|
NOTE: I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT FOG OF WAR, they are different things.
Taken from this thread http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=85283
This is a discussion about the shroud of darkness and if it is good/bad and if it should or should not be in sc2.
Here is a description of the different layers of fog/shroud:
On January 03 2009 17:16 geno wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 16:42 Ancestral wrote:On January 03 2009 16:32 .risingdragoon wrote:
x x For anyone who might still be confused, I've created some visual aides using the SC2 Battle Report! The current (or at least recent) incarnation of the SC2 minimap and the types of fog on it. Unexplored vs Explored vs Visible x.
Poll: SC2: Shroud of Blackness
(Vote): Remove it (like they did in War3).
(Vote): Keep it (like in BW).
(Vote): Undecided.
(Vote): Other.
if you vote other, please explain.
Me personally I think the shroud of blackness is good and the removal of it in warcraft3 is newbifying the game. Players who know maps and study them and practice them more are not rewarded for this.
Expanding is 1000 times easier (send your drone to the exact spot to morph without even scouting). Like I said if a noob doesn't know the map he can still see all the little nooks and crannies on the map used for proxying and find your hidden expo with a 1 click scout (or easy waypoint macroing).
Also it is a bit of an art/skill to navigate an overlord in just the right place on the map without even seeing the terrain or anything at all. Think of it like sailing on the open sea.
Furthermore the unexplored terrain can be easily confused with explored terrain and can screw you up late game if you are scouting but are distracted and can't see exactly where the scout is going or has been.
The fully black fog of war also makes the game more ominous, as you do not know what is to be expected from the darkness. This is good for spectating.
It also adds to the universe/story of the game imo (if you wanna take this as an argument). supposeably the opposing factions have just landed/discovered this new land and are just starting out in this unknown place. It just adds that mysterious factor to even multiplayer gaming when you aren't sure what to expect.
Some people actually like exploring and figuring out things on their own.
|
Your arguments dont hold up.
New players/n00bs dont play on different maps or new maps. Players who study and practise maps arnt rewarded at all as they are vs other people who have studied and practised the map.
Shroud of Blackness just encourages 1 map play like we see in Broodwar.. where all new/lesser skilled players play on one map and one map only.
|
On January 04 2009 08:35 Crompee wrote:
Your arguments dont hold up.
New players/n00bs dont play on different maps or new maps. Players who study and practise maps arnt rewarded at all as they are vs other people who have studied and practised the map.
Shroud of Blackness just encourages 1 map play like we see in Broodwar.. where all new/lesser skilled players play on one map and one map only.
your arguments don't hold up "n00b".
people are going to play whatever the fuck maps they want regardless of fog of war.. And yes this means every "n00b" and their mom is going to play BGH2010. Yea, they may be more willing to play on new maps with the shroud removed but that doesn't mean that anyone will. People conform to standards, if no one joins your obscure map games that's because they don't care to because they like their BGH. If they wanna play new maps they are already willing to learn, they don't need the shroud removed to get them to join a map.
PS- learn to type/spell.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3.
|
On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3.
QFT.
|
On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3.
I know you can't place buildings without scouting them but you can move the worker to the exact location before you do.
|
To address the "no shroud newbifies the game" angle, isn't that sort of an artificial measurement of skill anyways?
I mean, there is a difference between knowing maps and studying and practicing them, as you said, and knowing the basic layout of the map. Just because there isn't shroud doesn't mean that new players are going to know the perfect places to stick their siege tanks, or whether or not it is worth it to break the destructible for a flank (for example).
Arguing about it seems to be much ado about nothing, that's all.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 04 2009 08:43 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3. I know you can't place buildings without scouting them but you can move the worker to the exact location before you do.
Yes, and?
|
If they nickel and dime all the little elements of skill; automining, MBS, shroud, MUS, etc. Then the game gets watered down. Where does it end with the simplification?
PS- do not derail this thread about MBS or whatever, I'm just using that as an example.
|
On January 04 2009 08:44 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:43 CharlieMurphy wrote:On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3. I know you can't place buildings without scouting them but you can move the worker to the exact location before you do. Yes, and?
Ok, you can already create a map in BW where you can have explored fog of war all over the place. So why don't they do that in proleagues?
PS- (I know that you can see ooze upon map spawn with this on, but they could just reveal terrain everywhere but start locations/mains to avoid this problem)
|
On January 04 2009 08:37 CharlieMurphy wrote:
your arguments don't hold up "n00b".
Yea, they may be more willing to play on new maps with the shroud removed but that doesn't mean that anyone will. People conform to standards, if no one joins your obscure map games that's because they don't care to because they like their BGH. If they wanna play new maps they are already willing to learn, they don't need the shroud removed to get them to join a map.
PS- learn to type/spell.
So, people will be more willing to play on new maps with the shroud removed? but no-one will play on them?
I dont understand your logic. If removing the shroud encourages more maps to be played at lower level, then where's the downside to it? At the moment on ICCUP, in the D ranks we just have Python with the only real map being played with the reason as thats the map everyone knows.
|
On January 04 2009 08:41 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3. QFT.
Could you at least add something more to your post? I hate it when people say "GFT", "this", or even nothing at all. It gives me the impression that all you're trying to do is raise your post count.
Why are so many people so damn lazy to try new maps? I could take literally 10 seconds to look at a standard new map and play without too much trouble. Plus, this separates the newbies from the more experienced players. I think all the people who want shroud of darkness removed are just bitter because they have trouble with it.
|
The warcraft 3 method is much better. I am deterred from playing new maps because its annoying to try and memorize hundreds of different maps, especially when playing on iccup and I don't know half of the maps of the weeks, I would be more inclined to play them if I didn't have to have them all prememorized.
|
On January 04 2009 08:49 Crompee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:37 CharlieMurphy wrote:
your arguments don't hold up "n00b".
