|
Ever since Zelniq made this thread detailing the positional problems with a map that, for the most part, everybody liked, people have pointed out the problem in games and casts repeatedly.
I talked to the iCCup guys about creating a fixed version, but they're understandably busy guys, with their own awesome maps to make and charity casts to do for the kids. So I figured out how to use the mapmaker today and created my own updated version.
It is currently on NA, SEA and EU as Refined Scrap Station, but before pitching it on the Blizzard forums I wanted to discuss it here, and see if we could all get behind it.
If anybody wants to donate a slot to put it on the KR server, please PM me.
So, here's the list of changes, with screenshots, reasoning, and polls for you guys to vote on. Team Liquid loves polls, after all!
Also, please note, this is not a thread about map balance, or about the racial balance of Scrap Station. This is a thread about the positional spawn point imbalances of Scrap Station. I am not intending to make a new map or a different map, I am intending to fix the positional problems of the existing map while keeping the features and concept of it the same.
Change #1:
The righthand spawn locations ramp was pushed inward slightly. This prevents the problem of spine crawlers on the right spawn having bad coverage of the ramp compared to the left, and prevents the problem of needing an extra creep tumor to reach the natural on the right spawn.
In order to make the number of buildings required to wall off as a FEing Protoss or Terran the same, a doodad was added close to the cliff edge. Walling at the ramp is the same.
Left spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +
Right spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +
Change in Balance:
I think this is a considerable buff for early game Zerg, for obvious reasons. Terran and Protoss remain the same.
Poll: Do you like this change?Yes (263) 85% No, change it the other way (3 tumors to connect for both spawns) (30) 10% No, leave it as is (15) 5% 308 total votes Your vote: Do you like this change? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (3 tumors to connect for both spawns)
(Vote): No, leave it as is
Change #2:
A doodad has been placed behind the destructible rocks on the left-hand spawn. Before, it would take an extra building to wall off behind the rocks on the left spawn compared to the right.
Right spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +
Left spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +
Change in Balance:
I think this is a minor mid game buff for Protoss and Terran, but it is not necessarily bad for Zerg, since it lets them block the lefthand rock choke with fewer Roaches or whatever.
Poll: Do you like this change?Yes (150) 70% No, change it the other way (2 buildings to wall behind rocks on both spawns) (60) 28% No, leave it as is (5) 2% 215 total votes Your vote: Do you like this change? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (2 buildings to wall behind rocks on both spawns)
(Vote): No, leave it as is
Change #3:
The chokepoint south of the natural on the right hand side of the map has been slightly enlarged, making it impossible to wall with 2 buildings on the right hand side. It was always possible to wall with 2 on the right hand side.
Left spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +
Right spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +
Change in Balance:
I think this is a minor early game nerf for Protoss, but nobody is really doing 2 gate pressure anymore, especially not on this map, so really it's just creating wider gaps for big armies in late game.
Note that this change was reversed due to the poll, so the "Yes" option is now the "No, change it the other way" option, and vice versa. Make sure you're voting for the correct choice.
Poll: Do you like this change?No, change it the other way (Cannot wall here with 2 buildings on either spawn) (120) 66% Yes (57) 31% No, leave it as is (5) 3% 182 total votes Your vote: Do you like this change? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (Cannot wall here with 2 buildings on either spawn)
(Vote): No, leave it as is
Change #4:
Previously, there was a spot on the island on the south spawn side where Infestors could spit terrans over the gap, even though Stalkers cannot blink over the island. This spot has been removed to make this no longer possible.
Left spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +
Right spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +
Change in Balance:
I see this as more of a bug fix than anything else. I suppose it's an extremely minor nerf to Zerg, I've never seen anybody use this trick in a pro game.
Poll: Do you like this change?Yes (177) 87% No, change it the other way (Let Infestors spit IT's on both sides of the island) (24) 12% No, leave it as is (3) 1% 204 total votes Your vote: Do you like this change? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (Let Infestors spit IT's on both sides of the island)
(Vote): No, leave it as is
Change #5:
After using the map analyzer to check the edits, I found out that the edit to the ramp made the right hand main much smaller than I'd realized, going from 31.0 Command Center equivalents to 28. Because of this, the back of the right hand main was enlarged slightly, in order to make the two mains even.
Map Analyzer imagery:
+ Show Spoiler +
Changes:
+ Show Spoiler +
Change in Balance:
This keeps the mains roughly the same size as they were before, given that change #1 made the righthand main smaller than the left.
Poll: Do you like this change?Yes (44) 96% No (2) 4% 46 total votes Your vote: Do you like this change? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Finally, we've got a poll on what you think of the changes as a whole. Please note that this poll is asking if the current changes in the pictures improve the map.
If you don't like the current changes and would on the whole prefer the #2 option changes that were not done, please vote no. If a good majority prefer the #2 option changes I'll make a new version and we'll vote on that.
