broodwarmaps.net banner

BWMN Time
03/29/2024
11:59
News
new account
list users
Login:
name:
:PW.:
Replays
Map DB
ICCup
Map Access
New map
Edit map
 



Forum - main
macro.
page: 1
epidion's post brought me back to this.
though i am no expert in (korean) progaming, i will write down what was my impression recently.

Do you think that the broodwar gaming - on pro level as well as on average - has become quite macro-orientated? not only due to maps like luna or r-point, but also regarding popular strats?
PvZ FE and TvP 1fac-fe builds were more and more used by progamers than before, and thus also copied by the gaming masses. that at least, is my impression.
also it seems to me like the first expansion (most of the time the natural) is taken very early, much earlier than it used to be.
is this a trend you see yourself, too? or am i wrong and that is just imagination...

what should be our answer in maps? should we lean more towards micro-focus maps in order to bring back more micro (with things like harder 1st/2nd expos, focus on harassment possibilities)? or should we answer the call and create more macro-oriented maps, with giving emphasis to implement at least some new/different features?
can we influence this trend by making maps, or should we adapt to the gaming community in order to get our maps played? remember we already adapt a lot to their wishes.


what is your opinion on this topic?
modified by flothefreak
2006, 05, 22 10:58
I'm all for micro-oriented maps, as long as there aren't gay paths like in Peaks of Baekdu near the center.
2006, 05, 22 15:00
1. (PvZ) a map being micro-oriented just means it isn't an obvious choice to 12 hatch or expect a 12 hatch. it should be somewhat of a gamble. the only way you punish a 12 hatch on these macro maps is some _crazy_ lucky proxy. a 2 gate pressure build should be a little more worth it than on luna.

that's the easiest way to judge distance. protoss FE if done right can be safe against many pool first builds (might lose the FE, but still will be ahead).

shorter distances than luna would be micro...

2. (TvP) terrans also miss being able to fac port. with that out of the picture, terrans do a timed attack and/or get an expo then do a timed attack. lost temple is still balanced on pgt, despite it "being better for terran" than luna, etc. you can still take away the wallin like luna, but have cliffs.

3. another thing to think about is mineral counts. even before luna was overplayed, lt was becoming a macro map for most players. 8 patches plus an expo put you into the macro state really quickly and that was the name of the game for overpowering most opponents (who you can macro better than).

(8+8)*15K = 24K minerals. there has to be a clever way to have less minerals in the game and still be balanced. every bit you can cut off this number will be shifting towards micro. the minerals of other bases could be just compared to that, being 3/4 of the main or nat (like on lotem, 6*1500/8*1500 is 3/4 obviously).

the same can be said for gas. two geysers is really crazy. they last too long. everybody knows this. so again, cut them down so they no longer total 10K. you could even have more geysers (another at the 2nd nat perhaps?) but they all should total less and less than 10K.

finding a balance that is less abundant would make micro more worth it and macro less simple.
2006, 05, 22 15:12
Nice posts. Experimenting with less minerals is very interesting. Also I like what trcc once did, to have no gas in main at all. So you have to fight for your gas (micro) before you can start any macro stuff. Execution was sub-optimal due to huge balance problems though (Z>all). Maybe it'll be better to make the gas even more vulnarable.

Whatever you have in mind, give it a try. 8/8/6 is overplayed;)
2006, 05, 22 16:24
an approach might be the opposite of TTH, already approached in "jungle raid". less minblocks wtih higher value. main is worth as much as on every other map, but it mines slower, lasts longer and makes mainbase drops efficient even in midgame.
natural needs to be very low on minblocks as well

i may try a 6/5 combination in the near future, i like this idea. only z overpower must be prevented.
2006, 05, 22 16:48
i tried to make electrical sector micro orientated. it has a 7 mineral main with 6 mineral easy expo(777 each mineral) so thats 13 minerals and 1 gas which should still keep zerg in the game. From there on, it is mostly about micro until you can macro because you can either take the normal 8 mineral 1 gas expo which is very tough to defend or take island with 6 minerals/1 gas.