Yea, they may be more willing to play on new maps with the shroud removed but that doesn't mean that anyone will. People conform to standards, if no one joins your obscure map games that's because they don't care to because they like their BGH. If they wanna play new maps they are already willing to learn, they don't need the shroud removed to get them to join a map.
PS- learn to type/spell. So, people will be more willing to play on new maps with the shroud removed? but no-one will play on them? I dont understand your logic. If removing the shroud encourages more maps to be played at lower level, then where's the downside to it? At the moment on ICCUP, in the D ranks we just have Python with the only real map being played with the reason as thats the map everyone knows.
.............. People will play 1 map because its easier to play 1 map than it is to play 10 no matter if they have maphack on or not. Are you stupid? How do you not understand this.
Besides, the ladder will most likely be AMM like war3, and it will have 10+ maps for you to thumbs up/down anyways. There is no argument here at all about "MORE MAPS FROM SHROUD OMG".
|
On January 04 2009 08:50 BanZu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:41 maybenexttime wrote:On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3. QFT. Could you at least add something more to your post? I hate it when people say "GFT", "this", or even nothing at all. It gives me the impression that all you're trying to do is raise your post count. Why are so many people so damn lazy to try new maps? I could take literally 10 seconds to look at a standard new map and play without too much trouble. Plus, this separates the newbies from the more experienced players. I think all the people who want shroud of darkness removed are just bitter because they have trouble with it.
lol are you joking? thats a "Q" as in "Quoted For Truth."
GTF /= QFT
ps - its GTFO anyways lol
BOT, I totally agree with you though. They are just lazy.
|
On January 04 2009 08:52 CharlieMurphy wrote:
.............. People will play 1 map because its easier to play 1 map than it is to play 10 no matter if they have maphack on or not. Are you stupid? How do you not understand this.
Yes but wheres the harm in making it easier to play more than one map?
|
The Warcraft 3 method is fine. Black shroud doesn't newbify the game at all because you still need to practice and study the map to be good at it. Removing black shroud isn't going to automatically insert all the secrets and knowledge into the player. You still have to research it ahead of time to master the metagame.
|
Then we might as well remove the map preview already implemented in BW if you want people to fucking open up the map editor and scrutinize a map...
I see nothing detrimental about this and like someone said above, you're not gonna know every nook and cranny right off the bat WHILE YOU ARE PLAYING. (edit: i'd like to add that a lot of knowledge of a map would come from experience on it, simply analyzing it on a screenshot/editor isn't enough)
You are trying to preserve some useless "skill," its not even skill its plain knowledge that would be easily learned anyways.
|
I can't believe someone would be against this. This isn't like MBS or automine, this doesn't massively change the game. Learning where everything is on a map takes 4-5 plays, this way it takes 1. Big deal. People who truly learn the map aren't concerned with this shit, they'll be concerned with things like building positioning and whatnot and that's not easy to learn on the fly. Hell, even if someone showed me a map with this shit on and they've played it plenty before I'd still probably lose because I don't know the map.
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 3+ player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you.
|
On January 04 2009 08:59 crazie-penguin wrote:
Then we might as well remove the map preview already implemented in BW if you want people to fucking open up the map editor and scrutinize a map...
I see nothing detrimental about this and like someone said above, you're not gonna know every nook and cranny right off the bat WHILE YOU ARE PLAYING.
You are trying to preserve some useless "skill," its not even skill its plain knowledge that would be easily learned anyways.
studying preflop is different than having a cheat sheet real time.
|
On January 04 2009 09:02 anotak wrote:
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 4 player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you.
Are you serious? I can't believe you are serious?
You one of those people who leave when they get their gas stolen?
|
On January 04 2009 09:04 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 09:02 anotak wrote:
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 4 player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you. Are you serious? I can't believe you are serious?
Yes I'm serious?
Randomly seeing who manages to scout the other first? That's not competitive, that's bullshit.
|
On January 04 2009 08:45 CharlieMurphy wrote:
If they nickel and dime all the little elements of skill; automining, MBS, shroud, MUS, etc. Then the game gets watered down. Where does it end with the simplification?
PS- do not derail this thread about MBS or whatever, I'm just using that as an example.
You sound like you don't want anything changed.Time moves on , RTS games evolve.
War3 method all the way.
|
I'm all for change, but if change is just in the form of simplification just for the sake of making it easier and nothing else, that's just retarded.
I mean if they made the standard map like twice as large or threw on so much detail it was confusing then maybe no shroud would be good.
|
On January 04 2009 09:05 anotak wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 09:04 CharlieMurphy wrote:On January 04 2009 09:02 anotak wrote:
tbh I think it'd be even better if the game would tell you which start location your opponent is at on a 4 player map because there's no skill in getting lucky and you scouting him before he scouts you. Are you serious? I can't believe you are serious? Yes I'm serious? Randomly seeing who manages to scout the other first? That's not competitive, that's bullshit.
You know you can time a scout or something to block his scout right? I do it all the time. Cliff advantage helps your worker survive.
And since they only hit 70% of the time uphill maybe we should just take out that lucky crap too...
|
it'd be cool if they made each layer a few shades darker, it got kind of confusing to tell what was barely in range or not.
|
On January 04 2009 09:15 mahnini wrote:
it'd be cool if they made each layer a few shades darker, it got kind of confusing to tell what was barely in range or not.
Seeing how everyone is disagreeing with me. I would be willing to compromise if they made the shroud really really dark.
|
I believe removing shroud of darkness encourages new player to try new maps. And thats positive.
|
On January 04 2009 09:11 CharlieMurphy wrote:
I'm all for change, but if change is just in the form of simplification just for the sake of making it easier and nothing else, that's just retarded.
I mean if they made the standard map like twice as large or threw on so much detail it was confusing then maybe no shroud would be good.
ok look at it this way
war2 had no unit queueing and starcraft did
should starcraft 2 have no unit queues so people need to 'learn 2 macro betta LoLoL11!!1!1!'
point is starcraft had every ease of use UI feature implemented at time of release , SC2 will be the same.
|
You can't possibly think that having it the current way won't encourage people to play new maps..