Poll: Do these changes improve the map?Yes (276) 97% No (8) 3% 284 total votes Your vote: Do these changes improve the map? (Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
Some PMs/Reply's I have gotten from progamers and important community members on the subject:
On November 17 2010 05:30 prodiG wrote:
The changes seem okay, but I think if you wanted to have a perfectly balanced map you'd have to make it symmetrical. I'd just copy the top spawn, rotate 45 degrees and flip horizontally and then start lining things up. This would hands down eliminate all problems, although you'd need to completely overhaul the map as none of the aesethics on the bottom half would work anymore, on top of making sure you've got everything perfectly symmetrical.
On November 17 2010 10:26 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
Looks good.
On November 17 2010 10:41 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Looks pretty good, good job!
On November 17 2010 18:22 MorroW wrote:
i like it because scrap station has these positional imbalances that u mention here, the creep spread in the main to ramp and all the wallin things, is actually a pretty big deal at high level
im not 100% if we shoud change left side or right side to make the symmetrical, the only thing i want is that both sides look the same to create positional balance
On November 18 2010 01:57 Whiplash wrote:
I'm aware of the positional balance on this map in ZvZ, your balance changes seem to address it. Looks good, I saw your post a few days ago but just didn't comment on it.
On November 18 2010 04:12 Chill wrote:
Your solution in change 1 is a bit of a strange one - you've blocked off access to the right ramp by placing that doodad in the way... There must be a more elegant solution to restore symmetry without blocking ramp access.
2 is a no brainer
I don't like 3. I feel the double gate rush + block is a cool possibility, so I feel you should modify the left side to reflect the right side, as opposed to vice versa.
4 is fine as long as it still allows blinking. (blinking was never possible, he and I talked about that after)
I don't really have a comment on #5.
Hope that helps >_<
On November 17 2010 20:12 Mirhi wrote:
I actually like this, I'll have my guys post on this.
On November 17 2010 20:25 Tranqfx wrote:
yea, looks good
On November 17 2010 21:17 vT bLuR wrote:i like these changes  dont like the doodad to block the ramp one though
Anyway, please discuss! Thanks.
|
I really like the changes, but the other way. Making the game harder for everyone is better than easier, as you don't want the destructible rocks not to matter at all, and if it's too easy to wall off then scrap station will become a two base turtle fest map...
|
I'd also like to specifically request that any pro's with the time who read through all this post their opinions of the changes. Unfortunately, I am not the iCCup guys, and I can't just hop on skype and ask a whole bunch of progamers what they think of the thing.
Thanks.
|
Great changes, it's simply amazing how inept Blizzard is in just making a mirrored map.
I think with change #3 it would be better to widen the small choke rather than constricting the other, just because it seems that Scrap already has a lot of tight spaces and it would be more conducive to late game macro armies to add space rather than take it away.
|
Russian Federation4295 Posts
Good changes, but... Blizzard will NEVER add them, because they're not reading this forum
|
We absolutely need people to do in-depth analysis on all maps, proving how horrible Blizzard's maps really are!
|
why make this map even more zerg favored than it already is?
|
this is amazing =] at least someone actually tries to balance the map, instead of just posting complaining posts on tl.
|
That doodad placement just looks really, really awkward. I think it'll end up causing giving a positional imbalance to the right side instead of the left when it comes to how much surface area you get to attack/push with.
|
Nice work, I really am not a fan of scrap station and have had it thumbsed down for eternity but this is some admirable effort right here = )
|
Blizzard should really look into this, never noticed the destructable rocks problem and the blinking over the island problem.
|
This map is already so heavily zerg favored, yet you make it even more so. I'm not sure how anyone can say this is more fair at all. Also the doodad makes it look like a joke.
|
Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that so many of the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?
This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!)
|
On November 16 2010 16:23 Nightfall.589 wrote:
Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that all the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?
This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!)
No, it's not.
Thor drops on Lost Temple are not a positional imbalance, they are a feature. No matter where you and your opponent spawn on Lost Temple, you can Thor drop on the high ground and hit his natural hatchery.
This is correcting a problem where in a ZvZ the Zerg on the top spawn is at an advantage because of assymetrical problems with the map.
Please do not turn this thread into a racial balance thread. I do not want it to be a racial balance thread. I understand that editing a map inevitably changes the balance of the map, but I don't want people comparing these changes to, nor whining about, Lost Temple in this thread.
|
On November 16 2010 16:23 Nightfall.589 wrote:
Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that so many of the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?
This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!)
Um I don't see any drastic changes to the map that changed it so that it is MORE heavily zerg favored. Everyone knows that it's a zerg favored map no one will deny it, but the changes he made did nothing to make it worse. He's simply making it so that the map is mirrored. Before it was a 50/50 shot that you would get a worse position. Now with the changes you get the same field conditions both ways.
