you guys have the skills, but sometimes it's hard to tell what you're shooting for with your maps. why do any of you still make maps with 8 patches, or patches that are 1500, or geysers that are 5000? try small variations at least.
okay so 7 patches might help zerg too much--depends on how easily they can take their nat, and how tight the map is. what impact does it have on other matchups? could it be a good fit for some maps?
9 patches we have seen on luna with 8 at the nat, i think? we know the extra mineral (also on requiem) makes P not so bad vs Z as they slightly are on the standard LT and maps like it. but we also find luna incredibly boring.
we need a map that is fun like LT, but acceptable by people's positional balance standards. luna is boring for a number of reasons--not enough viable build orders, all the build orders people do are macro... so obviously, we need maps where the distances are shorter than luna (but not as short as 12/3 LT obviously, but shorter than 6/9 ground LT for sure... do a time test replay to see.) and it would be nice if we could make maps where cliffing is possible but a little weaker than on LT.
and part of the fun is slowing down the macro while keeping it balanced. if you have 9 patch main and 8 patch nat and 8 patch second nat, and terran can hold all those with tanks, what do you expect them to do? toss, against terran, can take off-bases that aren't defended by the main's tanks. so having decent minerals there instead of at a 2nd nat and nat would make for interesting games where terran can't just harass while going to 200/200. having more gas geysers for protoss expos (several on an island, or an off-base) speeds up the threat of carriers or arbs too.
of course those measures also make zerg lategame stronger against toss. that's why distances can't be too long. if they're short enough, and the nat is tight enough (for photons early midgame), the matchup should be fine. you can also manipulate how you place the mains to tweak zerg's strengths--how easily do you let zerg lords camp to know if toss is moving out or not? to see if toss gassed yet or not? expoed or not?
and at the same time, the island idea is good, because toss and zerg alike can take an island in that matchup, and if toss has some gas they can have DA's, reavers, dt's, templars, (with all the zeals of course) and be able to take an off-expo against zerg to secure the minerals..
and why always 1500? if you make the patches 3000 people will call you a newbie? that age should be long gone. it actually would be interesting if people cared about the mains a little longer into the game. you have to be careful though, since it effects all the races differently. the same goes for cutting it a little below 1500. zerg should run out the slowest, and terran expands the least. terran needs minerals way more vs zerg, so making the patches less should shift z>t if you do it too much. but what if the terrain is a little bit tight? what if the expo is a little bit vulnerable? or if the distance is a little bit too short (but not quite 12/3)? that could counterbalance a sub-1500 mineral count. how bout trying 1125? or 1325? or 1675? think they don't matter maybe?
and you should have even less fear in manipulating the vespene. it's pretty obvious 5000 is not the ideal amount. the main and nat should not even have the same amount. 6000? 4000? at least try one of those when you make your map.
they really would, if the map was played at all. i think one problem is that we are making maps too drastic or not drastic enough because we know they most likely are never going to be played--they will just be evaluated in a way that favors extremes (because they stand out as interesting) or extreme standardness (because it _doesn't_ stand out as imba).
Yeah I agree on everylittle thing you mention here, this what Ive been doing with my maps for years now, but downside of this is, if you not usto manipulating like I am, ive been doing it for years, is if not tweaked right, you have to play test alot games to see the balance, and if it works and gets gameplay diversity you want on that map.
All my maps have resouce managment at differant levels depending on how many expos on the map.
Players always complain about 7 in main though. I think the problem is not that we do not have the ideas or do not want to give it a try, it is that the players want the map to adapt to them instead of them adapting to the map.
panschk has 1 map that does mineral tweeks, but the problem is theres just not enough maps like that to change the gameplay from noraml to something else. Resources is just 1 way, another way is have some maps that have 2 entrance, why not, another is some naturals thats setup like Travins Citadel Of Adun, that good example of map thats sets something new to 4 player map.
Rushour another good map that actualy unbalanced for 1 on 1.
Those maps I wanna see more of, not same setup perfctly balance symmitry type maps like luna.
Luna good but not perfect, so why make better luna setup over and over, Polishing map after map of similar map design and ideas.
I start with an Idea then make a design after, this doesnt make me a better map maker im just pointing out that you need to do something differant, and that includes unbalances in 4 player maps, but exucted well to make the map fun to play, but have a counterbalance to make up for the flaws.
Its a greater challenge yes to come up with new idea then make a copy of something you like and to better that instead of something new.
6000 of gas in main can make more balanced pvz but in the same time make unbalanced tvp...you have not taken in consideration that perhaps, it is the game that is not perfectly balanced.