| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
JaKaTaKSc2
United States2787 Posts
On January 13 2014 10:26 Hydro033 wrote: I always wondered if Zergs spawning at the top of maps have disadvantages bc their drones need to go around the hatchery to get to the minerals.. This one has been bugging me for a while as well. Along with a host of other "small" things  | ||
|
Zenbrez
Canada5973 Posts
On January 13 2014 10:26 Hydro033 wrote: I always wondered if Zergs spawning at the top of maps have disadvantages bc their drones need to go around the hatchery to get to the minerals.. It's a factor, but it's never going to decide a game. | ||
|
cheekymonkey
France1387 Posts
On January 13 2014 09:48 EatThePath wrote: Mapmakers are well aware of this issue, but there's nothing we can do about it other than be conscientious about how geysers are placed at each base. Given how symmetry works, you'd be very limited in your map design options if you only allowed yourself to use certain geyser angles. The real issue is the footprint of the gas buildings, the adjustment of which would constitute altering the game data, essentially creating a different version of the game (albeit in a small way). More to the point, it's not considered acceptable in making melee maps. In other words, Blizzard needs to fix this. Wouldn't it be possible to scale the timing a worker spends in the geyser itself dependent on the distance to the CC to adjust for it? I also wonder if the the CC, nexus and hatchery makes for different distances from a geyser. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On January 13 2014 17:21 cheekymonkey wrote: Wouldn't it be possible to scale the timing a worker spends in the geyser itself dependent on the distance to the CC to adjust for it? I also wonder if the the CC, nexus and hatchery makes for different distances from a geyser. Yeah you could fix it in other ways, but that would be going around the actual problem which is the footprint, the actual size of the building in the game's terms, not the visual representation. The CC/nexus/hatch all have the same footprint. Those other fixes would still be data edits, too, leaving you in the same situation of altering the "real" game. | ||
|
eTcetRa
Australia822 Posts
| ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2475 Posts
On January 15 2014 11:41 eTcetRa wrote: Just noticed the issues on Yeonsu. Looks like Blizzard botched them, the resource formations I used were perfectly symmetrical. Uhh...yeah...same with Hab Station...damn blizzard. *cough* | ||
|
Blargh
United States2104 Posts
| ||
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
| ||
|
JaKaTaKSc2
United States2787 Posts
On January 15 2014 11:41 eTcetRa wrote: Just noticed the issues on Yeonsu. Looks like Blizzard botched them, the resource formations I used were perfectly symmetrical. Symmetry of the geysers is not important. The geysers could be perfectly symmetrical and still suffer from this issue. What matters is that only certain angles in certain directions are efficient for mining. So a geyser in the bottom left doesn't necessarily yield the same as a geyser in the top right, even if they are exactly opposite. | ||
|
Orek
1665 Posts
On January 15 2014 11:41 eTcetRa wrote: Just noticed the issues on Yeonsu. Looks like Blizzard botched them, the resource formations I used were perfectly symmetrical. On January 15 2014 12:42 SidianTheBard wrote: Uhh...yeah...same with Hab Station...damn blizzard. *cough* If I remember correctly, every single map had perfectly symmetrical resource formations. Daedalus Point and Polar Night even have a diagonal line that make things automatically symmetrical (?). As JaKaTaK pointed out above, symmetry alone doesn't prevent this problem. My suggestion would be to avoid using D,E and F locatoins and use only A,B,C and G locatoins if possible, though it limits map design a bit. For example, [D,45-90] and [B,180-225] gas locations look almost the same as [C,45-90] and [C,180-225], so it would be preferrable to use the latter. Having said that, it's primarily Blizzard's job to fix this. | ||
|
JaKaTaKSc2
United States2787 Posts
 | ||
|
telfire
United States415 Posts
On January 13 2014 15:39 Zenbrez wrote: It's a factor, but it's never going to decide a game. Sorry but this is definitely not true. In ZvZ of all matchups, with units that cost only 25 minerals, it makes a real significant difference, and I guarantee you it made the difference in many games. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46719 Posts