Besides terrans get lost temple and stepps zerg gets scrap station. It all evens out. 
|
all maps should be symmetrical, its really just that simple. why blizzard doesn't seem to think so is beyond me. Map balance is just as important as unit balance. All your changes are golden, or at the very very least an obvious improvement.
|
yup. all these changes do is balance the map. no problems there.
|
Is that you being sarcastic or supportive, Subversion. I cannot tell
|
On November 16 2010 16:27 Ketara wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 16:23 Nightfall.589 wrote:
Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that all the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?
This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!) No, it's not. Thor drops on Lost Temple are not a positional imbalance, they are a feature. No matter where you and your opponent spawn on Lost Temple, you can Thor drop on the high ground and hit his natural hatchery. This is correcting a problem where in a ZvZ the Zerg on the top spawn is at an advantage because of assymetrical problems with the map. Please do not turn this thread into a racial balance thread. I do not want it to be a racial balance thread. I understand that editing a map inevitably changes the balance of the map, but I don't want people comparing these changes to, nor whining about, Lost Temple in this thread.
Here's the thing - I'm not noting the positional imbalances, but rather, the choices that people make.
I'm all for fixing the imbalance, but when presented with Option A that makes a X-favoured map symmetrical, but more favoured towards X, and Option B that makes a X-favoured map symmetrical but less favoured towards X, I'd figure people would be more inclined to support Option B.
|
When reading to the answers i get kinda sad how many fuckin retards dont get what the OP actually did. How can you QQ instantly that this map that is "zerg favoured" is getting even more buffed for zerg? Do you even know what "zerg favoured" means? When reading stuff like "ohhhh your making teh mapz even betta 4 zergs omg" I dont think you do. Zerg favoured is atm only a term to refer to a map that is pretty much perfectly balanced. No short rush distance to tank push twice and shelll your nat. No ultra small chokes to pummel down 10 ultras that cant attack at once. No ledge for thor drops (not saying LT is imba).
So next time you whining about map changes use your degenerated brain and think about what your just about to write.
Sorry for the rant but it makes me mad.
As for the changes i really think they were all quite needed. I think having maps with features that favour race X is nothing bad. But having to cointoss between a godd spawn and a bad spawn is very shitty. I personally agree with you changes. Evening out spawn points on the better blizzard maps and let the ICCup guys make the other godd maps =).
|
Very nice changes.
What's with this though:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/k1J1e.jpg)
Anyone care to elaborate on their vote? Why do we need gaps for banelings?
|
How do these changes make it "more" zerg-favored?
Change 1 makes it easier to wall off with barracks/gateways, making it harder for speedlings.
Change 2 makes it easier to wall of the natural. You would only do this against zerg and zerg can't exploit this for their own benefit.
Change 3 also makes wall-offs easier. Once again, zerg isn't gonna be building stuff here to wall off, and T and P are only gonna do this against zerg.
Change 4 specifically makes it harder for zerg.
The only change that helped zerg was the creep tumor thing and that was simply to make the map symmetrical. 50% of the time you face zerg on this map, they already have this shorter creep spread distance.
These changes are very good and I hope Blizzard implements them. As for you people who think these changes help zerg more... srsly?
|
On November 16 2010 17:16 orotoss wrote:
Change 1 makes it easier to wall off with barracks/gateways, making it harder for speedlings.
This is not true, the first change made the wall off the same for Terran/Protoss, not easier.
Reducing the size of the main cliff so that the creep tumor can get down and not adding the doodads makes it require 4 buildings to wall there instead of 3. The doodads were added to keep it the same as the original in that regard.
Sorry if that was unclear.
|
All of your changes are good, in my humble opinion.
What I think about each change;
#1 while I do agree that each ramp should be equal in all respects I am skeptical of the Doodad chosen to close down the Right spawn Ramp. I am no map maker but I would think sliding the whole ramp 1sq would have the same effect as the Doodad. Shifting the ramp would also avoid any pathing issues caused by choking the ramp further (or even blocking LOS). <if that doodad doesn't block LOS ignore that.>
Since Nightfall has taken the time to address his concern more completely I would like to say that I am leaning toward agreement with him. However, as a P player I am not sure there being any consequences except in ZvZ.
#2 This change is something I actually hadn't noticed being a difference it comes up so rarely. While I agree that they should be the same I can't see the difference having any effects on strategy since SC2 has such advanced pathing. I would hypothesize that a smaller choke favors early Protoss pushes (specifically in mind stalkers vs lings) and mid game PvT since mid tier Protoss tech (collosi, immortal) are more mobile then T mid tier tech (Thor, Tank). The differences that I can tell are so slight that they could be irrelevant, however.
#3 Another necessary change, I would lean toward a wider choke however. The idea of a Zeal door is a nice feeling.