How often do people find someone to 1v1, host a map, have the other person say I don't know this map, and then they remake python. This happens thousands of times every day.
It's so far superior in so many ways...
|
As far as making it very dark.. Just no..
People would be upping the gamma just so they could see it more clearly.
How is it fun to have to squint to try to figure out what the fuck the map is like.. and then if you misread it because of the darkness.. that isn't fun.
It's fine the way it is.
|
What if they only just showed the lines on the map?
Like for example;
Only show where the edges of cliffs and water and space and stuff are. So just a general guide for map pathing without revealing too much?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
The only thing that changes is that you will no longer have your probe go to some obscure part of the map because you clicked in the water accidentally when trying to scout.
--;
|
I prefer the BW model. Just much more interesting to me. Makes multiplayer on a new map so interesting the first time.
|
Some people just like exploring, I am one of those people. I don't need a guide, I like to figure it out on my own.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Then have an option to switch between wc3/sc style and enjoy your exploring along with the misclicks, it's not like it's gonna make a noticeable difference anyway.
|
On January 04 2009 09:41 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Then have an option to switch between wc3/sc style and enjoy your exploring along with the misclicks, it's not like it's gonna make a noticeable difference anyway.
That doesn't work for competitive play/ladder. That's what this is about obviously
|
On January 04 2009 09:31 CharlieMurphy wrote:
What if they only just showed the lines on the map?
Like for example;
Only show where the edges of cliffs and water and space and stuff are. So just a general guide for map pathing without revealing too much?
Why? Say two people are playing a Bo5 with many obs, they are playing just for fun but both have the desire to win.
Loser picks map.
Now every time a map is chosen that the other player doesn't know, he goes to google images to take a look at where the expansions are.
Or maybe he doesn't care that much so now he's playing at a disadvantage.
Either way nothing is being added to the game.
On the other hand, the way it is currently allows people to plan their map dependant tactics such as cliffing a persons expo during the early game where there may be much downtime.
BTW you're like 100x more agreeable in person lol
|
I think it should be an option...
I have a lot of fun 1v1-ing on maps that neither my friend nor I have played on before and we're like "LOL, how did you get here!? I didn't know you could do that, HAHA"
Also for maze maps... not much of a (8)Labyrinth if you know how to get around.
On the other hand, for user-made melee maps, you would better tell the quality of the map right away at the beginning of the game and can altqq when you notice that somebody's minerals is 50000 while yours is only 1500.
|
In a serious competition, knowing where to send your units blindly by memorization of the map is an arguably legitimate skill, for sure. I'm talking about knowing where the main bases are and being able to comsat scan them on the first try, or to send out your worker scout without accidentally, occassionally clicking just outside the border of the base you're going for.
I like the idea of being able to look over the map while you've nothing to do in the early game and plan out your terrain abuse a little bit, especially on an unfamiliar map. But i've always found personally that playing on a map that i truly have no idea what to expect from, is fun largely because of being so completely in the dark. If you want to play a new map but don't want to be completely confused, well maybe you just have to study the map preview/map editor, and then play it a few times and actually make it part of your repetoire. I don't see what's so horrible about that or how it would likely be discouraging to most people who are willing to play unfamiliar maps in general.
But i really liked watching those two fairly newb blizzard employees actually have a fairly fun looking game, and i like the idea of making that possible, so long as it's not at a significant cost to the expansiveness of the skill gradient.
Here's a suggestion. Bw-esque black shroud for ladder mode, optional, just like many other things should be, in casual custom-game mode.
|
This thread just proved that some people will complain about EVERYTHING.
I'll make a new thread trying to convince people that auto-attack and unit queing in production buildings will KILL SC2.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 04 2009 09:42 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 09:41 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Then have an option to switch between wc3/sc style and enjoy your exploring along with the misclicks, it's not like it's gonna make a noticeable difference anyway. That doesn't work for competitive play/ladder. That's what this is about obviously
Yes it does, because this has next to no impact on competitive play since everyone will know the map anyway!?
|
Also, why are most of the people in this thread making it seem like nobody could possibly prefer the old way? Both ways are ok in my eyes, but I defintely prefer the old way for the 'feel' I get while playing.
And to be honest I dont really think "old way" and "new way" are accurate terms here... I assume plenty of RTS games still have the complete blackness method. It's more about feel and art design to me than "omg U jus want teh same game!" It's not about "old or new." Having the more visible fog of war will not stop "noobs" from playing the same maps over and over and over. If people are so concerned about noobs knowing maps then why not just include a detailed map during the game loading screen?
People are being way too closeminded about this and are trying to belittle it
|
Prefer the translucent fog, but I really don't care either way.
|
On January 04 2009 09:51 Integra wrote:
This thread just proved that some people will complain about EVERYTHING.
I'll make a new thread trying to convince people that auto-attack and unit queing in production buildings will KILL SC2.
Don't forget rally points.
|
On January 04 2009 09:58 SearingShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 09:51 Integra wrote:
This thread just proved that some people will complain about EVERYTHING.
I'll make a new thread trying to convince people that auto-attack and unit queing in production buildings will KILL SC2. Don't forget rally points.
Yea, those too!
|
Do you seriously think that adding map visibility is going to mean it's suddenly much easier to learn maps? The only thing it'll change is how much effort it'll take to be able to play on the map at all, any sort of in-depth understanding is still going to require a fair amount of study(what can be sieged from where, proxy positions, etc.) Being able to see the map doesn't mean you suddenly know everything about it. It tells you just as much as looking at a map preview for a minute or so before playing on a map in BW does; where the expansions are + the general layout.
Really the only place it'll make a difference is at a stupidly low level; aside from the few minutes it takes to learn the bare minimum about a map it's purely a visual change.
