Staredit Network

That doesn't say that I said to not have even minerals, nats, opportunities for each player.

That's why it's hard to make asymmetrical and balanced maps.

Way to ignore the rest of my post, there. That is why it sucks talking to trolls. Most of what you say is ignored. You probably still won't respond to it.



That's why it's hard to make asymmetrical and balanced maps.

What on earth are you suggesting, then? More maps like temple (same expos, etc. but not symmetrical)? Temple is, beleive it or not, positionally imbalanced. And it is still that way after 7 years of testing. It is close to being balanced, but you can't expect maps made at SEN to go through that.

You aren't even thinking anymore. You are employing your trademark of arguing for the sake of arguing, and then you ignore most of the other guy's response.

Save face and admit that you don't have any experience in this.

And that disproves my point how? Sounds like it proves it to me. LT = asymmetrical map that is still unbalanced after 7 years of testing...hmm takes a long time to get balanced huh.

What the hell are you saying!?

***You ignore my post again***. Then, you make a comment that makes absolutely no sense. You really are your normal self.

Me saying that asymmetrical maps can't be balanced supports your point that we should have asymmetrical maps!?!?!? What the hell is your problem?

Can we get this troll banned?

No, it says that they are hard to make, doesn't mean once they are balanced they aren't good.

Here's the thing. Most melee players have accustomed to the way maps have been made and how they are played. There's a "specific" way you have to do everything a certain way for it to be accepted by the general melee players. If you don't, most people won't play it since you haven't followed the guidelines in which they're used to.

It's just like how someone could be use to eating hamburgers all their life, and you try to serve them something else, naturally, they'll deny it, since they're so used to hamburgers, they aren't going to try something new. It'd also be telling everyone to start walking instead of driving, some people wouldn't mind, but the majority would have a problem with it.

If some melee players could open up to new ideas and innovations to melee, it'd be easier to apply changes to the current way everything has to be played. Example, if judges of a tournament allowed in a certain map everyone hated, the players would eventually get used to it, and wouldn't be annoyed by it as much, as if it weren't to be accepted. This could happen with new ideas, such as ones suggested by Kenoli. Their opinions are based off of good maps they like and the melee players have accepted as good, so everyone has to base maps off the basic rules of that particular map.



That's a rude thing to say about another member of SEN. Show some respect, as he never personally insulted you. We were all "noobs" once, not everyone had the gift to be good when they were first starting out. Just since his views are different from yours, doesn't mean you need to say that he doesn't have any talent and can't make apporiate comments. When you were starting out as a melee map maker and player, I think you wanted people to give you a chance to hear your ideas and to gain their respect.

Exactly, try something new to give a little variety. I mean sure playing against someone with a strategy you have perfected for that map is fun, but playing on something totally different where you have to explore and think of things for yourself is a good change as well.

Answer me this Devilin_. Would you want to play a game for money if you knew there was a 50% chance that you would be at a disadvantage simply because of your start location? Would you want to play on a ladder trying to become a well respected played, if the only thing that really mattered was if you got lucky? Cause I sure as hell wouldn't.

I'm doing something new with Nekwitz Battlegrounds, why aren't people flaming it? I think it's because it's actually a NEW idea. It's actually my idea... not just a dead tradition of Blizzard...

ADDITION:

You can't plan that far ahead in the game. One stratagy will not conquer all others, that is why StarCraft is fun

i won't respond to devilesk anymore until he responds to what i say

i'll respond to the new guy later

People don't flame you in the UMS section, since they have some respect. I could of easily went into your production thread and said "This is a crappy idea, why would you suggest it."

No, I wouldn't want to play on the map where 50% I could be at a disadvantage of my start location. But some of his suggestions aren't giving disadvantages, just giving a possible way to change melee.


The 2nd point is the only one that should be revised. The rest my provide a different feeling, some may need to be slightly modifed to accomadate players. I suppose some strats would be given more importance with these possible ideas though.

I'm going to be nice, and give you my views on each of his points...

-Give maps an organic feel, not a flashy design covering the map. Make the map interesting for the players, use some critters, make expansions in wierd places.
Already being done... if you don't think it's good enough go prove how good it can be by making a map of your own. People already use critters. Expansions placed randomly would imbalance the map, I don't like playing on maps that are imbalanced.

-Avoid making the map perfetly balanced and symmertical. The map being played the first few times will have a sort of uncertainty about it, the players won't know exactly where all the bases are, where all the expansions are... it makes the game much more entertaining.
I disagree, maps are funner when after beating your enemy (you would feel like you wasted your time), or losing (you would feel cheated), that it was a fair game and there wasn't any handicap.

-Break mineral fields into smaller pieces. (More fields with less minerals each) And make use of depleated or very low geysers.
Mineral fields in smaller quantitys would make expanding less profitable than just rushing, and make going eco, or powering (a very important parts of the game) difficult. Use of very low geysers isn't a new idea, it even has it's own topic here, and I'm doing a map with it.

