[D] Refined Scrap Station

Ketara

United States15065 Posts

November 16 2010 05:38 GMT

Ever since Zelniq made this thread detailing the positional problems with a map that, for the most part, everybody liked, people have pointed out the problem in games and casts repeatedly.

I talked to the iCCup guys about creating a fixed version, but they're understandably busy guys, with their own awesome maps to make and charity casts to do for the kids. So I figured out how to use the mapmaker today and created my own updated version.

It is currently on NA, SEA and EU as Refined Scrap Station, but before pitching it on the Blizzard forums I wanted to discuss it here, and see if we could all get behind it.

If anybody wants to donate a slot to put it on the KR server, please PM me.

So, here's the list of changes, with screenshots, reasoning, and polls for you guys to vote on. Team Liquid loves polls, after all!

Also, please note, this is not a thread about map balance, or about the racial balance of Scrap Station. This is a thread about the positional spawn point imbalances of Scrap Station. I am not intending to make a new map or a different map, I am intending to fix the positional problems of the existing map while keeping the features and concept of it the same.

Change #1:
The righthand spawn locations ramp was pushed inward slightly. This prevents the problem of spine crawlers on the right spawn having bad coverage of the ramp compared to the left, and prevents the problem of needing an extra creep tumor to reach the natural on the right spawn.

In order to make the number of buildings required to wall off as a FEing Protoss or Terran the same, a doodad was added close to the cliff edge. Walling at the ramp is the same.

Left spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +

Right spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +

Change in Balance:
I think this is a considerable buff for early game Zerg, for obvious reasons. Terran and Protoss remain the same.

Poll: Do you like this change?

Yes (263)

85%

No, change it the other way (3 tumors to connect for both spawns) (30)

10%

No, leave it as is (15)

5%

308 total votes

Your vote: Do you like this change?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (3 tumors to connect for both spawns)
(Vote): No, leave it as is

Change #2:
A doodad has been placed behind the destructible rocks on the left-hand spawn. Before, it would take an extra building to wall off behind the rocks on the left spawn compared to the right.

Right spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +

Left spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +

Change in Balance:
I think this is a minor mid game buff for Protoss and Terran, but it is not necessarily bad for Zerg, since it lets them block the lefthand rock choke with fewer Roaches or whatever.

Poll: Do you like this change?

Yes (150)

70%

No, change it the other way (2 buildings to wall behind rocks on both spawns) (60)

28%

No, leave it as is (5)

2%

215 total votes

Your vote: Do you like this change?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (2 buildings to wall behind rocks on both spawns)
(Vote): No, leave it as is

Change #3:
The chokepoint south of the natural on the right hand side of the map has been slightly enlarged, making it impossible to wall with 2 buildings on the right hand side. It was always possible to wall with 2 on the right hand side.

Left spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +

Right spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +

Change in Balance:
I think this is a minor early game nerf for Protoss, but nobody is really doing 2 gate pressure anymore, especially not on this map, so really it's just creating wider gaps for big armies in late game.

Note that this change was reversed due to the poll, so the "Yes" option is now the "No, change it the other way" option, and vice versa. Make sure you're voting for the correct choice.

Poll: Do you like this change?

No, change it the other way (Cannot wall here with 2 buildings on either spawn) (120)

66%

Yes (57)

31%

No, leave it as is (5)

3%

182 total votes

Your vote: Do you like this change?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (Cannot wall here with 2 buildings on either spawn)
(Vote): No, leave it as is

Change #4:
Previously, there was a spot on the island on the south spawn side where Infestors could spit terrans over the gap, even though Stalkers cannot blink over the island. This spot has been removed to make this no longer possible.

Left spawn (for comparison):
+ Show Spoiler +

Right spawn:
+ Show Spoiler +

Change in Balance:
I see this as more of a bug fix than anything else. I suppose it's an extremely minor nerf to Zerg, I've never seen anybody use this trick in a pro game.

Poll: Do you like this change?

Yes (177)

87%

No, change it the other way (Let Infestors spit IT's on both sides of the island) (24)

12%

No, leave it as is (3)

1%

204 total votes

Your vote: Do you like this change?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No, change it the other way (Let Infestors spit IT's on both sides of the island)
(Vote): No, leave it as is

Change #5:
After using the map analyzer to check the edits, I found out that the edit to the ramp made the right hand main much smaller than I'd realized, going from 31.0 Command Center equivalents to 28. Because of this, the back of the right hand main was enlarged slightly, in order to make the two mains even.