#4 ABOUT TIME, I've been soo jealous of no blink when the infestors abuse that.
I'm no pro but I hope my insights helped.
|
On November 16 2010 17:05 Xacalite wrote:
When reading to the answers i get kinda sad how many fuckin retards dont get what the OP actually did. How can you QQ instantly that this map that is "zerg favoured" is getting even more buffed for zerg? Do you even know what "zerg favoured" means? When reading stuff like "ohhhh your making teh mapz even betta 4 zergs omg" I dont think you do. Zerg favoured is atm only a term to refer to a map that is pretty much perfectly balanced. No short rush distance to tank push twice and shelll your nat. No ultra small chokes to pummel down 10 ultras that cant attack at once. No ledge for thor drops (not saying LT is imba).
So next time you whining about map changes use your degenerated brain and think about what your just about to write.
Sorry for the rant but it makes me mad.
As for the changes i really think they were all quite needed. I think having maps with features that favour race X is nothing bad. But having to cointoss between a godd spawn and a bad spawn is very shitty. I personally agree with you changes. Evening out spawn points on the better blizzard maps and let the ICCup guys make the other godd maps =).
I'm a Protoss player. I hate Scrap Station, and it's currently banned from my pool along with Steppes (the worst map ever made besides Incineration Zone). Wanna know why? It's not because it's perfectly balanced. It's because it's so goddamn annoying to have to build everything at your ramp or pretty much autolose to Zergling runbys. If you do take an expo, you still have to worry about those damn runbys, only in two directions now. Zerg has far fewer problems in regards to expanding, because of the relative immobility of Protoss units, and can therefore outmacro any Protoss player with ease. That's not fun. It's like if there were a map where us Protoss started with a proxy Pylon on a cliff above your main- oh, it's balanced, you just have to wall it off and defend properly. Doesn't matter. It's way too hard to defend, and sets the defending player on the back foot and allows far more risky play on the part of the advantaged player. Fact: the more things you have to account for, the weaker your build will be. Fact: Scrap Station's wide "chokes" and distanced main/natural make Zergling runbys much more serious threats than on other ladder maps, say Lost Temple (tight choke at natural) and Xel'Naga Caverns (much closer natural to main). Conclusion: Zerg is much stronger on Scrap Station than on other maps. I'd even go so far as to say it's a little bit overpowered against Protoss (Terran has Hellions and Tanks to really shut down any kind of Zergling attacks early on, and Planetaries later). Is this a reason nobody should ever play Scrap Station? No. Is this saying that Protoss is woefully underpowered and should receive massive buffs? No. Is this a reason Scrap Station should receive a few changes so that it is easier to defend as Protoss? Yes indeed.
And please, drop the "Zerg UP" attitude. That's stopped being applicable. If you keep on losing, it's because of your own inability.
|
On November 16 2010 17:30 Gofarman wrote:
All of your changes are good, in my humble opinion.
What I think about each change;
#1 while I do agree that each ramp should be equal in all respects I am skeptical of the Doodad chosen to close down the Right spawn Ramp. I am no map maker but I would think sliding the while ramp 1sq would have the same effect as the Doodad. Shifting the ramp would also avoid any pathing issues caused by choking the ramp further (or even blocking LOS). <if that doodad doesn't block LOS ignore that.
As far as I can tell, the actual problem with the ramp is not where it is in relation to the cliff, it's the distance from the tumor to the ramp.
The way creep works, in order for it to get down the cliff, it has to get down the ramp, then around the ramp, then pool into the area to the right of the ramp, before the tumor can be placed. The tumor cannot be placed on the ramp since the ramp is unpathable to buildings.
(This brings up a larger issue of why the hell can't you put a creep tumor on a ramp, but that's not being discussed here)
Without making the main and the ramp closer together, I don't see any way to get the creep from the first tumor to make it far enough to put a tumor at the bottom of the ramp.
The other way to do it would have been to leave the ramp the same size, but move the starting location of the hatchery. I changed it the way I did because I felt moving the starting location and its minerals/gas would make that spawn less vulnerable to attack by air. As is the amount of ground behind the minerals on each base is pretty even.
Not to mention I didn't think of doing it that way till I'd already done it the first way, ha!
I am not a good map maker.
|
Funny. When I saw this i thought to myself "oh someone actually figured out this thing about scrap" but it is not even changed here :-).