-Don't make hot spots of resources, spread them out a little.
So make it harder to scout enemies powering (getting better economy) and having less focus in the game?

-Use square terrain tiles to make parts ot all of the map.
No, I think maps with square tiles look ugly, and as you would put it "flashy". If it's a rare case, and it looks appropriate okay. If you think it looks good, prove it to us.

-Use some unbuildable terrain in places where the players probably won't like it too much.
Done on almost all maps at SEN already...


People don't ****ing reply at all to maps made my melee players in the UMS section. The way I see it, I'm giving him more respect by at least giving him an idea of what people of the community think of his stuff.

Happy?

People don't reply to your maps if they have no interest in it, or if they have nothing to add or suggest. Providing screenshots helps out a little, but still. I've posted a production thread and no one posted in it, and I'm not a melee map maker. It happens to everyone. The best reply I could give you if I were to post would be "This map sounds great, can't wait to see it's done!" Would that make you feel any better if I had posted nothing? Also, people sometimes just don't see it.

Back to topic! I thank you for giving your views on each of his points, as I think they're valid also, and posting in a respectable and organized fashion.

I would prefer it tenfold if someone from UMS would post their opinion, then I would at least have more motivation to continue the project... but only melee people posted in it... and that was after I had told some about it, and play on it with them. Screen shots for my particular map would not have been effective. It was up at the top for awhile and topics (embarrasingly bad ones, I might add [I mean the 20 er so non mods who posted in a thread asking mods what they wanted to be in a map]) all around it got posts. No one beside the melee people even downloaded it to give it a try.

On the otherhand, everytime a map is posted in melee, even ones that look like they took 5 minutes and were made by a UMS player, is given several posts by regulars in this forum. It makes me feel cheated, especially since there were at least 5 UMS regualars challanging me to make a UMS map.

It was much easier to just tell him his ideas were dumb and rely on the fact the melee regulars reading it would agree instead of giving an analysis on each idea.

I agree with PsychoTemplar. When anyone posts a map in the melee section, the person always recieves feedback and suggestions about his/her map. Yet when PsychoTemplar creates a UMS map, after UMS people dared him, or any melee mapmaker for that matter to make a UMS map and they don't even say anything about his map or how he can improve it or any feedback at all.

You act like the strategies for playing and the rules for map making were chosen arbitrarily. You seem to think that the only reason we don't want to change is because we have "mental inertia", in that we don't want to do something different.

Well, you know what? Sometimes things are the way they are because an evolution took place. In starcraft's case, that evolution was 7-8 years of playing, observing, and testing. There are televised games, as you may know, and tons of scrutiny and analysis go into every single one.

The game and it's strategies have matured. Players have discovered what works, what doesn't, what is fair in maps, what isn't, what needed to be changed, what didn't, etc. If we try to undo that evolution, the only thing we are donig is shooting the starcraft community in the collective foot.

So much is on the line every day over starcraft. Not only gamers' enjoyment, but millions upon millions of dollars in proffesional contracts, TV deals, etc. Forgetting all that we have learned about balance and fairness would destory the competitive atmosphere in the wildly populary pro scene, and would undoubtably kill it.. Once that behemoth is gone, much of the interest in Starcraft would vanish, and the game would finally go the way of nearly every other game before it.

Change can be good, and Starcraft has gone through change. Not haphazard change like you are suggesting, but careful, refined, gradual change that has made the game what it is today.

Instead of undoing evolution for change's sake, let's embrace it. Let's try to refine the well-proven rules, instead of throwing them out of the window.



I have the flu, so I hope I was able to convey myself clearly.

lol, i want to go over to korea and watch a Starcraft game live. I wonder how much a ticket costs to a SC game.

The reason is the very fact that melee maps are based off certain guidelines, therefore are easier to point out certain flaws that would obstruct the balance of melee maps. UMS however, are more loosely made and off fewer rules such as "It has to look good," "Grammar and good spelling is a must," etc. It's not that UMS map makers have something against melee map makers, the whole "no one posts in my thread" happens to everybody at least once. It's much easier to give feedback and suggestions to a melee maps, however, production threads in UMS are usually at a 1 digit % level, meaning there isn't much info ti give out, or to show terrain. Melee maps go through alot of versions, as most of the work is balancing, not the actual doing the terrain and placement etc...

You come in here, tell us to change, and then ignore my long post in response to you.

Are all UMS makers like this, or do we just get the worst of the worst?

I didn't reply to your long post since I didn't have anything to say to it, meaning I agreed with most of it and I'm aware of what you're talking about now. I really have nothing to reply to your post with, since I don't disagree with it. If I were to reply to it, then I wouldn't know how to reply to it, except for "Agreed."



Haha, a joke. Most people are like this.

I also think it's a lost cause, since I know most of you and melee players aren't going to change anytime soon. So I'll let you be for now.

If you really agreed with my post, then why is it a "lost cause"?

Since you guys won't change for "good reason." So it's pointless trying to convince you to.

Okay, if you read and agree with my post, why should we change?

If you don't agree, what don't you agree with?