And since it's just a visual change, you may as well just make it a toggle the same way showing terrain on the minimap is.
|
On January 04 2009 10:08 armed_ wrote:
Do you seriously think that adding map visibility is going to mean it's suddenly much easier to learn maps? The only thing it'll change is how much effort it'll take to be able to play on the map at all, any sort of in-depth understanding is still going to require a fair amount of study(what can be sieged from where, proxy positions, etc.) Being able to see the map doesn't mean you suddenly know everything about it. It tells you just as much as looking at a map preview for a minute or so before playing on a map in BW does; where the expansions are + the general layout.
Really the only place it'll make a difference is at a stupidly low level; aside from the few minutes it takes to learn the bare minimum about a map it's purely a visual change.
And since it's just a visual change, you may as well just make it a toggle the same way showing terrain on the minimap is.
+1
|
On January 04 2009 09:51 Integra wrote:
This thread just proved that some people will complain about EVERYTHING.
I'll make a new thread trying to convince people that auto-attack and unit queing in production buildings will KILL SC2. This just proves that some people have a very strange problem with other people having opinions and holding them actively over a Relatively small issue, in the thread that's supposed to be a discussion of peoples opinions on that very matter no less. This would effect the game if only slightly and i don't see the point of insisting that it's not worth talking about just so that we can complacently go along with whatever blizzard's default decision is.
|
Uh I'm against changes like mbs and automining but I see no good reason to keep the shroud... between good players or pros it makes no difference as they've memorized the maps anyways, but it helps make maps more accessible to people who don't have the time to learn them well.
|
My friends and I used to play FFA games on warcraft with the map explored + no fog of war. In effect you can see every unit on the map, anywhere. With 8 players, it is very bizarre yet entertaining.
|
On January 04 2009 09:03 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:59 crazie-penguin wrote:
Then we might as well remove the map preview already implemented in BW if you want people to fucking open up the map editor and scrutinize a map...
I see nothing detrimental about this and like someone said above, you're not gonna know every nook and cranny right off the bat WHILE YOU ARE PLAYING.
You are trying to preserve some useless "skill," its not even skill its plain knowledge that would be easily learned anyways. studying preflop is different than having a cheat sheet real time. +1
Obviously sometimes you would want to play without the opaque shroud and lots of people would and that's fine. But saying it doesn't make a very big difference competitively which seems to be the focused argument of way too many people here, is completely irrelevant and stupid. If it makes Any difference to competitive play why are we even talking about leaving it out of the ladder? Casual players and players playing new maps can play non-ladder games. Now what's your problem with that because i really don't think it has to do with the 'insignificance' of the issue.
|
On January 04 2009 08:53 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:50 BanZu wrote:On January 04 2009 08:41 maybenexttime wrote:On January 04 2009 08:38 FrozenArbiter wrote:
--;
This is not even a question, Wc3 method all the way. Misclicks caused by not seeing what the map looks like are bad. Making people less likely to play maps they dont know = bad.
Basically everything about it is bad.
Btw what you said about expanding is false, you can't place your hatchery before you've scouted the terrain - I've tried this in WC3. QFT. Could you at least add something more to your post? I hate it when people say "GFT", "this", or even nothing at all. It gives me the impression that all you're trying to do is raise your post count. Why are so many people so damn lazy to try new maps? I could take literally 10 seconds to look at a standard new map and play without too much trouble. Plus, this separates the newbies from the more experienced players. I think all the people who want shroud of darkness removed are just bitter because they have trouble with it. lol are you joking? thats a "Q" as in "Quoted For Truth." GTF /= QFT ps - its GTFO anyways lol BOT, I totally agree with you though. They are just lazy.
Sorry, I meant "QFT", that was a typo. I'm just saying that we don't need people to reiterate a good point. And if it isn't a good point, but it has the idea they agree with, they should at least spend some time elaborating.
|
Whats really the point of this thread? This change has no chance of not being in the game and a toggle will be included like there always is for this kinda stuff.
|
I say take it off for the many reasons described in this thread it's annoying and discouraging to play new maps. It doesn't noobify the game and I hate it when people say that if it's in Warcraft 3 it's noobish, some of the ideas are really good and should have been implemented in Starcraft (not MBS or AM!)
|
many starcraft players hate everything about wc3 because they are bitter it had such an international scene when in brood war its non existant
|
On January 04 2009 10:19 zobz wrote:
But saying it doesn't make a very big difference competitively which seems to be the focused argument of way too many people here, is completely irrelevant and stupid. If it makes Any difference to competitive play why are we even talking about leaving it out of the ladder?
The point is that it doesn't make any difference in competitive play of any respectable level. All it does is make maps one hasn't played on before more accessible. It's not just that "it doesn't make a very big difference", the effects on competitive players are so small as to be completely insignificant; it won't change anything in terms of the amount of practise time it takes to play on a map seriously.
|
On January 04 2009 10:35 Hazz wrote:
many starcraft players hate everything about wc3 because they are bitter it had such an international scene when in brood war its non existant
Non-existant is an over-exaggeration. For me I don't even care about anything outside of Korea. The reason why I dislike (not hate) WC3 is because it's gameplay is much different. Saying that since WC3 has such-and-such is not a good reason as to why SC2 should have it. I'm bitter that Blizzard is changing everything in SC when it has worked fine.
Oh, and I'm all for weeding out the newbs who are too lazy to learn SC. Unfortunately for me, Blizzard doesn't think this way.
|
It does make a diffrence, say for cliffs, dropping on one, when it's in complete darkness you have move the screen to the drop when dropping, if the cliff is allready explored you can just unload and forget and use less time on it.
its small stuff like that.
Or say it's early lategame, you havent scouted all the map, but you want to expand in an area, you fail to send the worker to the area so it can scout the perfect location for the CC's placment, now you got a minor annoyance and something that slows you down because you dident scout the location properly or failed to click the right spot on the minimap. Now the person that did scout it correctly at the first go will have no problem placeing the expansion when he remembers he sent the worker to expand there. Also knowing the map should be a skill, not a freebie like it is now.
|
ok im confused about what's going. They did not do that type of Fog of War in BW. Any unexplored area was TOTALLY black. In this you can still see the minerals shining. I dont like that at all. I mean If you can see the entire map archetecture without scouting then.... wat the hell? What's the point of learning a map then... besides trying to lessen your time being wasted on trying to make up strats on the spot. I think unexplored fogs should be completely black, like paint, jet black.
