|
Lets talk about bases:
![[image loading]](http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/images/starcraft_base2.jpg)
mandatory picture is mandatory.
To give you the broad strokes, almost all maps encourage rushing, both mains either having a short air distance or short run distance. EVEN desert oasis can be crossed with leisure having the longest walking path of all the maps, 54 seconds to a minute depending on what army you use. If Zerg scouted your army intent on pushing, or performing a timing attack they could just barely manage to plop down a few spine crawlers before you knock at their door. You would also get another cycle of larvae before worrying too much.
But most maps are not like that, most maps you see your opponent moving out, 15 – 25 seconds later he is in your face and most base preparations must be done prematurely, you can predict but it is never accurate and mostly guesswork.
Thus I have started asking myself questions:
Should the maps be bigger?
How many expansions should there be?
On how many of those do I put gas before it deteriorates game play into 200, 200 mech dominating the entire map because of easy to defend, take and ultimately hold third and fourth while still having an easy not so risky than it should warrant walk distance towards their respectable opponents.
What size should my map be? What size should be considered as tournament worthy standard?
Next when it comes to expanding there are ways to punish one base play, but also ways to reward expanding earlier. To encourage people thinking of taking an earlier expansion, you can either:
1. Make the natural easy to defend.
2. Limit the amount of resource found inside the main.
3. All of the above.
It came to me that a tournament could include any map they wanted to and that all of these things do not matter, its all about what these people have decided upon as standard, what the community wants to see, what they are familiar with and how the game flows.
Currently the game flows well with the following:
8 mineral patches and two geysers.
High yield has 6 mineral patches and two geysers.
![[image loading]](http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/5984/probeyieldrate2kn0.png)
this was purely to make me seem smart
![[image loading]](http://www.iccup.com/upload/images/news/1deL/Vespenegas.png)
What are the effect you see from the current setup?
2 gas in the main makes it easy to tech, into higher tier units but you wont be able to mass them without 4x ++ worth of refineries running, one base play is cute but ultimately as the game progresses once you have your tech you aim to expand after pushing out with the initial advantage such tech gives you and then your aim is to out produce your opponent and win with this initial advantage or at least snowball the momentum created by the initial immortal push and advance forward to colossi.
We can then safely say that one expansion is all anyone would be inclined to take during the course of a game, unless you want to effectively mass Carriers, Battle cruisers or Ultralisks
Ultralisks (300 mineral and 200 gas PER UNIT is insanely expensive), but that is fine because as Zerg, you can usually get away with 3-4 bases worth of gas to spend, while the other races kind of struggle to field more than 3-5 of these massive game changing units.
What happens when you take away the second extractor?
Most of the current strategies will be slowed down extensively. You would see a heavy amount of tier 1.5 perhaps even exclusively so.
Anyone with half a brain can reason that, If you want to slow down the mid, late or even the super late game all you need do is remove the second geyser from the entire map and suddenly every base you take only yields half the amount of gas that you normally would get.
Once you drop the amount of minerals gained per expansion what then? How long do you want a player to effectively manage off one base?
Are you satisfied with this 2 geyser play? Should expansions yield less?
I am not qualified to answer, so I am asking instead.
Day9 flirted with 300 population cap by stating that armies got maxed relatively quick compared to brood war, and in general could sustain 200 / 200 off two base for a limited amount of time.
I’m saying if armies get maxed fast, why not lower the amount of resource each expansion has to promote frequent expanding.
Yes by now it should be clear that I play Zerg and want other races to expand more often so that I can have my gumdrops and ice-cream because honestly, after a certain point when mech generally wants to take its third I have been maxed and waiting patiently for 10 minutes while saturating my fifth expansion.
The above statement is a gross exaggeration but should get the point across. Bases have too much minerals compared with gas. Maybe lowering either amount or both would be a good thing?
TLDR? here are some polls ;D
Poll: Should the maps be bigger?Desert Oasis / Cross position metalopolis (1 min walk distance should be though of as standard. (133) 63% I prefer Stepps of war style maps about 20 sec rush distance, it should be standard. (34) 16% I WANT EPIC SIZED MAPS SO I CAN EXPAND TWICE before even worrying about my opponent (31) 15% The maps should all be incineration zone with a 15 second rush distance because my penis is big. (14) 7% 212 total votes Your vote: Should the maps be bigger? (Vote): I prefer Stepps of war style maps about 20 sec rush distance, it should be standard.
(Vote): Desert Oasis / Cross position metalopolis (1 min walk distance should be though of as standard.
(Vote): I WANT EPIC SIZED MAPS SO I CAN EXPAND TWICE before even worrying about my opponent
(Vote): The maps should all be incineration zone with a 15 second rush distance because my penis is big.
Poll: How many mineral patches should your main have?8 (168) 91% 6 (6) 3% 7 (5) 3% 5 (5) 3% 184 total votes Your vote: How many mineral patches should your main have? (Vote): 8
(Vote): 7
(Vote): 6
(Vote): 5
Poll: 1 or two geysers?I feel two geysers give just enough gas for 1 base. (168) 94% I feel 1 geyser should be enough gas for 1 base. (11) 6% 179 total votes Your vote: 1 or two geysers? (Vote): I feel two geysers give just enough gas for 1 base.
