|
On September 23 2010 21:49 Champ24 wrote:
I doubt it was intentional. They would have to go out of their way to make these sorts of "differences".
It's far more likely they just didn't think about these things when they constructed the map. They may have had a few guys test some things out here and there, but with the millions of games being played on them now people will find inconsistencies in the map design.
Edit; typing on iPhone=lose.
Sounds pretty accurate. They should really try to hire people who know how to make maps.
|
![[image loading]](http://holycrapthatsfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/can-we-fix-it.jpg)
I believe that no one on these forums can fix it, send it to blizzard/official forums. And hope for best.
User was warned for this post
|
On September 23 2010 21:59 GreEny K wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2010 21:49 Champ24 wrote:
I doubt it was intentional. They would have to go out of their way to make these sorts of "differences".
It's far more likely they just didn't think about these things when they constructed the map. They may have had a few guys test some things out here and there, but with the millions of games being played on them now people will find inconsistencies in the map design.
Edit; typing on iPhone=lose. Sounds pretty accurate. They should really try to hire people who know how to make maps.
I don't really think that is the issue, I think it is just budgets. I work as an engineer and I know I get reamed to push crap out the door before I think it's ready (or maybe I suck, who knows). The application of these errors are pretty specific...baneling harass being struck by a spine crawler once as it tries to go in a base on a map is hard to think of.
Another thread pertains to colossi harass on a natural expansion on steppes of war...another pretty specific thing to look at. This game is extremely complex, so finding small things like this will likely go on forever.
But don't get me wrong, these things should be fixed.
|
it may seem insignificant to non zergies, but its so annoying if your trying to fast creep spread
|
why do blizzard-maps suck so hard?
Why do they have ppl that are making this maps that are completely incompetent when there are enough good mapmakers out there?
|
On September 23 2010 23:04 kickinhead wrote:
why do blizzard-maps suck so hard?
Why do they have ppl that are making this maps that are completely incompetent when there are enough good mapmakers out there?
Probably because Blizzard wouldn't hire full time map makers lol.
The maps they make are for the campaign. Aside from that it's obvious they don't know how to properly make maps, and I don't understand why people complain like this is news.
They should just have a "ladder map" submission contest and use those maps, and perhaps even have those same people edit the current maps. I like the ladder maps (Delta//Meta//LT//Scrap) but I agree there's subtle differences while playing each one.
|
|
|
On September 23 2010 22:25 Thunderfist wrote:I believe that no one on these forums can fix it, send it to blizzard/official forums. And hope for best.
I was going to start a thread about this, with the gist of what's said here, on the Battle.net EU forums and see if it got any attention. Then I foolishly clicked on a thread already there and after reading a couple of posts almost lost the will to live, the stupid hurt that much (someone out there actually thinks that the game is imbalanced because one colossus can't take on an MM ball by its-self).
Once I stop shedding tears for the fate of the human race I'll delve into there again.
|
another thing: the base on the left side is much wider. when i go on a rage induced cheesing spree and get scrap station, i can only successfully proxy hatch if my opponent is on the left, because there is so much room to hide a hatchery.
i can see proxying being more effective on that side too.
|
I would have thought that by now, Blizzard would have made a feature in the editor (even if only for internal use) that allows you to draw a part of the map and copy-rotate the terrain a number of times. Afterwards, they can add cosmetic changes and doodads, but it would ensure the maps are practically the same for every starting position.
|
I willl not play this map anymore. blizz should probably test this bullcrap before they publish. jesus. they good for programming, not this.
|
You would think blizzard would at least try to make maps that are symmetrical.
|
Knowing Blizzard, they'll probably attempt to fix it by adding destructible rocks or some shit.
|
Oh wow, that difference on crap station is pretty bad.. Blizzard needs to fix this kind of stuff asap.
|
Let's take an extreme example of a completely asymmetrical map. Why is this necessarily a bad thing? Since builds for a map and matchup are map-dependant this simply adds the extra dimension of positional dependency.
Different maps already favour different races, top/bottom vs side positions affect building arrangements and wall-off possibilities, with the terran building add-ons being even more unbalancing in this regard.
I'm not a high-level player, so maybe I'm missing something crucial here, but it seems like we're just assuming that the maps need to be exactly symmetrical.
|
On September 24 2010 02:21 safjx wrote:
Let's take an extreme example of a completely asymmetrical map. Why is this necessarily a bad thing? Since builds for a map and matchup are map-dependant this simply adds the extra dimension of positional dependency.
Different maps already favour different races, top/bottom vs side positions affect building arrangements and wall-off possibilities, with the terran building add-ons being even more unbalancing in this regard.
I'm not a high-level player, so maybe I'm missing something crucial here, but it seems like we're just assuming that the maps need to be exactly symmetrical.
They do.
If 2 zerg are fighting on scrap station and one of them loses, if it is even SLIGHTLY due to the map not being balanced, blizzard fuked up.
|
On September 23 2010 08:15 Dark.Carnival wrote:
Expect them to add more rocks in the next patch, that's the Blizzard way of balancing SC2 maps.
hahahahahahhahahahh made me laugh bigtime
|
On September 24 2010 02:21 safjx wrote:
Let's take an extreme example of a completely asymmetrical map. Why is this necessarily a bad thing? Since builds for a map and matchup are map-dependant this simply adds the extra dimension of positional dependency.
Different maps already favour different races, top/bottom vs side positions affect building arrangements and wall-off possibilities, with the terran building add-ons being even more unbalancing in this regard.
I'm not a high-level player, so maybe I'm missing something crucial here, but it seems like we're just assuming that the maps need to be exactly symmetrical. You're part right. The problem comes from the fact that there is no benefit in exchange for this blatant weakness.
|
Like Idra said, blizzard may not ultimately create balance. custom maps might ultimately create balance. i think some people do not remember old school sc1 ladder maps like rivalry and such. its a stark contrast from what was used later.
|
[wrong thread, mod can wipe this out]
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
