On April 01 2012 11:13 Zoomacroom wrote: The 6m movement is pretty interesting to me, but I find myself more intuitively drawn to 6m2g than 6m1hyg. Right now, the gas count is so incredibly important to scouting your opponent's build; whether you scout 0, 1 or 2 gases is usually the most important thing your scouting worker sees. If maps switched to 6m1hyg, doesn't that make scouting very difficult? Feels like it's turning the early game way too much on its head.
Kind of dumb that you could judge a whole entire build just from some gas geysers. It's more interesting for a player to scout more really, instead of judging a build.
I don't want to comment on my general feelings on the whole thing other than overall I disagree with the concept and universally am not a huge fan of when map makers try to be game designers (or any player for that matter).
Do feel I want to Chime in on the quick comment on LoL success.
MOBAs are probably always going to be more accessible than RTS so that point still remains... However there are some key points you missed with your comments I feel are worth mentioning.
While the average LOL game is longer than an SC2 game, the average Match is longer. Tournament formats, BO1/BO3 being used where as SC2 even a BO3 is often considered bare minimum with people saying "anyone can take off a BO3 off anyone".
Also worth noting watching a MOBA tournament can act as ones own learning tool. Since any other player is playing on the exact same map using the exact same tools.
It's not an excuse for any poor map pool in a tournament, and most players aren't on the level where map alone is a reason to not take anything from the pros. However watching tournaments where most and sometimes all the maps are different from the ones played by the average player is a problem, especially when you consider that one of the easiest forms of early learning is direct emulation.
@Zoom: What most people have been doing on the 1hyg version of 6m maps is to click the gas and see how much has been mined. It's a more sure-fire way of knowing what your opponent can and can't do than simply how many gasses they have. I personally like this feature a lot, as it rewards more high level play rather than the, "No gas = gasless expand, 1 gas = reactor hellions, 2 gas = cloak banshees" I often see in TvZ.
On March 30 2012 19:35 OldManSenex wrote: So there's a new game uploaded in my channel that might have some bearing on the Protoss underpowered vs. Zerg debate, and while I'd rather not kick the hornet's next with that particular subject, I do feel it's worth watching. Obviously it can't be used as anything beyond a single datapoint, and I'm certain both players could have done various things that would significantly change the outcome. For those who are interested in just watching the game without knowing the outcome I've put my thoughts on the game in a spoiler.
First thing's first: Protoss loses. However, what I think was pretty important to see here is the way he loses. The Protoss player is able to solidly secure 4 bases and even briefly take 5. Cannons are critical to his defense, and several times are literally the only thing keeping him alive. Yet despite all that he had several opportunities to win the game and it could have gone either way. What ends up killing him isn't actually the huge zergling/roach sledgehammer attacks some people in the thread are worried about (though those attacks do happen), it's the incredible mobility of mutalisk/zergling. For those who may have missed it above, I AM NOT SAYING THE MATCHUP IS PERFECTLY BALANCED! All I'm trying to point out is that in this game the Protoss was able to use non-standard strategies with a heavy emphasis on cannons to hold his bases, and that there might be ways for Protoss to succeed against Zerg in a FRB game that do not involve changing unit balance.
Hi guys, I am Frosty from the video. Just a few thoughts about ZvP on FRB.
I feel that zerg mobility may not be "imba" on FRB maps, just relatively more powerful. Perhaps maps should be made less open than cross point, but I can't say that for sure because I know that I am mechanically lacking in a sense that I couldn't keep my minerals low. I could also have transitioned more quickly to HTs or kept my pheonixes alive, and the game could have turned out differently.
This is the single greatest forum post regarding eSports I have ever seen. It is a supreme testament to the passion held by Starcraft gamers for their beloved game. I tip my hat to you Sir Barrin.
On April 01 2012 12:32 Kaos_StarCraft wrote: This is the single greatest forum post regarding eSports I have ever seen. It is a supreme testament to the passion held by Starcraft gamers for their beloved game. I tip my hat to you Sir Barrin.
Glad you feel that way! Please, please be sure to check out the "FRB Grand Tournament", where pro players such as iS.Axslav, GoSuViBE, vileIllusion, HeavensLighT, NMxMasa, and ClashShew will put this concept to the test on 6m1hyg maps!
Doesn't this concept meant that there is even less room for mistakes? I mean fewer tools (in form of money available) -->you misread the situation slightly = you instantly die because you won't have the money to change your build?