The right main base is actually much more vulnerable to drops than the left side. As a terran player I can defend my main with about 3 or max 4 turrets on the left side and the icing on the cake is that you can put a turret near the border of the map (north) which will kill dropship/air units attempting to pass there. On the right side you have to cover nearly 360° of your base, I think looking at the map is self explanatory, this needs to be fixed.
|
On November 16 2010 17:34 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 17:05 Xacalite wrote:
When reading to the answers i get kinda sad how many fuckin retards dont get what the OP actually did. How can you QQ instantly that this map that is "zerg favoured" is getting even more buffed for zerg? Do you even know what "zerg favoured" means? When reading stuff like "ohhhh your making teh mapz even betta 4 zergs omg" I dont think you do. Zerg favoured is atm only a term to refer to a map that is pretty much perfectly balanced. No short rush distance to tank push twice and shelll your nat. No ultra small chokes to pummel down 10 ultras that cant attack at once. No ledge for thor drops (not saying LT is imba).
So next time you whining about map changes use your degenerated brain and think about what your just about to write.
Sorry for the rant but it makes me mad.
As for the changes i really think they were all quite needed. I think having maps with features that favour race X is nothing bad. But having to cointoss between a godd spawn and a bad spawn is very shitty. I personally agree with you changes. Evening out spawn points on the better blizzard maps and let the ICCup guys make the other godd maps =). I'm a Protoss player. I hate Scrap Station, and it's currently banned from my pool along with Steppes (the worst map ever made besides Incineration Zone). Wanna know why? It's not because it's perfectly balanced. It's because it's so goddamn annoying to have to build everything at your ramp or pretty much autolose to Zergling runbys. If you do take an expo, you still have to worry about those damn runbys, only in two directions now. Zerg has far fewer problems in regards to expanding, because of the relative immobility of Protoss units, and can therefore outmacro any Protoss player with ease. That's not fun. It's like if there were a map where us Protoss started with a proxy Pylon on a cliff above your main- oh, it's balanced, you just have to wall it off and defend properly. Doesn't matter. It's way too hard to defend, and sets the defending player on the back foot and allows far more risky play on the part of the advantaged player. Fact: the more things you have to account for, the weaker your build will be. Fact: Scrap Station's wide "chokes" and distanced main/natural make Zergling runbys much more serious threats than on other ladder maps, say Lost Temple (tight choke at natural) and Xel'Naga Caverns (much closer natural to main). Conclusion: Zerg is much stronger on Scrap Station than on other maps. I'd even go so far as to say it's a little bit overpowered against Protoss (Terran has Hellions and Tanks to really shut down any kind of Zergling attacks early on, and Planetaries later). Is this a reason nobody should ever play Scrap Station? No. Is this saying that Protoss is woefully underpowered and should receive massive buffs? No. Is this a reason Scrap Station should receive a few changes so that it is easier to defend as Protoss? Yes indeed. And please, drop the "Zerg UP" attitude. That's stopped being applicable. If you keep on losing, it's because of your own inability.
uhhh are you retarded dude? Like seriously, do you have some form of mental retardation that slows your reading comprehension.
Read this closely
Scrap station was not symmetrical. Spawning on the left side was different that spawning on the right side. This is not balanced, regardless of race. OP made changes to make the map symmetrical. Why are you complaining about zerg protoss race imbalance, WHEN IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING IN THE THREAD? All this thread is about is making scrap station symmetrical. You have done the equivalent of joining a thread about pie, and started spouting how zerg is OP.
|
Please don't feed the troll, Ghostfall.
I appreciate it, but I want this thread to stay pretty srsface.
|
yeah...hes trollin' and his statement does not really have a point whatsoever.
Btw, is the map up on EU yet? cant wait to give it a try
|
An earlier version is on EU.
Balance wise it is the same, the new version has some cosmetic touch ups and my Swedish buddy is asleep.
|
Latest map is now up on SEA server, settings as Ketara specified.
|
I voted what the majority voted on all points, i think the map will benefit from these changes. good work taking what everyone says and do something like this.
|
I really like exploitable map specifics if they are symmetrical. For instance, I'd maybe like to be able to blink stalker over the island to the enemie's base. They could even integrate small island chains, where the Protoss can blink over with 4 blinks to the enemie's base.
I wonder, why such maps doesn't exist.
There is also much more possible by overusing curtains a lot. You can create whole fields of curtains, where only 2nd floor and air units can see the environment.
|
/\ this again has nothing to do with the thread. Great changes though op, this has been needed for a long time and I'm glad you took the initiative to get it done. I wonder though, were the mains the same size before your changes or after? It shouldn't matter much but pushing that ramp back had to change the size somewhat. I dont see how bliz could have put this map in the ladder with so many inequalities. overall these changes are great and the people crying zerg imba are just idiots.
|
On November 16 2010 22:47 Perscienter wrote:
I really like exploitable map specifics if they are symmetrical. For instance, I'd maybe like to be able to blink stalker over the island to the enemie's base. They could even integrate small island chains, where the Protoss can blink over with 4 blinks to the enemie's base.
I wonder, why such maps doesn't exist.
There is also much more possible by overusing curtains a lot. You can create whole fields of curtains, where only 2nd floor and air units can see the environment.
