place to put one.
Then I wondered about having a map without a watchtower, and wondered if it would be possible. I ask you your thoughts on this issue.
Watchtowers add reasons to control the map and spot attacking armies. However, the tradeoff is that they give vision, and in a map where all the attack paths go in range of the watchtower it makes defending to easy.
So again, I want your opinions on this matter.
|
Personally I think that the watchtower mechanic is beneficial for gameplay over all. It is a point of struggle, and can influence the game. They are by no means necessary, but maps would have to be altered to make counter attacks less likely. So no to make a good map you do not need a watchtower. It is not standard to ignore it, and tournaments/blizzard will most likely rule out your map because it is lacking that feature. Still I would like to see what you have done!
|
The Grid is possibly the only map without a watchtower to ever have been used in competative play(It has been in the Go4SC2 map pool for awhile). The initial reaction to it was some complaints which is expected as players are not comfortable with new features and will complain about any map that has not yet been "accepted by the masses".
I have been watching as many games on it as I have been able to catch on streams and it played okay, although you quickly recognize the benefits of a tower. Players are usualy reluctant to move out on the map as there is no standard position for them to take and limited benefits from taking certain positions. This could also be a symptom of the size and the macro heavy nature of the map though. Base trades and armies oddly passing each other without fighting are also more common then on other maps.
On a big map I would definetly recommend putting down a watchtower to keep the focus on certain positions. I could see it work better on a smaller map though.
|
I hate watch towers. I was open to seeing how they panned out, but feel they really hinder the game. Players don't need a map designer to pick a 'point of contention' for them. Let the players decide on their own.
Watch towers discourage scouting.
Watch towers make comebacks more difficult.
Watch towers make harassment less viable.
Watch towers make flanking and jockeying for position less viable.
Watch towers are a fun idea but are holding back many elements of SC2 gameplay.
|
On August 10 2012 14:55 0neder wrote:
I hate watch towers. I was open to seeing how they panned out, but feel they really hinder the game. Players don't need a map designer to pick a 'point of contention' for them. Let the players decide on their own.
Watch towers discourage scouting.
Watch towers make comebacks more difficult.
Watch towers make harassment less viable.
Watch towers make flanking and jockeying for position less viable.
Watch towers are a fun idea but are holding back many elements of SC2 gameplay.
They also have the added benefit of seeing attacks before they are coming.
While I do agree that it holds back elements of SC2 gameplay. I also wonder how the game would change without them.
|
If I remember correctly, there was a map where the watch towers expired after a set amount of time with a unit granting vision. I think that would be the best, since if you get control of the area, you don't want to use the watchtower right away. That might just be something I dreamt of, though.
I really do like the idea of maps without watch towers. I want to see them used in competitive play (online cups, tourneys, etc.), or even ladder.
|
Just thought I'd mention that the new HOTS map Howling Peaks only has watchtowers around the long-way entrance of the 3rd. The main attack path and short entrance to the 3rd both have no watchtower in sight.
|
Proxies are less difficult to spot when they're relegated to a few areas not covered by watchtowers.
A lot of BW maps had - tons - of unbuildable terrain (think Python, which has a massive open center). If you make a map without watchtowers, you might have to figure out how to make the map look good with lots of unbuildable terrain.
Proxies aside, a map without watch towers simply forces players to put more effort and resources into knowing where the enemy army is located.
|
On August 10 2012 15:56 plasmidghost wrote:
If I remember correctly, there was a map where the watch towers expired after a set amount of time with a unit granting vision. I think that would be the best, since if you get control of the area, you don't want to use the watchtower right away. That might just be something I dreamt of, though.
I really do like the idea of maps without watch towers. I want to see them used in competitive play (online cups, tourneys, etc.), or even ladder.
That was Xel'Naga Fortress I believe, the GSL 3p Map.
|
TPW Sacred
by Meltage
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/P7j8x.jpg)
Icouldnt fit in watchtowers in this map either
|
The other thing about not having watch towers is that terran can make sensor towers, which is almost as effective as a watch tower. I guess zerg have overlords and protoss have observers though.
|
I think without watchtowers you also have to limit your attack paths. Too many attack paths + no watchtower is likely to be too base tradey
|
On August 11 2012 12:53 Fatam wrote:
I think without watchtowers you also have to limit your attack paths. Too many attack paths + no watchtower is likely to be too base tradey
This really depends on how connected the routes are. For example, Cloud Kingdom has a ton of conceivable pathways but they all interconnect at short intervals with the only negative space being the cliffs themselves (except for that doodad block between the nat/3rd). If there were no towers on the map, it'd play mostly the same. Usually the attacker clears the tower anyway so that the defender can't know if they'll come up the ramp outside the natural or swing by the 3rd/4th.
However Daybreak without towers would probably have even more ships in the night moments.
|
On August 10 2012 14:55 0neder wrote:
I hate watch towers. I was open to seeing how they panned out, but feel they really hinder the game. Players don't need a map designer to pick a 'point of contention' for them. Let the players decide on their own.
Watch towers discourage scouting.
Watch towers make comebacks more difficult.
Watch towers make harassment less viable.
Watch towers make flanking and jockeying for position less viable.
Watch towers are a fun idea but are holding back many elements of SC2 gameplay.
I think that a really good map maker can tell you where the major point of contention map is going to be on their map, regardless of whether there is a watch tower there or not. Watch towers serve a purpose, but I would almost prefer them to be unique features on maps (same thing with destructible rocks...) as opposed to being on every single map.
|
On August 10 2012 19:37 OxyGenesis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2012 15:56 plasmidghost wrote:
If I remember correctly, there was a map where the watch towers expired after a set amount of time with a unit granting vision. I think that would be the best, since if you get control of the area, you don't want to use the watchtower right away. That might just be something I dreamt of, though.
I really do like the idea of maps without watch towers. I want to see them used in competitive play (online cups, tourneys, etc.), or even ladder. That was Xel'Naga Fortress I believe, the GSL 3p Map.
That's which map it was. Thanks for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