then there are 2 min only which are also very hard to take..

so my point being you can make a map micro orientated, but keep the 8/8/6, as long as every expo is very neutral/hard to defend.

but then again this makes PvZ even more unbalanced.
2006, 05, 22 17:24
the maps I like making I put 1700 at main minerals so main base is used more, and expantions sometimes I make them harder to take, like I did in Allied forces, I usualy go 8,7,6 for minerals.

so main 1700, with 7000 gas, and 1rst natural 1700, then all rest + neutrals stay at default, works for 6-8 player maps cause I sometimes dont have enough spots to make enough expos for a map.

this formual works great for maps that have alot players, dont think pro games ready for this resource change, 1on1 or 2on2s.

For my games I play with this setup you have more time to fight battles and dont have to worry about running out money every sec.

modified by King of 8 plr Maps
2006, 05, 22 21:18
thats gay. i love when money runs out on maps fast, cuz every unit counts. thats another way to nominate micro.
2006, 05, 22 21:39
6-8 player maps has to have this or game be over in 15 min, I'f theres 8 players on map you need truckload or resources dumbass.
Where im i gonna put 2nd 3rd if theres no room to put in good place, use your brain.

I dont like default on starcraft I never did, and theres alot players that like it like this that play in my games, they even asking me to move it up more, and I tell them that my maps are not money maps.

Total Annihilation money never runs out, at least this minerals setup gives you more freedom, and you can make alot more big battles, Some games are insane, 1on1 like turtle play comepaired to big battles, thats mostly reason i dont play 4 player maps, I fall asleep.

If you look at pro games repays, they only have 1 or 2 big battle at end before money runs out, my maps its more like 5-up big battles, and they dont happend only at end.

modified by King of 8 plr Maps
2006, 05, 22 21:57
Much money in main/expo encourages turtle strats though. That is why 1on1 on a real money map is really really stupid. Imo the less you give "for free", the more you gonna see battles early ->micro. Microing is just as important later on, but people dont call it like that anymore when there is more than 3 control groups involved. pretty strange actually.
2006, 05, 22 22:21
actually having less minerals in a main could have the opposite effect... making expoing way safer, and 1-basing way more suicidal. to make maps micro you have to make 1-base viable and worth it more than luna. (more like some situations on LT, but not 12/3 obviously that is also imba).
2006, 05, 22 23:49
so for micro maps, i think you should make it not run out faster than usual (in the main). it's more about how hard/easy it is to kill the nat, and then the nat not being 8 patchs (or the main... make it last, but give less). there are balance issues you have to try to counterbalance with all this:

-harder to defend nat could be P>T (tanks can't save it easy enough), Z>P (too many photons to safely get it), even T>Z (too many sunkens to safely get it) depending on how you do it. so a limited amount of T>Z is desirable to counterbalance the below effect; at the same time, try to minimize any Z>P because of the below effect. P>T should then work itself out. have some cliffs for terr to fac port--this would balance it nicely and also be more "micro." also, if T are weak due to other factors (short distances and the nat being less tank-strong), you can have an interesting, almost-tight, buildable middle, which again is "more micro."

-less mineral patches in main tends to be Z>T Z>P. the opposite effect to this is making distances shorter, which is also (yay) more micro.
2006, 05, 22 23:57
I've noticed when I play Blade Storm that 10/12gate zeal is surprisingly strong against Zerg, and I realized why... all of the bases are a bit out of the corners, so it actually makes it a much smaller rushing distance, and it's a lot of fun.

And yeah, I think Baek Do-Dae-Gan is proof that koreans are trying to shift more towards micro maps. Also, who wants to watch two players turtle for 20 minutes before any action starts? Korean e-Sports companies don't, so they are trying to change the face of the game to get more spectators.

This is a really good thread so far, this is the most productive, intelligent and positive I've seen the site in a long time.