(Vote): I feel 1 geyser should be enough gas for 1 base.
Poll: Mineral only expansions?Kinda meeh, when i expand its because I want gas. (109) 64% As a third? definately (49) 29% Yes, and it should be high yield. (10) 6% Other? please specify. (2) 1% 170 total votes Your vote: Mineral only expansions? (Vote): As a third? definately
(Vote): Kinda meeh, when i expand its because I want gas.
(Vote): Other? please specify.
(Vote): Yes, and it should be high yield.
Poll: High yield gasYes as a standalone expansion (84) 49% Yes, with the high yield minerals (40) 23% No, not even with the high yield. (38) 22% Why make regular vespene? High yield for the masses! (9) 5% 171 total votes Your vote: High yield gas (Vote): Yes, with the high yield minerals
(Vote): Yes as a standalone expansion
(Vote): No, not even with the high yield.
(Vote): Why make regular vespene? High yield for the masses!
Poll: The current way minerals and gas are handledIs not broke, so dont fix it. (115) 64% I would like people to experiment with it. (62) 35% Other, please specify. (2) 1% 179 total votes Your vote: The current way minerals and gas are handled (Vote): Is not broke, so dont fix it.
(Vote): I would like people to experiment with it.
(Vote): Other, please specify.
Poll: you enter a game, and every base has 1 geyserIts a good thing that would never happen. (56) 34% its fine, my opponents will be running off 1 vespene too so his tech will be equally delayed. (45) 27% Good old 7thpool - 8rax - proxy gayte? HERE I CUM (28) 17% I downtumb the map because i couldnt mech fast enough to save my life. (18) 11% I adapt by expanding twice! (13) 8% Maybe this is the solution to armies getting maxed awfully fast? (6) 4% 166 total votes Your vote: you enter a game, and every base has 1 geyser (Vote): I adapt by expanding twice!
(Vote): I downtumb the map because i couldnt mech fast enough to save my life.
(Vote): Good old 7thpool - 8rax - proxy gayte? HERE I CUM
(Vote): its fine, my opponents will be running off 1 vespene too so his tech will be equally delayed.
(Vote): Its a good thing that would never happen.
(Vote): Maybe this is the solution to armies getting maxed awfully fast?
|
i duno i havent tested or didnt play brood war i was too young but dont you get less gas per trip?
someone said its equal gas off 2 geysers anyway, but if so, this only means that you need MORE probes to get an equal amount
anyway im not too bothered with the 8min/2gas and 6min/2gas i think its fine as it is but yes i agree with the maps that they are too short and id like to see longer games,
a lot of the times you see players rushing and then you cant build fast enough if for eg you went for an earlier expo with less units and have been droning, but obviosuly a map that is HARD to rush due to distance will be shit because rushing is part of the game
i think blizz maps wont even be used in the competitive scene anyway and incineration zone is horrible lol.
|
i like the idea of having a little less minerals at mains or specific expansions, but one gas is terrifying D: terran bio can do silly things with only one gas in my experience
|
Protoss need 2 gas at their main more than the 2 other races
|
Most of the data, information and points in this thread are inaccurate or not tested properly..started getting pretty frustrated when you were randomly chucking around rush distance times like 1 minute for DO/metalopolis, and 20seconds for steppes...
If you take out 1 of the geysers, you get a game which will be like, marine vs ling vs zealot with a tiny amount of tech units.
I see you tried to put effort into the thread, but your questions/points are a mess.
|
On June 14 2010 14:00 KCrazy wrote:
i like the idea of having a little less minerals at mains or specific expansions, but one gas is terrifying D: terran bio can do silly things with only one gas in my experience
its better (easier) to have terran bio ball trying to compete for the map against lings, roaches and banelings than to have terran mech sitting inside its base, perching its tanks forward one babystep at the time for 30 - 45 minutes of the game, patiently taking its time never over extending. never showing a weakness always killing your drops with vikings and your nydusworms die too well placed defenders. Everytime i faced terran before reset i would die alittle inside, scout often and hope for bio.
it never came ;/
Most of the data, information and points in this thread are inaccurate or not tested properly..started getting pretty frustrated when you were randomly chucking around rush distance times like 1 minute for DO/metalopolis, and 20seconds for steppes...
the information is in INGAME seconds and rounded up seem pretty accurate from where i stand.