Map Analyzer imagery:
+ Show Spoiler +

Changes:
+ Show Spoiler +

Change in Balance:
This keeps the mains roughly the same size as they were before, given that change #1 made the righthand main smaller than the left.

Poll: Do you like this change?

Yes (44)

96%

No (2)

4%

46 total votes

Your vote: Do you like this change?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No

Finally, we've got a poll on what you think of the changes as a whole. Please note that this poll is asking if the current changes in the pictures improve the map.

If you don't like the current changes and would on the whole prefer the #2 option changes that were not done, please vote no. If a good majority prefer the #2 option changes I'll make a new version and we'll vote on that.

Poll: Do these changes improve the map?

Yes (276)

97%

No (8)

3%

284 total votes

Your vote: Do these changes improve the map?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No

Some PMs/Reply's I have gotten from progamers and important community members on the subject:

On November 17 2010 05:30 prodiG wrote:
The changes seem okay, but I think if you wanted to have a perfectly balanced map you'd have to make it symmetrical. I'd just copy the top spawn, rotate 45 degrees and flip horizontally and then start lining things up. This would hands down eliminate all problems, although you'd need to completely overhaul the map as none of the aesethics on the bottom half would work anymore, on top of making sure you've got everything perfectly symmetrical.

On November 17 2010 10:26 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
Looks good.

On November 17 2010 10:41 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Looks pretty good, good job!

On November 17 2010 18:22 MorroW wrote:
i like it because scrap station has these positional imbalances that u mention here, the creep spread in the main to ramp and all the wallin things, is actually a pretty big deal at high level
im not 100% if we shoud change left side or right side to make the symmetrical, the only thing i want is that both sides look the same to create positional balance

On November 18 2010 01:57 Whiplash wrote:
I'm aware of the positional balance on this map in ZvZ, your balance changes seem to address it. Looks good, I saw your post a few days ago but just didn't comment on it.

On November 18 2010 04:12 Chill wrote:
Your solution in change 1 is a bit of a strange one - you've blocked off access to the right ramp by placing that doodad in the way... There must be a more elegant solution to restore symmetry without blocking ramp access.

2 is a no brainer

I don't like 3. I feel the double gate rush + block is a cool possibility, so I feel you should modify the left side to reflect the right side, as opposed to vice versa.

4 is fine as long as it still allows blinking. (blinking was never possible, he and I talked about that after)

I don't really have a comment on #5.

Hope that helps >_<

On November 17 2010 20:12 Mirhi wrote:
I actually like this, I'll have my guys post on this.

On November 17 2010 20:25 Tranqfx wrote:
yea, looks good

On November 17 2010 21:17 vT bLuR wrote:
i like these changes

dont like the doodad to block the ramp one though

Anyway, please discuss! Thanks.

silencesc

United States464 Posts

November 16 2010 05:42 GMT

I really like the changes, but the other way. Making the game harder for everyone is better than easier, as you don't want the destructible rocks not to matter at all, and if it's too easy to wall off then scrap station will become a two base turtle fest map...

Ketara

United States15065 Posts

November 16 2010 06:02 GMT

I'd also like to specifically request that any pro's with the time who read through all this post their opinions of the changes. Unfortunately, I am not the iCCup guys, and I can't just hop on skype and ask a whole bunch of progamers what they think of the thing.

Thanks.

Bear4188

United States1797 Posts

November 16 2010 06:22 GMT

Great changes, it's simply amazing how inept Blizzard is in just making a mirrored map.

I think with change #3 it would be better to widen the small choke rather than constricting the other, just because it seems that Scrap already has a lot of tight spaces and it would be more conducive to late game macro armies to add space rather than take it away.

Existor

Russian Federation4295 Posts

November 16 2010 06:29 GMT

Good changes, but... Blizzard will NEVER add them, because they're not reading this forum

Mr.Pyro

Denmark959 Posts

November 16 2010 06:40 GMT

We absolutely need people to do in-depth analysis on all maps, proving how horrible Blizzard's maps really are!

Lina

42 Posts

November 16 2010 06:50 GMT

why make this map even more zerg favored than it already is?

imyzhang

Canada809 Posts

November 16 2010 06:52 GMT

this is amazing =] at least someone actually tries to balance the map, instead of just posting complaining posts on tl.

Craton

United States17281 Posts

November 16 2010 06:54 GMT

That doodad placement just looks really, really awkward. I think it'll end up causing giving a positional imbalance to the right side instead of the left when it comes to how much surface area you get to attack/push with.

