EPTAny model that doesn't even attempt to cooperate with LotV's current goals is bound to fail.
[MOD]Economy - Hot Mineral Harvesting - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
Any model that doesn't even attempt to cooperate with LotV's current goals is bound to fail. | ||
|
Uvantak
Uruguay1381 Posts
Also lilium, my big gripe with DH/TH and this new system that you are proposing is that there are too many of them, we need to sum everything up into a single system that complies with that Blizzard wants. And that means maybe accelerate the income rate of the first 8 workers compared to the next 8 so players are more encouraged to expand. We have two ways to go, simply copy the HotS income rates and add worker pairing based on these numbers (DH9) while keeping LotV mineral lines and the ~12 worker start or create a new-ish system that increase the relative income difference between the first and second workers even more than DH9 (~DH10 maybe), so players are encouraged to expand more. Davy has said that he wants more aggressive expanding, lets give him that. | ||
|
RFDaemoniac
United States544 Posts
+ Show Spoiler [Example Layout and Income Curve] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/C1pUFl.jpg) This gave way too much income off of a single base, but that's understandable given that there are 12 patches total. Also note that the layout of them is not very aesthetic but that can be varied. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LphwDl.png) The point being that we have a ton of options that create the curve that we want. unless blizzard explicitly does not want a curve (it would be really nice if we could ask this), there's no way we won't be able to come up with a system that they're okay with. Rather than asking about a single system, ask them what their goals are and if they understand why we want an income curve, and whether they are okay with it given some requirements. For example, their issue against DH was that the income advantage for having 4 bases instead of 3 was 20% more, which they thought was too much. If they would rather that it was only 10% more, then we can tune the numbers (or layouts) to match that. | ||
|
BlackLilium
Poland426 Posts
On July 01 2015 06:31 Uvantak wrote: Also lilium, my big gripe with DH/TH and this new system that you are proposing is that there are too many of them, we need to sum everything up into a single system that complies with that Blizzard wants. And that means maybe accelerate the income rate of the first 8 workers compared to the next 8 so players are more encouraged to expand. While there are two economic system I made, HMH is a straightforward improvement over DH. I see no reason to choose the latter over the former. So, ultimately, there is only one economic system that I am proposing at any given time. Naturally, the economic system changed and evolved over time. It is a result of maintaining the project, rather than "fire and forget". People make valuable comments, raise concerns, and if I see a way to resolve it - I try to implement it. It's hard to understand what Blizzard wants, when their statements contradict each other. Initially they claimed DH was too extreme, and then that it is too weak. Still, HMH is a response to it in two ways:
At this point however I think LotV economic system is set in stone is not going to change. They are in the process of balancing the game around it. However, it should be pointed, that once LotV hits the shelves HMH will not become less relevant! I think the HMH itself is good where it is, but requires balancing of other aspects of the game around it. That is much harder job to do. I am planning to try doing just that, but I will need much more help from your side. Davy has said that he wants more aggressive expanding, lets give him that. If that is the only goal - why not simply reduce the cost of Nexus/CC/Hatchery? | ||
|
Pontius Pirate
United States1557 Posts
On July 02 2015 03:46 BlackLilium wrote: If that is the only goal - why not simply reduce the cost of Nexus/CC/Hatchery? I'm not convinced all three of them need to be cheaper, but the Nexus could probably use a bit of a once-over. Maybe also a slightly quicker build time, or some mechanic that gives it shield armor while constructing. Yes, it's a bit band-aidy, but it's an area that Protoss needs attention in. | ||
|
BlackLilium
Poland426 Posts
For that reason, I am taking on this much harder task. With HMH as the starting point I would like to build a game around it. But I can't do that without you! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/489163-project-starcraft-improved | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
| ||
|
BlackLilium
Poland426 Posts
On July 03 2015 06:26 RoomOfMush wrote: I hope you meant to write "I cant do that without you!". Ooups.... of course that's what I meant! Fixed. | ||
|
HypertonicHydroponic
437 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=24086804 I think this idea is cool because I had mentioned the idea in both your double harvesting thread, and in Zeromus's thread, which, by the time I got to that thread my post was lost in the sea of responses. I think it is great you came up with an implementation for it, and found what seems like a pretty balanced approach (I haven't fully digested your numbers yet, so I don't know how close they match some of what I had worked on). I'm not trying to be a d!ck about it, but I'd like to be acknowledged at least for fueling the idea (you can look back at your PM's to see that you told me you thought this would be too hard to implement ... and now here it is). To that end, I'd like to give a shout out to Qancakes, the creator of Kobold Tribes who gave me the idea of this implementation, basically applying a "buff" at mining time. I knew it would only be a matter of time before someone else came up with the same solution ... which is why I was willing to pay someone who knew the data editor to collaborate on it. Oh well, maybe next time... | ||
|
BlackLilium
Poland426 Posts
HMH was created as a solution to problems of Double Harvest, while having more degrees of freedom for economy balancing. It was not a result of fiddling with Kobold Tribes economy or your idea. If there is any dependency, I am afraid the connection is very very thin. | ||
|
MaximilianKohler
122 Posts
| ||
| ||