In regards to the question of should we adapt to the trend, or try to make the trend? To be honest, I don't think that BWM has enough influence to do something big yet. But if the right map comes along, that could all change. I think for now we should adapt to what people want to play, but that doesn't mean make exclusively macro maps, I think we should be innovative. One outstanding map with a great concept is all we need.

And honestly guys, taking into account the community right now, I'd say experimental + innovative > balance. I know it's not our style, but it's what people are interested in.
2006, 05, 23 01:04
as far as what we _should make_, as i've said before, there's really two options...

1. make an existing balance, but prettier, more easy to learn/play, pleasing things like that.

2. try to find a different balance

this topic is to discuss between one possibility of option 1, and one possibility of option 2. imo, though, the real question is which of these approaches needs more doing?

imo, we do option 1 all the fucking time, _way_ overdone. option 2 is almost completely neglected.

and i don't think many people want any more macro maps. fuckin luna is enough. but people would like something like lotem but less positional and maybe with some new creative twists. most creative twist maps turn out to be too imba, but there's a growing number that turned out to be alright (pro maps i'm talkin about).

so in light of all that, it turns out that we probably have too many maps to play anyways. that's another reason to favor option 2: we already have many known maps to play. if we're going to make anything different, it better BE different, and worth it next to all the other options. remakes are never going to overtake the existing ones, especially in maps that are currently "pro"... make a map that basically plays like luna except it looks different. it might get motw here, but it will be of no use to anyone.
2006, 05, 23 01:31
http://www.panschk.de/mappage/forum/showthread?subforum=main&threadid=435
2006, 05, 23 01:32
nicely said dentist, this was my big complaint on 4 player maps, being same after same concept everytime. Thats why im not uploading 2-4 player maps because they wont be excepted or are taken as experimental and quickly rejected.
+ theres enough good map makers doing 2 player maps.

So for time being my 6 player maps are more a rare commodity for me to release to public.
Think pro maps should be more adventurous, like my 6 player maps are. I take chances on my maps and try and make them interesting, and make players play differnatly.

For example Kings Reign, everyone wanted an all open middle to make it a regular map "Luna", but I instead wanted more complicated mineral expos with neutral buildings in middle, this made expo in middle harder to hold and makes map interesting cause it forces player to play differantly.

I released micro map called Pro map, its differant tight and isnt your regular 4 player map, its best be played 1 vs 1, but can be differant if 4 play as well. The map aint fancy but it something new and differant thats the point of why I uploaded that one only.

modified by king of 8 plr maps
2006, 05, 23 03:13
page: 1

Reply:


You have to be logged in to post
random map
  (4)New Bloodbath ..
Newest updates:
  (2)Dusk_0.60
  (4)Blustercrux_0.60
  (4)Daedalus_0.60
  (4)Aquamarine_0.60
  (2v6)Rich vs Lean
  (3)Ra 0.66
  (2)Dark_Swamp_0.60
  (2)Tess_Chapter_0..
  (4)Vhansoon_0.60
  (2)Arcane_Magic_R..
MOTM
  • month 6:
      (2)Butter 2.0b
  • MOTW
  • week 2021.01:
      (3) Lambda 1.0
  • Main Forum
  • New B..(Kroznade)
  • Magna..(addressee)
  • No Fo..(Pension)
  • Share..(Shade)R)
  • Feedback
  • This s..(triller1)
  • Rotati..(triller1)
  • Off Topic
  • scm dr..(addressee)
  • Real L..(Pension)
  • Vetera..(ProTosS4Ev)
  • Starcraft 2
  • announ..(triller1)
  • STARCR..(triller1)
  • Search Forum
    Articles:
     
  • How to make larvae spawn at the bottom right corner  
  • Worker pathing guide - How to debug and balance resour  
  • An elegant way of dealing with cliff asymmetry
  • Competition:
     
  • Innovative Naturals Competition  
  • Tourney Map Pack Aspirant Suggestions  
  • Maps That Need A Remake  
  • Think Quick Map Contest ($100 prize)