I'd go Zerg just to mine those island chains with blings :D
|
The changes look great!
Time and again I am completely shocked at how difficult of a time Blizzard is having at making a mirror map. I don't profess to be programmer or know much of how this whole process works, but really? Make the both sides the same... it sounds so simple.
|
Great suggestion - nevertheless just another one of those blizz will happily ignore because they don't care about input on maps from the community.
Seriously, although I'm mostly defending blizz when it comes to balance changes in general, they are awfully stubborn when it comes to admitting they suck at making maps. They are preventing starcraft 2 from improving by not listening to the community when it comes to maps.
|
To be honest, the majority of the kespa maps also sucked, but a large part of their maps became standard in the community and possessed a great balance like fighting spirit and tau cross.
Blizzard has the upper hand in designing a system, which will structurally grant a balanced map pool, but they are just not doing it.
At first they need to patch out all the positional imbalances, then they need to implement an intelligent system, which sorts bad maps out in the long term or lets them become patched.
|
On November 16 2010 23:32 Tyler918273 wrote:
/\ this again has nothing to do with the thread. Great changes though op, this has been needed for a long time and I'm glad you took the initiative to get it done. I wonder though, were the mains the same size before your changes or after? It shouldn't matter much but pushing that ramp back had to change the size somewhat. I dont see how bliz could have put this map in the ladder with so many inequalities. overall these changes are great and the people crying zerg imba are just idiots.
It does make the main of the right hand spawn a little smaller. Scrap Station already had huge mains though, so I don't think it's severe.
Maybe I'll figure out how to use that map analyzer gadget today and put some before and after analyzed imagery up there.
People are starting to post about how Blizzard can't make maps, Blizzards maps are bad, Kespa this etc, and I really don't want this thread to move that way. I only want to talk about these changes specifically for right now.
If this goes over well I might update other maps too, but for now lets just talk about Scrap Station.
|
I don't like the first change, since you are reducing the right spawn ramp size by placing a doodad.
I think its better to change the position of the no ground, so that it closes of with 3 buildings without problems.
Also the choke point close to the third mineral patch on both sides needs to be done so that 2 buildings can't block it off.
Overall its an improvement, but you need to take into consideration my suggestions above.
|
On November 16 2010 16:43 actionbastrd wrote:
all maps should be symmetrical, its really just that simple. why blizzard doesn't seem to think so is beyond me. Map balance is just as important as unit balance. All your changes are golden, or at the very very least an obvious improvement.
Not so obvious to me.
"Map balance is just as important as unit balance" ... or maybe we can even say that map balance is just as important as the balances between the races ?
But balance between the races doesn't mean they should be the same...
And to be honest, as a chess player, i don't even think that the map balance is so important in itself. In chess, white has the advantage over black, it does not ruin the game ... on the contrary.
Scrap station is designed to be a mirror map, so I really like the proposed changes, it just correct the flaws of the original map.
The symmetry is just the easiest way to have a balance between the spawning location. It doesn't mean that it is the only way, and that there can't be a good map without symmetry.
What would you say if to balance the races, they had made symmetrical tech trees ? I think the game could have been more balanced this way... but much less interesting.
|
It makes me sorta sad because this is something blizzard should be doing, not only because they apparently have hired their own map makers but also because it would breach a community stonewall in regards to map making in general.
Good changes regardless, appreciate the effort it must have taken to fix positional imbalances on a blizzard map.
|
Good changes. Time to make a topic on official forums. gj
|
EU version has been updated and is now current.
Not quite time to put it on the Blizzard forums yet, I want to get more votes and do some other things as well.
Hasn't even been 24 hours of voting yet, I'm sure a lot of TL users haven't even seen the thread.
For people rereading the thread, since a lot of people do not like my #3 change and would like the change to go in the other direction, I'd like some replies and discussions about that change in particular and the merits of doing it one way over the other.
|
these changes seem great at balancing the map! it would be nice to see Blizzard take their map design as seriously. too bad we can never see these improvements on ladder 
|
I guess, since there are issues about the #3 change, I'll go ahead with my thought process in regards to it.
There's pretty much three reasons why I tightened the lefthand choke instead of widening the righthand choke.
#1 - I feel like Scrap Station is already a Zerg favored map, and that the larger changes are more or less straight benefits for Zerg on this map. Therefor, for the smaller changes I decided to go with the options that seemed more advantageous to Protoss and Terran.
#2 - I like early 2-gate pressure with chronoboosted Zealots, I think it's fun to watch, and I think it's a strategy that should be usable on most maps. However, the geography of this map makes this strategy extremely difficult, because of the huge rush distances. Not to mention it's just gone out of style in general.
I pretty much never see 2-gate pressure on this map as is, even with the perfect 2 gate wall doable on the existing righthand spawn already. Therefor, I felt that it was safe to give this strategy a slight buff, considering it was already a pretty bad strategy for the map.
