| BWMN Time |
| 01/12/2026 |
| 23:55 |
| News |
| new account |
| list users |
| Login: |
| Replays |
| Map DB |
| ICCup |
| Map Access |
| New map |
| Edit map |
 |
Forum - main
revolutionary mapelements page: 1 2 | ||
| i wanted to discuss this already a few times, now, due to LGI's comment i came back on this. there are a few mapping features that were new invented and were often used. simple things that opened masses of possibilities, e.g. custom ramps, neutral buildings, or an older blizzard example: just dropping the ramp of a map changes everything into airmap. those features partly evolved completely new maps which were kind of a revolution (RoV was fucking new and cool). so, now my point is: why are some of those ideas/techniques used all the time (custom ramps, neutral blocking buildings, blovking mineral lines) while some are not? why is there only _1_ map with mind-controllable neutral units for pvz balance, why is there only _1_ map with no gas at main, but a quite safe natural with gas, why are there no attempts on a gas-only-map like R-point (but balanced)? why are those great ideas, which change gameplay so much and would make games really different, just "tested" one time, but not executed as normal mapping issue? why don't you - if you think pvz would be hard on a map - just put a few neutral units into each mainbase? why does nobody try to make a map with mineral-only-main, too? that's weird and I'd like to have a discussion here why you think certain techniques are not used as much as others (for they are less or as much work as the other, used techniques). i am currently working on a new idea, and although i'll probably fail, i might push some ppl reading this thread to think about it and ask themselves why there is no new approach to those new things, and just take them as "normal". modified by flothefreak | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 11:58 | ||
| Just before few hours i read... i think that it was boongee's post... Something about Mutial Dream 2 . Well after reading this, and the comment in the MotW section 2006.12 . I've come to this. Ok, i make original maps, but i can't draw them well. Well be my guest to do it right. I give you a concept, some original ideas, someone of this site, who can draw good can take the map and make it a good map. BUT BE AWARE OF ONE THING! Many times i see great maps on the jpgs. So beatiful, so well drawed. But when we come to gameplay there is always something wrong, just because of the beauty of the jpg. So pleace don't destroy your maps in game. | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 12:10 | ||
| well first of all, mind control is so difficult to get and still stay in the game which is why i think its not used because its just annoying to have there. custom ramps were never meant to be...people made them. stick to staredit(rov exception because is actually uses them effectively) people dont want to play min only mains because it reduces strategies. your obviously going to A. Cheese/Rush B. Fast expo no rushing any tech units:( andyea i guess thats all i have to say | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 17:04 | ||
| well, the few times i gamed permafrost, it was quite interesting, with pvt vs mmforces and stuff. it doesn't only limit, but just changes the gameplay. MC is not that attractive - only in PvZ, where it can be used effectively (see pimpest plays 05). as pvz is slightly imbalanced on most maps, neutral units would rock, because it makes DAs more attractive AND they pay off some more, which would handle their costs | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 17:45 | ||
| I don't get the neutral units. Like archons and stuff sitting on the map that you can MC? Is that what you mean? Also, people make their maps to be played and loved, but it's definitely an uphill battle if you have a map with a strange element. It's so hard to get people to play it more than once, work with it, improve it. | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 18:52 | ||
| DA's?? = District Attorneys??? lol. but whats DA and MC? i think we are doing fine tho with what we are doing here.. these maps do not hurt the sc community or anything. but i will say that some stuff .. blocking minerals, nuetral buldings in chokes, and min blocks stopping ccs from landing are jus not natural looking.. and although they do help gameplay .. it sumtimes looks absurd and abstract for a 'real enviroment'. and lets put it this way flo.. if u saw a min only main u wuld freak out and put a devastating comment on the map page and it will persuade others to down the map wen it does infact have potential imo. i infact have put a gas only expo and u told me to not do it. (it was a earlier map but never the less).. most ppl wuld cut the map and mappacker down if they saw that. we are also too concerned wit very small imba but wen infact ppl love luna etc maps that are imba. and i find that gosu players play them all neway. our theorycrafting is so bad.. half of us dont even watch the reps we post and the other half dont even play the maps. so bringing this convo up really doesnt help too much.. but i must say that sometimes jus play the maps and show the actual imbas that u are suggesting in ur comments. like flanking space.. bad nats.. terrible ramp placement etc. when sum1 does make maps wit these extra stuff it shuld be embraced and constructively criticized. thats the bottom line.. we all do this for enjoyment.. idk ne1 gettin paid for these maps so dont act like ppl are makin real money to do this.. b/c then u wuld have reason to be insulted (for a lack of words) and have bad criticism. | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 19:07 | ||
| "and lets put it this way flo.. if u saw a min only main u wuld freak out and put a devastating comment on the map page and it will persuade others to down the map wen it does infact have potential imo." that's plain bullshit. I for my part, i think permafrost is great. so don't try to imply ANYTHING to me. there are some comments on permafrost concerning a min-only-MAP and why i think it wouldn't work. but permafrost has minonly mains, and it is cool. "i infact have put a gas only expo and u told me to not do it." but i don't deny it in general. it was then just on this particular occasion how come you think you know anything of my attitude and then even criticize it. if i think s.th. is bullshit, then I say it literally. | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 19:43 | ||
| i dont know anyone except you thats why to play on maps with mineral only mains, so i guess your on your own | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 19:58 | ||
| theres not much innovation on maps because most people have no clue as to the real effects of how game changing elements such as a mineral only natural and the like will effect the game balance. if its a challenge for people to make a balanced map using only the standard elements, using unconventional means would spell disaster. neutral units to mind control sounds like a stupid idea, because they couldnt be placed on a land map otherwise the other player could kill them before they were mind controlled, and the unit would have to be really powerful since mind control and the energy to cast it and all of the shields of the archon is a very large investment, and then you get a situation like warcraft3 with heros. | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 20:05 | ||
| (quoting all of flos last passage) well my post was a bit heavy.. but some extent ur comments def do persuade others to feel the same. jus limit it a bit. cuz some ppl do take comments the wrong way.. we all do. its human nature. all im saying really is that some maps dont have enuff 'stuff' to motivate others to try new things.. a person like sp is really the only map maker that has made cool maps that motivates an audience to play it jus cuz its different/new ideas concepts.. an example for me is NML with the back door nat.. that map was an improvement compared to my older maps and still it got no attention. im saying that we shuld embrace ideas neway. its not hard to do.. theres also a difference between bad ideas and good ones.. also a difference between potential tactics and no tactics on new idea on maps gg no re | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 20:07 | ||
| well, it's the purpose of every sentence/post in a discussion to - at long sight - persuade or make the own opinion "wise and right" (hope you get me, it's hard for me to express this in english because i lack the vocab in this word field). so if my posts seems to be persuasive, that's rethoric... and i don't say every newbie should use those techniques - but here are enough experienced mappers around who just see those new techniques as "not normal, but we could test it one time on one map. but if it works, well, nice, won't use it any further" and concerning DA/MC: neutral units only serve protoss, because only P can use them via MC. so, in pvt and pvp, you rarely see DAs (maybe vs carrier... but if you go DA vs carrier, you deserve this advantage :D). but in PvZ, you sometimes see DAs because of maelstrom or MC. unfortunately, the DAs are very expensive. Now, PvZ is slightly imbalanced on most maps. With the might of DAs, that could turn the tide - but they are too expensive most times. but with neutral units to MC, DAs could be an alternative and worth teching. so this would make going DAs more attractive and cheaper - so more effective. that is one interesting approach to balance PvZ, and that's most important: WITHOUT changing anything in pvt/tvz balance! | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 20:53 | ||
| i still dont know wtf is da and mc lmfao | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 21:34 | ||
| you dont think neutral units would be annoying to see? | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 21:34 | ||
| Nuetral units do nothing to the map except make it a UMS melee map. gg no re. its jus not smart to place them in a map. and no toss wuld go outta of his/her way to tech/use an ability jus for some unit laying among a battle field.. not very intellegent idea. now home of the swarm was a very great map.. it incorporated the idea of z buildings. it is very interesting and i'd play it neday outta the week. but units are a different thing altogether. maybe civilians or larva to give it a territorial feel. really wat im saying is that it makes a melee map into a UMS map. and essentially thats what it does there isnt ne way around it | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 21:42 | ||
| but neutral buildings don't? -.- DA=dark archon MC=mind control and a toss won't change the tech for some neutral units - but DA with maelstrom are one alternative anyway - why not making it more attractive and a bit stronger so it helps in PvZ some more? | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 21:58 | ||
| no its not going to help.. if p players have that much of a hard time pvz then the strategy shuld change completely .. not maps. thats ridiculous. flo are u a p player? cuz it seems that u have trouble.. so far the maps we have done are pretty balanced (the ones that are motw or sattar)... its important to remember that only a select few are gonna end up ever be pgt maps. so these maps wont end up being used neway. nuetral units usually mean U M S.. those maps will not be played pgt .. and thats what many of us aim for .. so this post isnt going to make things different. | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 22:25 | ||
| neutral buildings blow too. they look so unrealistic and there such a pain in the ass | ||
| 2006, 03, 19 23:21 | ||
if its a challenge for people to make a balanced map using only the standard elements, using unconventional means would spell disaster. <3 | ||
| 2006, 03, 20 10:41 | ||
| lol, nasty?? we make balanced maps? did you see the sattarchasm PvZ statistiques? again, inform yourself. and it's not just my personal lack of skill that makes pvz slightly imbalanced. sp: i read my posts~~ | ||
| 2006, 03, 20 19:04 | ||
| statistics mean shit though. sattarchasm is a new map that brings a lot of possibilities for protoss that they dont realize. while on the other hand yu have zerg who just expos like fuck all over the place, whats the difference if there all within one choke? next season it will be more balanced imo. | ||
| 2006, 03, 20 21:33 | ||
| flo = perfectionist how about we do this for now on: PLAY THE DAMN MAPS!! and not even with you and your buddies... play with some gosu players. idk ppls skill here but i can tell you the only person i see that plays others maps and posts them is epidion. and what map do you know has 50% winning percentage for all match/ups? cuz i know none.. maybe its a fact that there are more gosu z than gosu p players .... gg or maybe z are jus more powerful period.. didnt take those into consideration? maybe strats need to change? gg no re.. dont come at me wit statistics .. sattar is balanced enuff a couple percentage numbers isnt bad... it jus means p hasta step their game up!! | ||
| 2006, 03, 20 21:40 | ||
| page: 1 2 | ||
Reply:
You have to be logged in to post
 |