[edit] but i still think it looks cool though. I dont give either way.
|
On January 04 2009 10:35 Hazz wrote:
many starcraft players hate everything about wc3 because they are bitter it had such an international scene when in brood war its non existant
That is because Blizzard failed with the ladder. And the foreign scene is basically Europe, US man (maybe there is more, if there is please enlighten me)
Even though iccup and pgt are fun and rule, there is one key thing that makes them almost not legitamite.
THEY ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY BLIZZARD! THAT MEANS THEY WILL NOT RECOGNIZE THE PLAYERS THAT HAVE ACHIEVED A+ BECAUSE THEY WERE PLAYING ON PRIVATE SERVERS!
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Who cares about that  ? They don't have any tournaments you have to qualify for (the only Blizzard tournaments for SC are invite ones) so it doesn't matter wether Blizzard recognizes them as anything?
|
I know, but I think it would be better if Blizzard recognizes these and hosts it on battlenet.
Anyway this thread is getting off topic.
So I think the fog of war should be completely black for un explored areas of the map. Makes it more interesting to play and watch!
|
how is it a cheat sheet? It's not like it's secret information or anything, it's only black so we know what we have and haven't explored. We know (or should know, if we have played/viewed the map) what's there, we're not learning anything new. Saying that knowing where things are in the black is a skill is just artificial, it's not like you have to be good at starcraft to look at a screenie or have played the map before.
Furthermore, knowing where expos and things are does not mean that you know the map.It just means that you are able to physically play it. The map does not tell you how the game will play out with different matchups, it does not tell you what strategies will and will not work.
|
On January 04 2009 13:32 virLudens wrote:
how is it a cheat sheet? It's not like it's secret information or anything, it's only black so we know what we have and haven't explored. We know (or should know, if we have played/viewed the map) what's there, we're not learning anything new. Saying that knowing where things are in the black is a skill is just artificial, it's not like you have to be good at starcraft to look at a screenie or have played the map before.
Furthermore, knowing where expos and things are does not mean that you know the map.It just means that you are able to physically play it. The map does not tell you how the game will play out with different matchups, it does not tell you what strategies will and will not work.
Is it really, truly, earnestly, with all candor, THAT hard to play with shroud of darkness? I have trouble accepting that people have trouble with it because I have none whatsoever. If it's really that hard to physically play it because of it... I really don't know what to say about your skill level/intelligence
EDIT: Oh that's right, non-existant
|
the point is not that shroud of darkness is difficult (it's not) it's that it doesn't add anything to the games. Removing it would only make things better for the game as a whole. People would actually play maps that are not python. There's no real argument for keeping it other than aesthetics (make it a toggle) and the occasional clicking your scout to the wrong part of the map (seriously guys, that's not skill)
|
On January 04 2009 12:59 Dalroti wrote:
I know, but I think it would be better if Blizzard recognizes these and hosts it on battlenet.
Anyway this thread is getting off topic.
So I think the fog of war should be completely black for un explored areas of the map. Makes it more interesting to play and watch!
No, i think it would be better for observers, specially on a commentated game, as they could actually provide better input on the map while not having to point at a completely black screen.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 04 2009 14:01 virLudens wrote:
the point is not that shroud of darkness is difficult (it's not) it's that it doesn't add anything to the games. Removing it would only make things better for the game as a whole. People would actually play maps that are not python. There's no real argument for keeping it other than aesthetics (make it a toggle) and the occasional clicking your scout to the wrong part of the map (seriously guys, that's not skill)
Couldn't agree more.
|
On January 04 2009 09:49 Not_Computer wrote:
Also for maze maps... not much of a (8)Labyrinth if you know how to get around.
who wants to play maps like that anyway
the pathing is horrendous
|
I think it's a great idea to remove it, it will really help people grasp maps a bit better when starting off.
I do think, however, that it should be an option in the map editor, that way all of those awesome UMS maps can still have some mystique with the shroud (like UMS RPG's).
|
I dont play that much BW these days. When I do install it and play, there are always a bunch of maps out that ive never played or have very little experience with. So when I play one of those maps, Im stuck asking my opponent where abouts the start locations are or where my natural is.
As a result, there are only about 3-4 maps Im comfortable playing on iccup. Many people will have the same problem as me and it contributes to why people generally do not play different maps from the norm.
Being able to see the map layout means that maps made by amature mapmakers stand a chance at becoming popular, people will be more willing to play on maps other than the ones they always play.
I Do support a toggle however. Doesnt sound too hard to implement, and the black might become handy in UMS or to anyone who wants to play the original way. Also its a LOT clearer for spectators when there is black over the areas that havent been looked at yet.
As for knowing start locations in 4 player maps, NO. That lack of knowledge of where your opponent starts has a big impact on strategy. You might as well just only have 2 player maps.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
imo Blackness is better if for no reason other than...
a) making cool shapes in the blackness with probe (pusans M anyone?)
b) knowing where you've scouted/where you haven't (semi useful for nonprogamers)
c) favors those who have studied the map before hand
No blackness pretty much removes all three things which is kinda  makes b harder (T_T for me, progamers will be fine) and makes c redundant
|
On January 04 2009 17:55 Plexa wrote:imo Blackness is better if for no reason other than... a) making cool shapes in the blackness with probe (pusans M anyone?) b) knowing where you've scouted/where you haven't (semi useful for nonprogamers) c) favors those who have studied the map before hand No blackness pretty much removes all three things which is kinda makes b harder (T_T for me, progamers will be fine) and makes c redundant
I don't know if this has been brought up, but b seems like a good point to me.
But, tbh, it's really not that big of a deal whether you've scouted an area unless we are talking about the first five minutes of the game (then you should really know!).