On April 02 2012 00:20 RageCommodore wrote: Doesn't this concept meant that there is even less room for mistakes? I mean fewer tools (in form of money available) -->you misread the situation slightly = you instantly die because you won't have the money to change your build?
In my view that would serve the correct purpose = by making the game more prerogatory. I think the game needs to be that way for it to become more competitive and thus more satisfactory for professional gamers.
On March 30 2012 19:35 OldManSenex wrote: So there's a new game uploaded in my channel that might have some bearing on the Protoss underpowered vs. Zerg debate, and while I'd rather not kick the hornet's next with that particular subject, I do feel it's worth watching. Obviously it can't be used as anything beyond a single datapoint, and I'm certain both players could have done various things that would significantly change the outcome. For those who are interested in just watching the game without knowing the outcome I've put my thoughts on the game in a spoiler.
First thing's first: Protoss loses. However, what I think was pretty important to see here is the way he loses. The Protoss player is able to solidly secure 4 bases and even briefly take 5. Cannons are critical to his defense, and several times are literally the only thing keeping him alive. Yet despite all that he had several opportunities to win the game and it could have gone either way. What ends up killing him isn't actually the huge zergling/roach sledgehammer attacks some people in the thread are worried about (though those attacks do happen), it's the incredible mobility of mutalisk/zergling. For those who may have missed it above, I AM NOT SAYING THE MATCHUP IS PERFECTLY BALANCED! All I'm trying to point out is that in this game the Protoss was able to use non-standard strategies with a heavy emphasis on cannons to hold his bases, and that there might be ways for Protoss to succeed against Zerg in a FRB game that do not involve changing unit balance.
Hi guys, I am Frosty from the video. Just a few thoughts about ZvP on FRB.
I feel that zerg mobility may not be "imba" on FRB maps, just relatively more powerful. Perhaps maps should be made less open than cross point, but I can't say that for sure because I know that I am mechanically lacking in a sense that I couldn't keep my minerals low. I could also have transitioned more quickly to HTs or kept my pheonixes alive, and the game could have turned out differently.
Edit: Thanks OldManSenex for casting my game!
That game was really entertaining to watch, i can only assume it was a fun to play
On April 02 2012 00:20 RageCommodore wrote: Doesn't this concept meant that there is even less room for mistakes? I mean fewer tools (in form of money available) -->you misread the situation slightly = you instantly die because you won't have the money to change your build?
In my view that would serve the correct purpose = by making the game more prerogatory. I think the game needs to be that way for it to become more competitive and thus more satisfactory for professional gamers.
I agree partially, but the chance to randomly lose seems to rise a lot by utilizing this concept. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of FRB, but the system of hard counters in SC2 would become even worse than it already is.
Still no poll barrin? If you're going to create a thread on how to do FRB map-making then it's good to take the best or the most favorite(s) maps from FRB by running a poll to use an examples.
On April 02 2012 07:23 IronManSC wrote: Still no poll barrin? If you're going to create a thread on how to do FRB map-making then it's good to take the best or the most favorite(s) maps from FRB by running a poll to use an examples.
Off-topic Iron, but how do I make a skybox on my map? I'm having a hard time figuring it out. :/
Although this is a great idea on passing, I have huge concerns about the balance of the game should this change take place. Consider that with less resources, players will rely more on micro to gain an edge in battle. When this comes into play, I get the feeling that the versatility of Terran may become too strong. There have been articles in the past posting DPS/mineral or microability of a unit, both key points where the Terran race excels.
Also the placement of expansions need to be very intricately placed. Maps with forward bases will disfavor the zerg's need for expansion, even more so than normal on a FRB map.
Anyway, I'm interested to see how this develops. Right now I'm leaning toward's plexa's argument...it's actually the poorly designed units that are ruining the game, not the resource rates.
Ive been playing SC2 massively since release, several thousands of games. But even though Ive done that, I still think SC2 is pretty bad. Don't take it the wrong way as in "it sucks". It doesn't, but it is badly made in comparison to BW and WC3. The sole reason may be what the OP posted while everyone has been summerizing it all through the years that "it's too much terrible terrible damage". Don't want to engage too much into the discussion except bumping and saying I HOPE BLIZZ READ IT AND UNDERSTAND IT. Good thread.
EPT