Coindrop

United States203 Posts

November 16 2010 07:06 GMT

#10

Nice work, I really am not a fan of scrap station and have had it thumbsed down for eternity but this is some admirable effort right here = )

inFeZa

Australia556 Posts

November 16 2010 07:18 GMT

#11

Blizzard should really look into this, never noticed the destructable rocks problem and the blinking over the island problem.

Darkstar_X

United States197 Posts

November 16 2010 07:22 GMT

#12

This map is already so heavily zerg favored, yet you make it even more so. I'm not sure how anyone can say this is more fair at all. Also the doodad makes it look like a joke.

Nightfall.589

Canada766 Posts

November 16 2010 07:23 GMT

#13

Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that so many of the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?

This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!)

Ketara

United States15065 Posts

November 16 2010 07:27 GMT

#14

On November 16 2010 16:23 Nightfall.589 wrote:
Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that all the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?

This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!)

No, it's not.

Thor drops on Lost Temple are not a positional imbalance, they are a feature. No matter where you and your opponent spawn on Lost Temple, you can Thor drop on the high ground and hit his natural hatchery.

This is correcting a problem where in a ZvZ the Zerg on the top spawn is at an advantage because of assymetrical problems with the map.

Please do not turn this thread into a racial balance thread. I do not want it to be a racial balance thread. I understand that editing a map inevitably changes the balance of the map, but I don't want people comparing these changes to, nor whining about, Lost Temple in this thread.

Zerksys

United States569 Posts

November 16 2010 07:41 GMT

#15

On November 16 2010 16:23 Nightfall.589 wrote:
Am I the only one who finds it quite disturbing that so many of the Zerg-favoured changes (Or the "No to Protoss/Terran-favoured changes) are receiving so many votes on a map that's already very Zerg-favoured?

This is the equivalent of people supporting making Thor drops even better on LT (Say, by adding a chasm between the hatchery, and the cliff!)

Um I don't see any drastic changes to the map that changed it so that it is MORE heavily zerg favored. Everyone knows that it's a zerg favored map no one will deny it, but the changes he made did nothing to make it worse. He's simply making it so that the map is mirrored. Before it was a 50/50 shot that you would get a worse position. Now with the changes you get the same field conditions both ways.

Besides terrans get lost temple and stepps zerg gets scrap station. It all evens out.

actionbastrd

Congo598 Posts

November 16 2010 07:43 GMT

#16

all maps should be symmetrical, its really just that simple. why blizzard doesn't seem to think so is beyond me. Map balance is just as important as unit balance. All your changes are golden, or at the very very least an obvious improvement.

Subversion

South Africa3627 Posts

November 16 2010 07:49 GMT

#17

yup. all these changes do is balance the map. no problems there.

Ketara

United States15065 Posts

November 16 2010 07:51 GMT

#18

Is that you being sarcastic or supportive, Subversion. I cannot tell

Nightfall.589

Canada766 Posts

November 16 2010 07:56 GMT

#19

On November 16 2010 16:27 Ketara wrote:

Show nested quote +

Here's the thing - I'm not noting the positional imbalances, but rather, the choices that people make.

I'm all for fixing the imbalance, but when presented with Option A that makes a X-favoured map symmetrical, but more favoured towards X, and Option B that makes a X-favoured map symmetrical but less favoured towards X, I'd figure people would be more inclined to support Option B.

Xacalite

Germany533 Posts

November 16 2010 08:05 GMT

#20

When reading to the answers i get kinda sad how many fuckin retards dont get what the OP actually did. How can you QQ instantly that this map that is "zerg favoured" is getting even more buffed for zerg? Do you even know what "zerg favoured" means? When reading stuff like "ohhhh your making teh mapz even betta 4 zergs omg" I dont think you do. Zerg favoured is atm only a term to refer to a map that is pretty much perfectly balanced. No short rush distance to tank push twice and shelll your nat. No ultra small chokes to pummel down 10 ultras that cant attack at once. No ledge for thor drops (not saying LT is imba).

So next time you whining about map changes use your degenerated brain and think about what your just about to write.

Sorry for the rant but it makes me mad.

As for the changes i really think they were all quite needed. I think having maps with features that favour race X is nothing bad. But having to cointoss between a godd spawn and a bad spawn is very shitty. I personally agree with you changes. Evening out spawn points on the better blizzard maps and let the ICCup guys make the other godd maps =).

1 2 3 4 Next All

Please or register to reply.

[D] Refined Scrap Station

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming