EPTMapmakers need to do away with unsafe fake pillars - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
jacknicholson446
1 Post
| ||
|
tskarzyn
United States516 Posts
As to the OP, everyone already gave the answer. By the time pros play any meaningful matches on these maps, they will have already learned which pillars do or do not offer protection regardless of appearance. | ||
|
Blitzball04
191 Posts
On April 10 2024 18:01 Vindicare605 wrote: No. Zergs have gotten far too complacent in having map makers cater for their desire to have free and unpunished scouting information over the course of the entire game. You already have creep, and you already have access to the best scouting units in the game in the Overseer and Zergling. You don't need any help from the maps to help with your scouting. No that would be terran. Terran has the best scouting with free scan and free depot In before people come in and say “it cost minerals!!” No it doesn’t, it cost terran the “opportunity” to mine more minerals but it doesn’t actually cost anything, just energy. | ||
|
dph114
30 Posts
On October 06 2024 11:32 Blitzball04 wrote: No that would be terran. Terran has the best scouting with free scan and free depot In before people come in and say “it cost minerals!!” No it doesn’t, it cost terran the “opportunity” to mine more minerals but it doesn’t actually cost anything, just energy. literally 3k take | ||
|
Jamesoliver
United States4 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25075 Posts
On October 06 2024 08:43 tskarzyn wrote: Having an RNG element to pillar protection would be an interesting mechanic in and of itself. High risk / high reward. Generally speaking, I don't think watch towers or natty spy pillars belong in SC at all... but that's a separate thread. As to the OP, everyone already gave the answer. By the time pros play any meaningful matches on these maps, they will have already learned which pillars do or do not offer protection regardless of appearance. Outside of games like deliberately insanely hard platformers, having assets being so ambiguous is just inviting frustration. Playing I Wanna Be The Guy as an ode to masochism with your buddies, dodge 5 falling apples only for the 6th to randomly fly up at you and kill you, it’s quite fun within that specific kind of context. Battling just to get to the next screen in a game deliberately designed to fuck you over, quite fun if you know that’s the deal. Or sleight of hand in a puzzle game or a point and click, sure that’s fine. It makes sense for designers to be sneaky in those contexts. In the SC2 context, which of these seemingly identical features grants safety and which doesn’t? Better trial and error it either on ladder or a test map isn’t intuitive, nor is it fun like those other examples because RTS games rely on predictable behaviours in a multiplayer context. As for the wider pillar question in general, I feel it’s just in a pretty bad spot where safe pillars are too good for Z scouting, but the lack of them is perhaps too bad. Which makes finding a middle ground kind of tricky. | ||
| ||