#3 - I feel like walling at that position is kind of a bad idea anyway, because it makes the short rushpoint blocked by the rocks very exploitable, and it's far far away from your production facilities, forcing you to cover long distances just to get that bit of early pressure. Especially with the short air rush distance, I think a wall there would leave you vulnerable to Mutalisk or Banshee harass etc.
The counterargument, and one that I think is solid, is that Scrap Station, and Blizzard maps in general, feel very enclosed and constricted, so why should we constrict the space even more.
Is that what most people are thinking, or is there another argument there that I haven't thought of?
|
Great changes except the 2 warpgate wall off. Other than that, I'd like to see Blizzard replace their current map with this one.
LT could do with some cliff editing too. Thor drops are stupidly good.
|
Is there no other way for update #2?
What do people have against your update #3?
On November 17 2010 01:13 Elean wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 16:43 actionbastrd wrote:
all maps should be symmetrical, its really just that simple. why blizzard doesn't seem to think so is beyond me. Map balance is just as important as unit balance. All your changes are golden, or at the very very least an obvious improvement. And to be honest, as a chess player, i don't even think that the map balance is so important in itself. In chess, white has the advantage over black, it does not ruin the game ... on the contrary.
White has a win percentage between 52% and 56%, but because one party has to move first. I consider 55% to be ok.
|
I don't understand what you mean about update #2, Perscienter.
For change #3, I think people are just against making the maps chokes any tighter than they already are, in general. I'd love it if people would voice their thoughts, though.
|
Putting a doodad there could be cheap. Isn't there another way?
|
Instead of the silly doodads (one on each side to fix 1 & 2) couldn't you just move the gap in the terrain a bit on one of the sides and make it even that way?
|
I tried really really hard to move the edge of the terrain to where I wanted it to go, but the editor seems to not be very friendly when it comes to moving terrain very close to ramps and rocks.
Plus there's open ground between the doodads for fix #1 and the edge of the station as is, so doing it that way would affect more cells than doing it the doodad way.
I tried to find doodads that looked small and unobtrusive, if there are better ones let me know.
In any case, since the demand to fix change #3 in the other direction has been pretty solid, I changed the map to reflect that. I'm uploading the new screenies and editing the post now, should be up to date soon.
|
HOKAY
The map has been changed so that for our #3 change, it is now no longer possible to wall off at that spot with 2 buildings on either spawn. I'm doinz what you guys vote for.
The map analyzer imagery is also posted, and because that showed the righthand main as being much smaller than it used to be (due to the ramp change), I enlarged the main slightly. That's up as a Change #5 with a new poll.
If it's possible, could a mod edit the options of the change #3 poll, so that the Yes option is now "No, change it the other way (can wall here with 2 buildings on both spawns) and the No, change it the other way is the Yes option? If that's not possible without remaking the poll people will just have to vote intelligently.
Thanks for all the feedback I've been getting guys, in both threads. This is my first time using the editor after all, and I want to make sure this is done in a way we're all in agreement with, so when I do post it on the Blizz forums in a day or two we can all get behind it.
|
|
|
Scrap Station is unplayable. Your changes made it slightly less unplayable. Good job?
|
Working on getting comments on the map from big names now to try and add some legitimacy to it. Updating the OP as I get replies.
Thanks to everybody who answered my PM's. I know I'm being a little persistent and annoying, but I don't think there's much of a shot of tournaments using this version without some credible community backing.
|
konadora
Singapore66358 Posts
awesome! wonder how did Bizzard not even think of such issues and patched them as the game progressed?
|
i really hope tournaments start using your map.
|
Really awesome job with the map editing Ketara. I believe the major changes affects ZvZ the most, although I don't mind only two creep tumours either side TvZ. (as Terran)
I think that Scrap Station will still be slightly (postitionally) imbalanced anyway; mainly due to anti-air placements on each side requiring a large amount of difference in areas that need to be covered, but that is not a major concern for me at my current level.
Hopefully the changes make it slightly easier for Protoss in the PvZ match-up, although I'm not deep in my knowledge of how it plays out. IIRC, it's mainly hold off mutas (and then the roach/hydra transition) until Protoss can bust Zerg's third. Hopefully someone with more knowledge could help me there. XD
|
We need people like you making maps for Blizzard.
They are good with the "art" part of maps and make them look nice and cool but when it comes down to absolute balance they just shit bricks and smoke weed while they do it which just brings out ridiculous maps or small simple problems that makes one wonder how the hell they managed to screw that up...