On February 20 2014 06:17 telfire wrote: Sorry but this is definitely not true. In ZvZ of all matchups, with units that cost only 25 minerals, it makes a real significant difference, and I guarantee you it made the difference in many games. I don't really think so, as units still need to spawn and run across the map. If you were having a race to the exact second to a certain mineral count, sure one player might get there one in-game second earlier... but that implies perfect (literally, perfect) mechanics in every other sense, and there is too much variability in the rest of the in-game mechanics (e.g., the second you have to worry about injecting larvae with a queen, this larva starting point becomes irrelevant, as well as the second you build a drone when you have 55 minerals instead of exactly 50, etc.). Not splitting your drones perfectly (better than auto-split)/ having one drone re-maneuver itself to gather minerals is as "game-changing" as this tiny inconsistency. If you think that such a game (or "many games", as you say) was decided merely by the larva positioning, please post said game. | ||
|
ArTiFaKs
United States1229 Posts
On February 20 2014 07:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I don't really think so, as units still need to spawn and run across the map. If you were having a race to the exact second to a certain mineral count, sure one player might get there one in-game second earlier... but that implies perfect (literally, perfect) mechanics in every other sense, and there is too much variability in the rest of the in-game mechanics (e.g., the second you have to worry about injecting larvae with a queen, this larva starting point becomes irrelevant, as well as the second you build a drone when you have 55 minerals instead of exactly 50, etc.). Not splitting your drones perfectly (better than auto-split)/ having one drone re-maneuver itself to gather minerals is as "game-changing" as this tiny inconsistency. If you think that such a game (or "many games", as you say) was decided merely by the larva positioning, please post said game. Wow, destroyed. Also, I always figured certain geysers were further away and noticed the slight differences in locations, but never realized how big of a difference it made. I'm totally going to use this and I'm glad this post got revived! A lot of people could benefit from this, especially the pro's. It'd be nice if under the map details in-game they could indicate which geysers were red, blue etc. That'd be a nice addition in a patch if they don't feel like actually fixing the issue, but I doubt that'll happen. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46719 Posts
On February 20 2014 12:28 ArTiFaKs wrote: Wow, destroyed. Also, I always figured certain geysers were further away and noticed the slight differences in locations, but never realized how big of a difference it made. I'm totally going to use this and I'm glad this post got revived! A lot of people could benefit from this, especially the pro's. It'd be nice if under the map details in-game they could indicate which geysers were red, blue etc. That'd be a nice addition in a patch if they don't feel like actually fixing the issue, but I doubt that'll happen. Yeah there are some pretty in depth resource analysis diagrams out there for certain maps that label every mineral and geyser in the starting locations with % efficiency | ||
|
JaKaTaKSc2
United States2787 Posts
| ||
|
forsakeNXE
Germany539 Posts
On April 14 2014 21:49 JaKaTaK wrote: Any chance we can get an update for the new map pool? I second this on one map you need 4 in gas e.g. i guess in your main to mine efficently. | ||
|
Orek
1665 Posts
On April 14 2014 21:49 JaKaTaK wrote: Any chance we can get an update for the new map pool? I just moved and my internet contract is messed up at the moment, so I'm afraid I won't be able to update it for a few days/weeks  | ||
|
JaKaTaKSc2
United States2787 Posts
| ||
|
Uvantak
Uruguay1381 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1gwA2Y2.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lq87OwS.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RcfvdHm.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/J3ezUiH.jpg) And the colors: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/XfebKEP.png) It should be noted that even if the vespene geyser at the thirds of King Sejong seems to be really far away they actually are not. | ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
ByuN vs MaxPax
herO vs Krystianer
Percival vs Shameless
LetaleX vs YoungYakov
Nicoract vs Gerald
GgMaChine vs ArT
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs SHIN
MaxPax vs Solar
Clem vs TBD
herO vs TBD
Lambo vs TBD
Rogue vs TBD
IPSL
TerrOr vs IJ_Terran
rasowy vs Hazorath
BSL
TerrOr vs OyAji
UltrA vs Gosudark
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
IPSL
Art_Of_Turtle vs KameZerg
Radley vs George
BSL
Artosis vs Dewalt
Ret vs Tech
SOOP
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
