Staredit Network

I figured fela was talking about the map making skill of it because:
A- he has many posts in this thread for the ums side.
B- we speaking out against ihatett who has many posts for the melee side.

I will accept some of the blame though, for it was I who referred people over here for that reason. But those who came over here for reason that reason, may stay for the one this topic truly is about.

Are great ums maps harder to make than great melee maps?

I am 100% positive Ums is harder. The ones that are against ums usually have no little or no experiance with triggers. (From most of the ones I've argued with, and/or are really stubburn) If you have a good knowledge of melee strategies, and you are good at terrain, you can create a good melee map. How can melee be more complicated than ums? Just because of a lot strategies that a large proportion of people on sc already know about, and can easily take into consideration? Please.

Also, UMS require much more motivation. And almost all cancelled map projects are due to motivational problems. Not, Oh, I couldn't finish cause I'm not good enough.

Ums, you need motivation for:
A- Learning how to use triggers. Learning how to terrain compared to learning how to use triggers, is simple as hell. To see terrain is harder is just down right laughable. But melee is more than terrain, and ums is more than triggers.

B- And overall keeping motivation on the project. Ums maps are usually not done. Melee maps are done once the minerals and start locations are in. It's just a matter of, "are they balanced or not?" And melee relies at least 90% on balancing. (Maybe even more)

Well put, I still think that it's relevant to the person, which we've already hit on before in this thread. I have good knowledge of SC's trigger system, it's just that I haven't made a UMS map since the GUEdit days and all my maps were junk because I had crappy ideas (it is more than triggers, you're right) and I'm not creative.

Getting your map played on is much easier if the map is UMS. Melee'ers can't stand to play on inbalanced crap, therefore they tend to stick to maps that are Blizzard's or have a PGT or WCG name slapped on it. The skill level is much higher in melee'ers.

Bah. I couldnt read all six pages.
My arguement is:
Melee and UMS are like apples and oranges. Oranges pawn apples .
Seriously, UMS does require balancing, although by far not as much as melee(I know barely anything about Melee, so if there are any errors in this arguement, would someone more familir with melee clear them up? Thanks.) People who say "LIEK O M G'S MEELI R T3H SUX0RZ!1111 ONLY T3H NUBZ0RZ MAKE DEM BC TEH R ONLY MINS AND TERRAIN!" are retards. I don't know much about Melee, but I believe you need to balance PvP, PvZ, PvT, ZvT, ZvZ, and TvT. (six in all). There are several aspects and nuances to the game (ask a melee person what they are) that need to be taken into consideration. The game gets exponentially more complicated once you bring teams into play (PPvPP, PTvPP, PZvPP, TTvPP, etc. Minerals and gas need to be balanced, as well as exp locations, because each race has different needs for these. Terrain also needs to be visually appealing, and in some cases, realistic to a certain world. The terrain has extreme effect on certain things like glitches and strategies. The rate of tech reasearch also needs to be controlled. Melee is pretty much at the mercy of the player, it can follow widely different courses, while even the most open of UMS (other than melee-types and RP's) does not come close.

People who say that UMS is just some random square terrain thrown in with a bunch of triggers are also incorrect. They are comparing bad UMS's like bounds and defense with the cream of the Melee crop. Look at several highity RPG's. Although the terrain might not serve as much of a function, it is very visually appealing. RPG's must be tiled with ISOM and extended terrain. I dont see many melee maps using lots of extended terrain/sprite tricks. UMS maps (for the sake of arguemnet I will use higher quality RPG's) do require balance. You need to control the rate of enemy advancement, the difficulty level, etc. It has to be challenging but not impossible. Text and many other factors have to follow a format. Storylines need to be deveoped, as well as characters. Special effects like spells nedd to be considered.The limitations of SC and the trigger systems pose challenges that require workarounds. The mapper needs to use many limited things like sprites and locations and switches with care. Triggers can often take a lot of thought to debug. UMS needs to also be fun and engaging, gameplay needs to be thought up, unlike melee which uses SC's gameplay.

By the way, I'm not insulting melee, but on a personal level, most of the melee people seem to be superior wonderful friends, stubborn, flamers, or seem to think that melee is the basis for judging people. (except wesmic, because wesmic is awesome )

Dr.Shotgun is right, and so one is everyone that hated this thread right when it began, knowing we can't compare them together like this. We just simply can't compare melee to ums. Instead, we have to compare each game to each other. See which ones are the easiest to make. I'll make a new thread about it.

I apologize for this argument for going out of hand, (A large part of it was my personal fault) the apples and oranges statement was 100% correct.

Comparing melee maps with UMS maps is like comparing Counter-strike with Starcraft.

Mmmmm you could compare which one is hacked more.