EPTIt's kinda interesting to note how some maps aren't really symmetrical. Always thought they would be.
[Tool] SC2 Map Analyzer - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Draconicfire
Canada2562 Posts
It's kinda interesting to note how some maps aren't really symmetrical. Always thought they would be. | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 02:29 Logo wrote: 1. You're my hero. This is going to be awesome for map making. 2. I respectfully request that you had a total scouting time type of analysis to the map. Essentially the time to scout each of the other bases so we can compare the time it takes to 100% know where your opponent is on a map like LT. (We can do it with your tool + addition, but I'm too lazy to add!) 1. I was motivated to make it to help my map making! 2. Awesome idea, watch for an update with this! | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 02:53 Peekay.switch wrote: This is by far the best tool I've seen. I'm really curious programming wise... What kind of license is the project on? Is it possible to view the code? Once again, this tool is gonna become wicked handy in the future. It's all open source under GPL and you can grab it at SC2Mapster.com at the project's page http://www.sc2mapster.com/assets/sc2-map-analyzer/. The release zip is just the executable for folks who want to use it without looking at the guts. I originally started it as a SourceForge project but then I discovered SC2Mapster and decided it should live there. | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 03:00 PrinceXizor wrote: Great just just analyzed some of my maps, with a question. is there a minimum width that it uses for the ground path? i have a map with a ground rush distance of 90000000 which can't be correct, especially when no line is even shown? the map DOES have a ground path however. and would it be possible to ask for you to add a command to show Base to base distances. that is main to nat, nat to third, third to every other base ect. to see expand paths better? If you trust me to keep your mapping secrets, send me the map file and I can try to debug that ground path issue. Yeah, I can do some more base-to-base stuff, I'll probably name the bases so the table data will be readable. Another great suggestion! | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 03:08 PrinceXizor wrote: It's interesting i've found that one of the maps i made, literally by copy paste was off by a cell, and i didn't catch it consequently the map has an imbalance of 158% in resources to one side, and 130% in openness to the other side. I wonder if that renders the map unplayable or just that strategies might vary slightly dependant on spawn location. WHAT? Again, if you trust me not to distribute your maps around, I'd love to see the map that caused this. Let's get this thing air-tight and as useful as possible! | ||
|
SuxxorTIme
France16 Posts
| ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 03:15 Musoeun wrote: This stuff is fascinating, but I'm wondering: can you run your imbalance thing with more than two bases? EDIT: And also... I'm really wondering if you could run similar figures on BW maps, and what that would come up with. Original the influence + positional imbalance calculations considered all the start locations against each other at once. This wasn't giving me the results I was looking for, because I'm mainly interested in how is the map balanced for every 1v1 configuration. So, if you want to know how a team map is balanced, say, we could add another version of the calculation for that. The map data lets you specify which locations teams can spawn in. Also, if looking at each start location pair is just too much, check the summary.csv file. If you run the analyzer in a directory it will look for all the maps in it and summarize them. The summary.csv file looks at all the positional balance results and grabs the worst one to put in the summary. And no, the tool won't open a BW map, but yes, I'm planning a post to analyze some of the Brood War ports. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
| ||
|
Nightmarjoo
United States3359 Posts
| ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 04:40 Logo wrote: If you ran a map through the galaxy editor SC1 legacy converter then ran the tool would the results be relevant? Maybe not so much for openness, but for resource and distance stuff? Okay, if you did that because you are interested in info for playing BW then the results are still useful. Yeah you can still measure distances and ask questions like, "How much variation is there in the rush distances on 4-player map X?" The openness pictures should still tell you stuff like whether two spaces on the same map are similarly open or not. One issue is how good the conversion tool is. I think it only generates terrain right? You have to place resources, doodads, etc and I think it would take quite some time to replicate a brood war map exactly. So yeah, probably not worth the effort to better understand Brood War. Now Brood War map ports for SC2, that's another story! | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 04:49 Nightmarjoo wrote: Unfuckingreal, that's awesome! Nice job. It basically automatically does what us mappers have been manually eyeballing for years. EXACTLY! You know you've dropped pylons all over the map to balance the chokes and all that tedious jazz. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On June 26 2010 05:03 dimfish wrote: Okay, if you did that because you are interested in info for playing BW then the results are still useful. Yeah you can still measure distances and ask questions like, "How much variation is there in the rush distances on 4-player map X?" The openness pictures should still tell you stuff like whether two spaces on the same map are similarly open or not. One issue is how good the conversion tool is. I think it only generates terrain right? You have to place resources, doodads, etc and I think it would take quite some time to replicate a brood war map exactly. So yeah, probably not worth the effort to better understand Brood War. Now Brood War map ports for SC2, that's another story! Well I meant more of to compare some of the things in BW maps to what we might do in SC2 moreso than how to play BW. Either way if resources don't make the cut it's not particularly useful. | ||
|
monkh
United Kingdom568 Posts
I don't think it recognises areas blocked by doodads (i think) i had area blocked by trees on one of my maps and it didn't seem to account for them in travelling distances | ||
|
SoL[9]
Portugal1370 Posts
Amazing job! Ty | ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
This will greatly aid in the making of competative maps in the future. Hopefully blizzard takes note in some way. What would be great would be a scouting analysis, essentially take the ground distance between bases, and work out the best direction to scout on each map, for each location, and then do a comparison of whether 1 base can narrow down the opponent's location faster or not. | ||
|
chuky500
France473 Posts
It would be nice to have informations on the distance if you take an alternate route too, but I don't know how hard it would be to find the alternate routes. Another thing is to run your program I had to launch cmd.exe but I had to place myself in your program's directory then type sc2mapanalyzer.exe and then drag my map in the console, but it would have been easier if I could just drag your exe in the console, then drag my map because this doesn't work, it says it can't find the free font (I guess because it doesn't run the exe from the right directory). Or even running your program without opening the console by drag and dropping the map file onto the exe would be fine. I'm using Windows XP btw. Also, I tested 2 of my maps and since you display the full path in the picture one of them had the informations cropped in the picture that compares the 6 o' clock vs the 12 o' clock. I don't know if the size of the font is related to the size of the map because my huge map had a smaller font size and the picture didn't crop the 6 and 12 o' clock infos in the file name but for the regular sized map it was cropped. And all my maps are in the My Documents directory anyways so it's not really usefull to display the c:\documents and settings\... and all One last thing, on my huge map the cliffs were tinted a bit grey, I don't know if it's a feature but I didn't see my cliffs were a bit grey in my normal sized map. Good job anyways. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
The openness is particularly useful concept and well implemented. GJ! edit: The Google spreadsheet still doesn't open for me - says I don't have sufficient rights. Could you make it public please? | ||
|
dimfish
United States663 Posts
On June 26 2010 07:42 figq wrote: The Google spreadsheet still doesn't open for me - says I don't have sufficient rights. Could you make it public please? Looks like I posted my personal editing link, changed it to the link for sharing publicly. Please shoot me a PM if that didn't fix it for you. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
Also I'm getting up to 8% positional imbalances on my map that's almost entirely symmetrical. Possibly due to no-pathing fills? The edge of my map, separated by a gap has uneven terrain since it's no-pathing). Other than that there's a small 1 tile imbalance (bases along the line of symmetry can't be positionally balanced) and 1 extra tile right on the line of symmetry (useless tile, just makes it prettier), but is that enough for the map to show something like a 10% difference? | ||
|
NuKedUFirst
Canada3139 Posts
This will be useful for checking rush distances | ||
| ||
