Staredit Network

I have to disagree with you there. Head on over to the Europe and Asia (more so with Asia) server. There's three times as much melee games (they're 90% actual melee, not that moneymap shit). Oh, not to forget that half of the games under Use Map Settings is normal melee with the observer slots.

Those people dont usually play new maps. They always play those Gamei LT or hunters map. It kinda sucks in that sense.

But I dont blame, I wouldn't like it if i just join a random map and find out like two minutes into the game (after exploring) that this map was rigged and unplayable.

No, there's a lot of them that play WGT and PGT maps. If you ever wanna see some good people play (not professional level) head over to Asia and obs a game. You won't be able to talk to them though.

Well i do see them play those maps alot, but not as many as I hoped I'd see. Because still over 75% of the maps being played on those gateways are either LT or hunters.

Lol, I go to play Call of Duty and that fool says I can't talk. I thought I was allowed to leave SEN without fear of being flamed behind my back.

Oh, that reminds me... I think it's Strategic Warfare VIII, one of the best in the whole series. That is more indepth than melee. I'd also say Wehrmacht Vollstandig, and Napoleon's Ambition comes to mind but that's not quite as "in-depth" as melee. The Fate and Destiny RPG is most excellent and is better conceived and executed than melee, not to mention more in-depth with its then-innovative combat system which is still really fun. Those are just some of my favorites so they were on the top of my head, but there's a whole list of maps that are more in-depth with what you can do than melee.

Actually, Killer2001's Final Fantasy VII Part a (I hope I got that right) is more in-depth with how it immerses you in the storyline, plus a combat system very similar to Fate and Destiny. I guess I just figured out what UMS maps have... souls.

So, there are at least four UMS maps that are more in-depth than melee maps, and those are just the tip of the iceberg. Really, once UMS maps are done well, they rape melee to no end.

Altered Starcraft!

Altered starcraft sux lol. I played it before a loooooooong time ago and i was like omfgwtf is this crap. I guess it's different now

Dude... Palpatine is a SITH you never trust a SITH LORD, DUH. Don't be retarded like anakin, look how he turned out.

Read what maddox says about it http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=episode3

If Broodwar wasn't the deepest game, it wouldn't still have televised leagues and a huge player-base after 7 years.

You do realize that's played on The Hunters, therefore it's played on a melee map that was already created. Altered SC is so unbalanced anyway.

That cracked me up. Maddox is king.

Melee has more strategies than any current ums maps today. Trust me.

But the people that make melee maps, they didn't create those strategies. They didn't decide how much damage a fire bat does, or how much hp a supply depot has. They didn't do that. They didn't do ANY of that. They just did the terrain, and kept in mind the strategies to try to make the map as even as possible

Don't use that whole, "They've remade X melee map 10-50 times, because it was slightly uneven." Cause any decent ums map maker could get their map, and remake it 10-50 times, to make it not slightly uneven. (Even THEN chances are it won't be even, cause you got more than terrain to worry about)

I'm looking at melee, and I see the only major hard thing to do in it, is just to even out the map. Like, play it OVER and OVER and OVER again. As well as have OTHER people tell you about it. So sometimes you're not doing all of the testing/balancing yourself. (You know, testing and balancing. the so called backbone to great melee maps) I myself never made a melee map, well I did, and it sucked. I did it before I learned about triggers, because triggs were too hard for me at the time. I'm pretty sure almost everyone here has done this. Oh wait. Did I just prove a point?

I guranTEE you. For every person that you find, that says melee map making is "too hard" to learn how to do. Or it's too hard to make a melee map. I will be able to find 10 people who say the same thing about ums maps, to each one of yours. Seriously.

Side Note - I've seen some one call me one of the smartest people here. Assuming that's overall, and assuming I've done smart things lately, I don't want to have the stress of remaining "One of the Smartest." Nor do I want that reputation, because it would make me think twice before I honestly admit I'm wrong on the something. So, just think of me as a guy that's acted smart so far, and could easily one day become stupid. That's all. Less stress and less biased opinion for me.

ONLY CUZ YOU SUCK AT ALTERED STARCRAFT!

No, this just means they need to get lives.

P.S. I hate watching sports of any type, or rather this is more of a "competitive game."

You can't use that as an excuse because no UMS maps have any of those things You still haven't shown a UMS map that is more indepth than BW.



That's biased, very biased, at least ihatett was talking facts.



See, I don't think you can make such claims about other people doing the balancing if you, yourself haven't made one. You don't know firsthand what a person who makes a melee map has to do.

Plus even if you don't have to balance the units and everything because it's already been done you still have to balance the terrain according to that. In UMS if the units and terrain aren't balanced you can change EITHER of them, in a melee map you HAVE TO adjust the terrain to the units.

Also you can't compare UMS triggers to Melee's terrain, that's part of the reason this argument is flawed, they are like apples and oranges. To actually somehow compare them you would have to compare UMS terrain and Melee terrain, then UMS triggers with THE ACTUAL GAME OF STARCRAFT. That is why we talk about no UMS map having as much depth as the game of SC.

Because they have triggers they have less depth?

You're just jealous of what UMS has, and what other games have. There are hardly any options with Starcraft. Basic attacking and some special abilities. At least other games have troop formations, supply lines, unit maintenance that provides for a much... more realistic battlefield experience. So don't tell me that SC has the most indepth gameplay anywhere. It's fast paced so people like it. That's why they enjoy watching it. It doesn't have slow gameplay. It's more of an "Action" RTS instead of a "Strategic" one.