Just because there isn't a hatch at 3:00 the first time you scanned doesn't mean you shouldn't scan it again in 2 minutes
|
c) is the most stupid thing i've ever read from you plexa ~~ imo
|
b) You can see where you've scouted and where you haven't
|
On January 04 2009 13:53 BanZu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 13:32 virLudens wrote:
how is it a cheat sheet? It's not like it's secret information or anything, it's only black so we know what we have and haven't explored. We know (or should know, if we have played/viewed the map) what's there, we're not learning anything new. Saying that knowing where things are in the black is a skill is just artificial, it's not like you have to be good at starcraft to look at a screenie or have played the map before.
Furthermore, knowing where expos and things are does not mean that you know the map.It just means that you are able to physically play it. The map does not tell you how the game will play out with different matchups, it does not tell you what strategies will and will not work. Is it really, truly, earnestly, with all candor, THAT hard to play with shroud of darkness? I have trouble accepting that people have trouble with it because I have none whatsoever. If it's really that hard to physically play it because of it... I really don't know what to say about your skill level/intelligence EDIT: Oh that's right, non-existant
Why can't we have more posters like you? It would be great if everyone was a flaming idiot and against everything that has absolutely no negative sides. Just imagine!
|
On January 04 2009 17:55 Plexa wrote:imo Blackness is better if for no reason other than... a) making cool shapes in the blackness with probe (pusans M anyone?) b) knowing where you've scouted/where you haven't (semi useful for nonprogamers) c) favors those who have studied the map before hand No blackness pretty much removes all three things which is kinda makes b harder (T_T for me, progamers will be fine) and makes c redundant
a) meh.
b) seems to me that you can see where you've scouted and where you've not.
also, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to make it toggable.
c) you have a point here but I think the benefits, as described by Fen, far outweighs this negative.
|
Allowing new players to see the map before exploring it is going to help them a lot, the difference it's going to make in pro games is a lot smaller compared to the downside for new players :/.
|
On January 04 2009 17:55 Plexa wrote:imo Blackness is better if for no reason other than... a) making cool shapes in the blackness with probe (pusans M anyone?) b) knowing where you've scouted/where you haven't (semi useful for nonprogamers) c) favors those who have studied the map before hand No blackness pretty much removes all three things which is kinda makes b harder (T_T for me, progamers will be fine) and makes c redundant
b) not really true; see the minimap I posted (the one in the OP):
It's actually quite easy to see where you've scouted before (explored fog is much lighter than unexplored fog). Even on the main screen, its quite easy to see the difference between the dark fog and the light fog; unless you are incapable of adapting, within a few days it will be second nature to know that you've never been in the black fog and anything could be there.
c) doesn't affect the pro-scene so doesn't matter to me as a viewer. As a player, I plan on playing most of my games against people who have studied or at least played the map beforehand. I don't want all my wins to be against terrible players, thats bad for me and bad for them. Its accepted they will be out there though, so I'd rather they at least have that than go in blind because the person who studies the map will still have a lot more benefit than the person who can see where the expansions are on his minimap.
but a)... hmm thats hard to refute. Down with variable fog shading, up with shroud?
|
On January 04 2009 17:43 Fen wrote:
I dont play that much BW these days. When I do install it and play, there are always a bunch of maps out that ive never played or have very little experience with. So when I play one of those maps, Im stuck asking my opponent where abouts the start locations are or where my natural is.
As a result, there are only about 3-4 maps Im comfortable playing on iccup. Many people will have the same problem as me and it contributes to why people generally do not play different maps from the norm.
This i never understood. Players who refuse to play on different maps because they don't know em. To me, new maps are always interesting, especially when both players, play it for the first time.
Then it's a explore and adapt kind of thing. Maps are such a vital part of this game that you seriously cut of a great portion of fun by playing the same map over and over again. There's just so much more to it. Like UMS, you just hop in a game and learn by doing.
We used to have internal tourneys in my clan with all new maps and those were usualy the best games we ever had. Sure you talked about iccup up there, but still.
But, if it helps people to break out of their little safe zone, give them vision.
|
I think it should be removed. It would be a step forward for rts gaming.
|
I like it as it is in the screenshots in the OP. It would be so much easier to accept playing new maps.
|
On January 04 2009 20:11 Jayson X wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 17:43 Fen wrote:
I dont play that much BW these days. When I do install it and play, there are always a bunch of maps out that ive never played or have very little experience with. So when I play one of those maps, Im stuck asking my opponent where abouts the start locations are or where my natural is.
As a result, there are only about 3-4 maps Im comfortable playing on iccup. Many people will have the same problem as me and it contributes to why people generally do not play different maps from the norm.
This i never understood. Players who refuse to play on different maps because they don't know em. To me, new maps are always interesting, especially when both players, play it for the first time. Then it's a explore and adapt kind of thing. Maps are such a vital part of this game that you seriously cut of a great portion of fun by playing the same map over and over again. There's just so much more to it. Like UMS, you just hop in a game and learn by doing. We used to have internal tourneys in my clan with all new maps and those were usualy the best games we ever had. Sure you talked about iccup up there, but still. But, if it helps people to break out of their little safe zone, give them vision.
When I play, part of having fun is being able to play a good game. I dont need to win, I just need to feel that I was playing to the best of my abilities. If Ive got mutas out but still dont know where my opponent's base is, it makes it really hard for me to play a good game and is not fun. If my opponent doesnt know the map either, then its not really a problem, but when he does, im going to be placed in a severe disadvantage.
Being able to see the map means that I can adapt to the game even if ive never played the map before. If I think my opponent has expanded, I can look at the minimap and make a logical inference as to where that expansion is. If im faced with black, then im gonna be sending units all over the map trying to find it. This would be a situation where ive made the correct strategical decision, but punished for my lack of map knowledge. To overcome this disadvantage I have to play on maps I know.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
but a)... hmm thats hard to refute. Down with variable fog shading, up with shroud?
The scouting pattern has almost made an X, I don't see why it'd be harder to make "patterns" this way :c
|
If you check iccup at D level, most of the games are on pythong because the low level players (including myself) are not confident playing on the other maps. Removing this might help with map rotations.
|
On January 05 2009 02:11 Bozali wrote:
If you check iccup at D level, most of the games are on pythong because the low level players (including myself) are not confident playing on the other maps. Removing this might help with map rotations.
I agree.
Plus there is no "art" in knowing exactly where to click, but a very residual "skill", learned over repetition.
Instead of impressing your young neighbor by millimetric clicks in the dark, i'd rather share a game with him.
|
Yes, it's not a skill - it's a fomality on the level that knowing the maps matters, and an obstacle to trying out new maps on lower levels of play (plus a hinderance in ladder games, when you can't just avoid certain maps you don't know...).
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
I think we can all agree that this is going to be the most insignificant of differences to the point where making it a toggleable feature wouldn't hurt. Anyone suggesting that this is going to change mass games on one map is overestimating the significance of this feature.
|
On January 05 2009 03:22 Plexa wrote:
Anyone suggesting that this is going to change mass games on one map is overestimating the significance of this feature.
I agree.
That argument is really weak, Dawn of War doesn't have black fog and everyone plays on the same maps. It's more to do with people liking familiarity.
Also... what's wrong with people playing on the same maps?! If you're fed up of Python and make a game on another map you'll still find someone on Iccup to play you.
However removing black fog does make the game easier. All those pimp blind storms progamers do are less impressive if you can see the terrain without having explored it.
|
No, DoW players play on the same maps because others are imba and there's no way to make new maps (afaik).
|
I like hard video games, and not knowing the map makes it more difficult
|
On January 05 2009 04:33 eXNewB wrote:
I like hard video games, and not knowing the map makes it more difficult
Oh really ? If you started the game with 0 workers, in exchange of every 5 seconds a message showing for all players saying "exNewB is really badass, hes playing it hard mode" would you do it ?
|
I do not like having to lose my first 5 games on a new map just because I don't know it. I want to lose because I am a newbtastic nubcake with nubsauce filling. In Warcraft 3 I can play on a map I have never played on before and be like "Ok, there is my natural expansion, this is where my opponents will have a chance to start." Players who know the map very well will still be rewarded (in a lesser way), they will know that the trees (which act like destructible barriers in warcraft 3) are just short enough so there death knight can shoot death coil to the other side.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 05 2009 03:45 Klive5ive wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2009 03:22 Plexa wrote:
Anyone suggesting that this is going to change mass games on one map is overestimating the significance of this feature. I agree. That argument is really weak, Dawn of War doesn't have black fog and everyone plays on the same maps. It's more to do with people liking familiarity. Also... what's wrong with people playing on the same maps?! If you're fed up of Python and make a game on another map you'll still find someone on Iccup to play you. However removing black fog does make the game easier. All those pimp blind storms progamers do are less impressive if you can see the terrain without having explored it.
Lol blind storms? You can't storm somewhere you can't see, hence this feature doesn't affect storms AT ALL?
It doesn't make the game easier, jesus, once you've played a map 5 times the only difference is you wont misclick as much.
|
|
|
Seeing as this in no way affects balance, game performance, or development time, I see no reason why it can't be togglable.
|
i just recently started to play some sc now and then again... maybe 10 games a weak, sometimes a nice little session with a friend... Back in time we knew the maps as good as it gets.
Now we play on *new* ones (chupyung, destination, andromeda...) or at least ones we did not know back then and it's just plain annoying.
The first ~5 games you have to search for everything, after that suddenly everything is clear and the fog doesn't matter. Hell, i once scouted for about an eternity because i couldn't figure out where my enemys choke was (he had perfect block so the scout was *stupid*).
Go the WC3 way, it's way better and you actually have way faster fun on new maps.
|
Lazy ass mofos. ITS TOO HARD TO EXPLORE A MAP OR LOAD IT UP AND CHECK IT OUT BEFORE I PLAY. NOW I LOSE THE FIRST 5 GAMES BECAUSE "I DON'T KNOW THE MAP".
Who's fault is that?
|
Jesus christ SOME of the "pro" wannabes and pro players are really screwed up in the head. I'm glad they are not making video games because they will torture the players with stupid repetition and inhumane game mechanics for the sake of "skill".
Let's get the bull shit out of the way and get to the game, strategy and execution. No one wants to be a fucking hermit and study the maps (who finds that fun or skillful?) and it sure doesn't encourage or help the casual players who play on multiple maps. In the end serious players will study maps anyways so it doesn't reward no one. All it rewards is more burden and time consuming BULL SHIT for the sake of adding another "skill" factor.
|
I would love to have the blackness gone, I have to leave games on Iccup cause I don't know where shit is, I'd rather be focused on the play then studying and learning new maps. I really don't think it takes any skill out, just less pre-game studying
|
On January 05 2009 09:09 Hokay wrote:
Jesus christ SOME of the "pro" wannabes and pro players are really screwed up in the head. I'm glad they are not making video games because they will torture the players with stupid repetition and inhumane game mechanics for the sake of "skill".
Let's get the bull shit out of the way and get to the game, strategy and execution. No one wants to be a fucking hermit and study the maps (who finds that fun or skillful?) and it sure doesn't encourage or help the casual players who play on multiple maps. In the end serious players will study maps anyways so it doesn't reward no one. All it rewards is more burden and time consuming BULL SHIT for the sake of adding another "skill" factor.
agree
|
On January 05 2009 10:00 n.DieJokes wrote:
I would love to have the blackness gone, I have to leave games on Iccup cause I don't know where shit is, I'd rather be focused on the play then studying and learning new maps. I really don't think it takes any skill out, just less pre-game studying
But if you didnt leave, you would learn the map  It doesnt take long to learn a map..