These updates need to be added to the map like now.
|
Love the changes, though I was hoping you'd move the island CLOSER, as it was in the beta, so that Protoss could blink back and forth between the island and the mains. I feel that would really open this map up to a whole new dynamic, and would also eliminate the q.q'ing about this map being favoured for zerg, since now zerg HAS to watch for protoss main harass, which outside of air units was rarely an issue prior.
|
|
|
It's about time maybe i won't get ROFL stopmed by slow push 2 base colli
|
The OP posted this same topic at SCA.net (link is in another one of his posts above mine). Apparently the war in iraq is more comparable to starcraft then football to starcraft.
|
Added some replies from the VT gaming forums by the VT guys.
|
Good changes, but im going to be honest some of the things I love in starcraft are advantages from certain positions. Instead of making it equal why not change something on the other side of the map.
|
In my opinion, both spawns should be worse off for zerg. It's the least inventive way possible of making that map less zerg-friendly.
|
I've had a number of progamers voice concerns about the doodads at the top screwing up units pathing down the ramp. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that there's a good way to fix this and keep the number of buildings required to wall here even on both spawns.
But how's this for a compromise:
![[image loading]](http://www.planetzebes.net/SC2/rsstest.png)
Instead of both doodads at the top, moved one to the bottom to minimize the pathing concerns and keep the choke the same size.
|
Impressive thread.
I think this map could become a classic, and the changes will definetly help that.
The days where every map was a crazy macro map is gone.... I am diggin the diversity, and I hope blizzard, with the help of the community, builds more interesting maps like this that promote newer ways of play.
|
love the changes but I suggest leaving a link to download the map to make it more friendlier for the casual members on TL
|
So, I spent a few hours in the map tester today, moving doodads around and then building 200/200 armies and trying to create pathing problems.
There was indeed a problem with the doodads close to the ramp, but I've figured out a way to fix/minimize it:
![[image loading]](http://www.planetzebes.net/SC2/rsstest2.png)
I removed the doodads by the ramp, and added the 1 rock doodad off to the side. Lets you make a slightly different wall with 3 buildings, and the rock is out of the way, large armies don't really path to that part of the map as is. There might be some small issues with maxed armies, but it's many times better than having the doodad by the ramp.
Updated map is up on NA and EU, and screenies in the main post are fixed.
|
I really wish Blizzard would implement this on the ladder. Having obvious positional imbalances in a map is so lazy
|
Its definately a step in the right direction,i feel that the extra space on the right hand side of the right island seems quite nice for hidden tech in TvZ, can an overlord reach there without dieing ?
I would still agree that this is a zerg map unless you can completely shut down muta harass, but to do so you always risk falling behind etc.
|
On November 19 2010 09:47 Galaxy77 wrote:
Its definately a step in the right direction,i feel that the extra space on the right hand side of the right island seems quite nice for hidden tech in TvZ, can an overlord reach there without dieing ?
I would still agree that this is a zerg map unless you can completely shut down muta harass, but to do so you always risk falling behind etc.
The reason why I added the extra space on the far right like that is because there's a lot of space on the far left of the other spawn for hidden tech, that didn't really exist before on the righthand spawn.
I felt that was the best place to add space that kept the two mains symmetrical.
|
Good improvements. I knew about the creep tumor to ramp distance imbalance, didn't know about the others. The map really should just be mirrored. I think blizzard got caught up in the atmosphere of the map rather than the actual gameplay and imbalances on it. Really speaks to the amateurish nature blizzard has taken when making maps.
I don't think it would be so bad just to copy the left side and transfer it to the right if that's possible. The one exception would be the choke near the natural. I'm split on whether it should be 2 building gap or 2 building + zealot gap.
|
|
|
That reworks is incredible. The map needs this to be balanced. I personally hate it and hope it gets removed but otherwise this fix is necessary.
|
United States7166 Posts
sorry it took me so long to reply to this
first of all this thread needs more attention as it's really stupid that maps like this one have pointless imbalances. i think you did a great job overall but for change 1, I think something else needs to be done to fix the positional imbalance, as your solution creates a new imbalance where now on the right position the area below the ramp is significantly wider than the left (and original right). Adding a doodad a little bit to the left doesn't change the fact that it's just a lot more open for a number of different things/units/abilties. i think you should keep that area the same size which would mean you would have to probably shift the entire right main base down some. that also fixes 4 naturally and maybe the island would need to shift slightly too, dunno
2 is good, 3 im not sure maybe you should actually change it so both sides can be solid walled off by 2gate/2rax. 5 seems fine
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/UK16n.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/oFwrZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/dpMs0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/I4mDW.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/jqXTZ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/YgfgN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/UojSN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Oo5LT.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/rRLew.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cmpu3.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/ZlLF7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/FDZCq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/7LdmU.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/QEu3b.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/UikxP.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/MSVTd.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Jn1uA.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/LCmHf.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/e3a06.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/eLgnc.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/kXlr8.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/PVQJ1.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bfJqz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/QeIbn.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/nILJN.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/7yaLe.jpg)