For the same reasons people enjoy watching football, basketball, etc. over say golf.

Perhaps it is for that very reason that you don't like UMS, even though such gameplay can get very fast and very brutal. UMS has the potential to be a thousand times as indepth as melee, though something of that caliber has not been achieved yet. Still, there are some maps that have more depth to them than melee.

And the zerg have nothing that can defeat a fleet of battlecruisers. Nothing, except a bunch of hydralisks under darkswarm perhaps.

*Edit* I listed a bunch of maps thank you very much. Don't say I haven't shown. If you want to see for yourselves you can check those maps out. You won't believe what I say about them anyway.

But I do know secondhand. Here's a quote from Hate:



I've heard many other people say things much like the bolded text over the years.

BTW - Fela, trust me. Melee has more strategy. Blizzard did a great job making melee.

Doesn't that prove it's hard balancing a melee map?



You're just jealous of what melee has, why don't you try learning how to play the game. Dude any UMS map compared to Melee map, the UMS map has hardly any options compared to melee. Basic attacking and special abilities? Go play a real melee game, not some comp stomp k?

And why are you talking about OTHER games? This is about UMS vs Melee, I'm sorry you have to twist this argument to include other games because you can't support the UMS side, you're posting in the wrong topic, try the "Are there any other better games" one.



No, because the overall UMS map doesn't have as much depth, adding triggers to a game doesn't make it better.

Also you use this "potential" crap. Who cares about potential? You can't prove it with maps that have already been made, you can't use "potential" as your argument.

No, we aren't jealous of other games. Those games have come and died because they aren't as enjoyable. The point of games is not realism, it is fun. Starcraft is far and away the fastest game ever made, and on top that their is an amazing level of strategy. For someone who would say what is in my sig, you can't understand that.

Oh, and I seriously doubt that any UMS map could ever be as fast, as balanced, or as deep as the normal game because it won't have hundreds of thousands of players testing it for 7 years. It won't have televised matches where the announcers scrutinize the maps and the strategies used on them each and every game.

This is something that I have noticed you doing: every time an arguement is presented that you don't feel like you can deal with, you say, "Starcraft sucks, and it's players need to get a life!".

Let me tell you something; you are on this site more than anyone else I've seen. You are also obsessed with UMS. How are those any less of a waste of life than playing a game with a huge community, LAN parties, etc.?

Geeze.

You're actling like your side MADE melee themself. You guys didn't make melee. You guys didn't do anything to melee. All you guys did was the terrain. That's it. That's the bottom line.

You're not making a game, you're making a map.

Alpha:




Yes, you did! You gave me a new arguement!

To someone who just opened up the campaign editor, it looks a lot easier to make a normal map that a UMS map. No triggers, no locations, no editing stats, all you have to do is place terrain. However, things aren't always what they seem at first glance.

100% of the maps that they make will be horrific. It happens all the time: UMS people post maps in the Melee Forums that are absolutely disgusting. We do our best to be nice and to give them pointers, but they rarely improve.

There is so much more to making a map than scribbling terran;

Balancing a map requires this:

• Balancing the map for all positions vs. all other positions.
  
• Balancing all of the positional matchups for: TvT, TvZ, TvP, ZvT, ZvP, ZvZ, PvT, PvZ, PvP
  
• Ensuring that none of the balance changes you make does not affect one of the other 107 matchups (assuming it has 4 start locations, and is intended for 2 players).
  
• Realizing that if one of the 108 matchups is imbalanced, everyone will know.
  
• Ensuring that the decoration does not imbalance one of the 108 matchups.
  
• Presenting the map to the intense scrutiny of thousands of skilled players, knowing that no one outside of a handfull will ever play your map if it is imbalanced.
  
• Rinse and repeat.
  

There are about 10 map makers in the world that have that ability. We at this site can only try.

However, UMS maps are like making a game in VB, but easier. You have everything made for you: the art, the pathfinding, the physics, the scripting system, and for the most part the sound. All you have to do is plug those parts in.

Programming is much harder than UMS. Try making a game from scratch with Managed DirectX (no need to use the harder unmanaged DX, I don't) and tell me whether I don't know what I'm talking about.

ADDITION:


How stupid can you be? Where did I say that? I was responding to the hacker's post saying that Starcraft wasn't deep or fun.

Also, since you think that all we do is "place terrain", you should read the top part of this post.

And what are you guys comparing? Comparing UMS games you have created to melee maps? That doesn't seem fair, or are you comparing ums maps with melee maps? Doesn't seem like your arguments are for that. Or we can try comparing UMS games with the Melee game. That would include SC the game, which would be the equivalent of triggersin a UMS map, and the terrain of the maps.

Nah, he thinks all we do is palce terrain however we feel; I respond to that in my post.

So testing out the map over and over again to make it even, is what makes it harder. Right? That is the major reason right?

That goes back to the thing I quoted from you before, you're not doing all of the work. You're getting opinions from other people, other people TELLING you what should be done. Or why it's uneven.

I know you don't just scribble in terrain, as much as you know we don't just throw triggers together and not test them.

They don't tell you what exactly to do, they just tell you what's unbalanced, you yourself have to come up with a solution by adjusting the terrain.

But you already know what the situation of the map currently is. So that throws out the testing arguement. Only thing you got going now, is just the figuring out how to make it so Zerg doesn't have an advantage anymore, or something like that. That's it.