Anyways, my opinion is that it's one of many features that "helps" streamline the game into something that lacks character, and takes away from gameplay.. Something I don't quite feel comfortable with, my view, i dont care if you don't agree..
Not sure how I would explain this.. either you feel the same way, or you dont."Everyone" will play so "flawlessly" and SOME OF the minor things that might be considered buggy or flawed in the original - whitch also gives sc it's charm, is being watered out.
I've played for 10 years+ now (im not being elitist, I win 50% of my games on iccup), I still mess up sending my worker to the right place, and have to move it.. And even though I mess up, and it frustrates me to hell sometimes when I want to do a quick expansion, I dont need it to be changed.. Its me messing up, im ok with it, its stuff like this some of us have fun trying to get better at, just one of many thing.
but whatever.. I posted about this shroud issue on blizz forums long ago, and here aswell in the minor complaints post or what it was called, atleast i've said what I feel 
|
On January 05 2009 11:22 ocoini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2009 10:00 n.DieJokes wrote:
I would love to have the blackness gone, I have to leave games on Iccup cause I don't know where shit is, I'd rather be focused on the play then studying and learning new maps. I really don't think it takes any skill out, just less pre-game studying But if you didnt leave, you would learn the map It doesnt take long to learn a map..
It's a lot less fun to play when you lose because you didn't know where your natural was or the other spawn points on a map are.
|
On January 05 2009 11:43 Ideas wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2009 11:22 ocoini wrote:On January 05 2009 10:00 n.DieJokes wrote:
I would love to have the blackness gone, I have to leave games on Iccup cause I don't know where shit is, I'd rather be focused on the play then studying and learning new maps. I really don't think it takes any skill out, just less pre-game studying But if you didnt leave, you would learn the map It doesnt take long to learn a map.. It's a lot less fun to play when you lose because you didn't know where your natural was or the other spawn points on a map are.
Sometimes when i play on new maps i send out 2 workers very early on, sure it might lose me the game, but atleast I find my nat ^_^;; And loseing on a map you've never played befor vs. someone that has is kinda in the cards anyways.. And you seriously are going to find your opponent with 2 scouts, unless its an island M;mm
|
United States3824 Posts
I'm just going to read the sumup of this thread in the autoban list
|
On January 04 2009 08:37 CharlieMurphy wrote:
your arguments don't hold up "n00b".
Isn't caling someone on a forum "noob" with no obvious reason for it an insult? And isn't insulting people on this forum punished?
|
On January 05 2009 16:31 Cheerio wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 08:37 CharlieMurphy wrote:
your arguments don't hold up "n00b". Isn't caling someone on a forum "noob" with no obvious reason for it an insult? And isn't insulting people on this forum punished?
he got tempbanned
|
I like having a dark shaded fog of war, it's easier for me to see what I have vision of and what I don't. It's sometimes hard for me to tell what my actual vision is in war3 based on the minimap, which annoys me.
|
On January 05 2009 11:22 ocoini wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2009 10:00 n.DieJokes wrote:
I would love to have the blackness gone, I have to leave games on Iccup cause I don't know where shit is, I'd rather be focused on the play then studying and learning new maps. I really don't think it takes any skill out, just less pre-game studying But if you didnt leave, you would learn the map It doesnt take long to learn a map.. Anyways, my opinion is that it's one of many features that "helps" streamline the game into something that lacks character, and takes away from gameplay.. Something I don't quite feel comfortable with, my view, i dont care if you don't agree.. Not sure how I would explain this.. either you feel the same way, or you dont."Everyone" will play so "flawlessly" and SOME OF the minor things that might be considered buggy or flawed in the original - whitch also gives sc it's charm, is being watered out. I've played for 10 years+ now (im not being elitist, I win 50% of my games on iccup), I still mess up sending my worker to the right place, and have to move it.. And even though I mess up, and it frustrates me to hell sometimes when I want to do a quick expansion, I dont need it to be changed.. Its me messing up, im ok with it, its stuff like this some of us have fun trying to get better at, just one of many thing. but whatever.. I posted about this shroud issue on blizz forums long ago, and here aswell in the minor complaints post or what it was called, atleast i've said what I feel
It´s a core question that has come up a lot already just in "small":
Is it better to make it harder to learn (a map) to increase "skill" or should it be streamlined to get players as fast as possible (accustomed to the map).
A lot of the arguments run parallel, but unlike thequestion how the game (or usually the UI) should be made "easier" to be more accessable, this one is less abstract.
"Knowing the map" is less a skill and more a requirement to play.
|
On January 04 2009 08:28 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Furthermore the unexplored terrain can be easily confused with explored terrain and can screw you up late game if you are scouting but are distracted and can't see exactly where the scout is going or has been.
Unless you are totally blind, this won't happen.
|
Why are people talking about not knowing where the mains or nats are. It doesn't take 'studying' to learn this. It takes a glance. If you actually Want to play unfamiliar maps on iccup, you have nothing to complain about because all you have to do is go to iccup, and look at any full sized map preview you're interested in for 30 seconds. Honestly what the fuck are you complaining about. Playing on a new map will always put you at a disadvantage, so just go ahead and play at a disadvantage because you haven't been practicing lately (what a ridiculous concept) or just play python because you're too much of a pussy. It's your fault! This is competition.
In regards to clicking on unexplored spots on the map, and getting it right blindly. Some people can do this consistently, others can't. It's something you learn through practice. It benefits the more experienced player. Now how is it not a skill? Because i'm sure i've heard more than one person say that it is not. If you're not comfortable with the aformentioned, which are basically the harsh facts of playing a competitive game, i don't blame you. That's why you don't have to play the ladder. If you're in a casual mood, or if you want to rapidly learn a new map, simply play a non-ladder game where there are always extra options available, and for good reason. What's wrong with that?
|
in theory i agree with it leading to an incresed map pool being played but hasn't the War3 map pool become very stagnant? is this due to laziness or just a lack of good war3 map developers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/8002/mapom3.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/7379/darkbf7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/6836/fogje4.jpg)