If you take out 1 of the geysers, you get a game which will be like, marine vs ling vs zealot with a tiny amount of tech units. if you take out the geyser in the main and not on the natural you would get a longer period when tier 1 could effectivly be used. Perhaps food for thought? if you want to get more than one tech path perhaps get an earlier expansion?
the questions are vague enough that you can shape a meaning out of it but your not thinking, simply stating what you feel would happen yet not seeing the possibility that one base play might need to be toned down.
|
I feel that the game is a bit more balanced on small maps. The inherent mobility of air units makes them far too powerful on maps like Desert Oasis.
|
On June 14 2010 14:04 UnderWorld_Dream wrote:
Protoss need 2 gas at their main more than the 2 other races
You must be joking. Terrans are by far the most gas hungry race. Unless you go brainless Marauderspam, in which case you should probably just play AOE and just peasant rush all day.
|
i voted for incineration zone because my penis is huge
its not 
|
I believe we should have maps similar to lost temple, metalopolis, steppes of war. The Sin Chupung Ryeong port was excellent as well. Kulas Ravine was also good. Scrap was good as well. I'd prefer to steer away from larger maps as they don't provide interesting gameplay. Pure macro games are a little boring imo. I suggest that if anyone wants to play a pure macro game that they should go play fastest map possible 
|
Huge maps please. With MBS and automine there needs to be some other way of rewarding good macroers.
|
without 2 gas, where is the incentive to bother teching to T2? Just take terran as an example, you wouldn't be able to make factory then starport + tanks, and you certainly wont be able to FE because 1 basing would rape any attempts. Barracks spam would prevail. Stupid idea, and if you were actually thinking about it, you wouldn't have raised it.
I'll reiterate, your post is just full of inaccuracies. Just look at your claim that Ultras cost 300 gas. How can you try to put forward credible arguments or ask relevant questions when you don't have necessary game knowledge to back them up?
|
personally I think the pop cap's a bit screwed up atm, because compared to broodwar you have a lot more pop taken up by workers, late game you have 40-60 workers, which all take up 1 pop while you would have almost 1/2 that in broodwar because they would pick up 8 minerals not 5, and twice as much gas, from only 1 geyser.
You hit pop cap fast because 1/3rd of your army is drones/probes/scv's also the addition of spawn larvae, reactors, and chrono boost allows you to power economy and get an army really fast with no setbacks if you time it right. This coupled with the fact that compared to broodwar;
- queens are cheaper than hatcheries for more larvae
- a reactor is essentially another barracks for 50/50, instead of 150/0
(your going to build some with tech labs definately, but your also going to build some with reactors, so the point still stands)
- warpgates once researched speed up the production of gateways
Your cash is more streamlined into army, and less of it goes towards buildings, this coupled with workers taking up a large portion of your army, and acellerated unit production you hit 200/200 far faster than you ever did in broodwar.
Simple answer would be to increase the pop cap to 225 or something, or maybe even 250.
but that would look a little weird.
|
On June 14 2010 15:22 pyr0ma5ta wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 14:04 UnderWorld_Dream wrote:
Protoss need 2 gas at their main more than the 2 other races You must be joking. Terrans are by far the most gas hungry race. Unless you go brainless Marauderspam, in which case you should probably just play AOE and just peasant rush all day.
no he just thinks that since sentries cost 100 gas he should be entiteled to mass them
How do you afford early sentry spam? early two gas off one main
I'll reiterate, your post is just full of inaccuracies.
you found one, i fixed it forgot to type in the mineral cost anyhow, statement still stands.
without 2 gas, where is the incentive to bother teching to T2? Just take terran as an example, you wouldn't be able to make factory then starport + tanks, and you certainly wont be able to FE because 1 basing would rape any attempts. Barracks spam would prevail. Stupid idea, and if you were actually thinking about it, you wouldn't have raised it.
Bunkers? wallin? its not like you are new to the subject of stationary defence and sim city.
One base play rapeing things? with one geyser? what are they going to mass if only allowed 6 mineral patches (16 workers for near full saturation) =?
Pure macro games are a little boring imo. Sc2 has no pure macro games, not even idra is trying to get away with "pure macro." Pure macro does not currently exist in sc2.
Its the idea of double expand before pool. Does it work with the current map pool? Is there even incentive to double expand? didnt think so.
|
On June 14 2010 16:03 Madkipz wrote:Its the idea of double expand before pool. Does it work with the current map pool? Is there even incentive to double expand? didnt think so.
There sure as fuck is incentive.
There's incentive to expand 7 times before making any units if you can get away with it, and "can I get away with it" is a question answered by the map, for the most part, not the game.
|
I would like maps with only one gas at the main and one or both gas at the natural high yielded. This would make T3 at one base impossible and allows more harass at T2.
This would maybe make Zerg a bit too strong. Is there a way to make Zerg weaker by map design? Small chokes in the middle, maybe?
|
No maps shouldn't be bigger. Lost Temple is the perfect size for a map, Meta a bit bigger. Imagine units taking as much time as units going from one base to another in Katrina (BW Map) in Sc2, that would be a huge pain. Rarely do I see pure macro games, as already mentioned, but those just turn out to be boring games. IdrA games are good enough of "macro games" for me.
|
Perhaps reduce the amount of minerals/gas at your main/natural so that it is mined out ~the rate of current gold, and raise the total amount at the gold bases, promoting play to keep your gold and deny theirs through the later game.
Just off the top of my head 
|
1 Gas would favor zerg heavily as they can play pretty independent of gas with lings/blings and roaches.
As for map size, I like to see variety in map sizes. I don't think there's anything wrong with having a 35-45s rush distance map and a desert oasis sized map.
|
What happened to maps with 9 mineral patches? Why only 8?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
