Something has got to be done about this ridiculous aggression bonus. The aggression bonus was designed to give a *SLIGHT* edge to players who are aggressive and not camping. This means it should be only a few minerals. It is inconcievable to me that you should get a return in minerals equal to half the number of units killed that turn. In most games I play, the aggression bonus is always the biggest factor for the winner. In some games, I have personally been able to achieve an aggression bonus numbered in the hundreds of minerals in a single turn. Please, PLEASE, cap the aggression at something like 20 minerals per turn.
If I was to change the aggression bonus now it would completely change the way the game was played... Now this might not be a bad thing but at the same time other people might like the aggression bonus so it really is more a matter of opinion regarding gameplay style opposed to something that needs to be changed asap. Also as I suggested before I could make another mode that would be more slow paced and implement a lower aggression system but it will take time and I'm also working on another map atm.
When players leave, their units and territories should become computer owned/controlled. The territories should get an extra marine every turn. The current situation of destroying all units when a player leaves and then making the territories free to anyone is completely unbalanced. I will give you an example that keeps happening - consider a game with three players remaining. One player is very large and owns half the map to himself and the other two players split the remaining territories between them. They decide that the only way to win is to team up and attack the larger player. So the first player sends all his units to attack the larger player, the larger player is severely hurt but wins the battle. Now the second player sends his guys to attack the larger player in a different place. Upon seeing the team-up, the larger player decides to leave. Now the first player has no units left because he fought it out. The larger players units are destroyed and his countries suddenly become free. Only the second player has many units left since he didn't get his chance to fight. So he gets all the countries for free. The units *MUST* remain to keep the gameplay balanced after someone leaves.
What you described doesn't sound unbalanced as much as it sounds like an intelligent player can manipulate the system. Teaming up against a larger player is strategic. I really don't see how it's unbalanced currently, everyone has equal opportunity to take over the empty bases after a player leaves, and destroying the units after a player leaves prevents other problems like...
Leaver players units camping the Spectre spawns (It might frustrate players when they spawn and get blow up by units that aren't even owned by a player).
Players getting trapped, it would not be fun to end up being trapped in a country like Australia with a wall of computer owned units being the only thing to stand in your way.
Games being drawn out longer than they need to be with players fighting computers rather than other players.
Maybe I'll consider adjusting this if I get more feedback but so far no one else seems to have an issue with this in particular.
Please add the marine range upgrade. This was in the original SC1 version. Why not add it?
Marines are already on the fringe of being OP, if I was to give them another upgrade they would definitely be OP unless other units got buffed of they got nerfed. So if you do want me to implement the Range upgrade a better solution would be for you to give me an idea of how to do it without Marines being to strong.
Please make the goliath air range longer. You nerfed the both the ground range and air range. But the air range should be increased again. The air range is so small that I could not kill a dropship from what seemed to be right next to it.
I can add +1 Range to the Goliaths air attack if everyone feels it's necessary.
Please add a mineral count to the leader board. How many minerals a player has left is crucial information when deciding to attack, and should not be a secret.
I will implement this when I do my next patch, I actually already know how to do it I just have been a little short on time lately so haven't gotten a chance to sit down and work on it.
I don't understand why africa gets THREE zerglings per turn. It should get 5 marines and 1 zergling. Currently it has a bigger bonus that europe, even though europe is considerably harder to take and hold. Australia has 1 point of attack, it gets 1 zergling and 1 marine. South america has 2 points of attack and gets 1 zergling and 3 marines. North america has 3 points of attack and gets 1 zergling and 6 marines. Africa has 3 points of attack and gets 3 marines and 3 zerglings???? Europe has 4 points of attack yet gets less of a bonus. Europe should get around 2 zerglings and 5 or 6 marines.
Africa was actually a suggestion that was implemented in order to give players more incentive to upgrade zerglings. As far as the rest of the countries their numbers are all based off of the original maps add or subtract one or two. Africa also technically has four points of attack and two large openings on either side of it so I don't see the problem with the amount of bonus they are getting. As far as Europe though I could give them an extra unit.
I hope this helps clear up some things and I will be making a patch this next week. Also if I do get more feedback on things like aggression and leaver units I will consider changing them so feel free to disagree with me if you feel it's a necessary improvement to the game.
I'm curious how you feel like you failed at data editing? But besides that I think that is a very nice terrain and I would search for the Weekly Terrain Exercises threads in the search if you want to be inspired by some truly amazing terrains.
Also if you are interested into getting into data again there are a lot of great tutorials on this site that I found really useful and you can always create a thread asking for help with something specific.
Nice to see all the feedback, since there are a few issues I see coming up in a few different posts I'll be addressing those in topics.
1) Damage Numbers for Units
I've noticed that one topic that keeps coming up is that of the numbering system regarding Marine and Zergling damage, it seems that a lot of the posts are talking about reducing that damage and tank damage, from the current 15,25, and 75/150 to something like 11,17 and 85. Now this is a fine idea and I will consider implementing it but I have noticed that it doesn't take unit Hp into account and it also doesn't specify how Goliaths would be handled. Reducing unit damage without reducing unit Hp would make units like tanks and Goliaths even harder to kill. Now as far as the idea itself I think I might have a solution to the issue but I will need to have a lot of feedback on it before I proceed.
The idea I was thinking about implementing was a voting system at the beginning of game that would allow player to choose different modes. This would make it possible to keep the current system that is already in place and then also include another system that would be the adjusted damage and such. Now if I choose to implement this it would result in having to vote at the start of the game for the mode the players want to play, and it would take some time to implement but it is possible so I would like to here some feedback of what you guy think about it.
2) Science Vessels and Goliaths
I have very recently nerfed Science Vessel healing rate as an attempt to hotfix the problem but I will most likely go with a similar approach to this post below in the next patch.
Sci Vessel Should In my opinion use Energy Te Repair bio.. A limited amount.. and then Charge half the cost of unit for mech.. :) that way you could repair yur men from cannon or tank fire for free but u have to micro to do itand you cant lose too much health cause u have to charge your energy. and then u have minerals to pay for goliath repairs if you want to use that brand new unit so bad with full healthyoushould have to purchase it.Or at least. pay for the Repairs. like it Naturally should flow. would be much more realizstic and macro/micro intensive.
3) Adding Chokes
Now I did end up adding a number of chokes after some of the posts on chokes came up. So how does everyone feel about the new chokes?
4) Stim and Speed Ling Upgrade Removal
This could also be fixed if I decide to create another mode to the game that players could choose at the start. As it is right now I'm not going to remove Stim or Speed Lings but I can nerf those abilities instead until they are in a good spot. I did increase Stims health cost to Marines and one of the reasons I really don't want to remove speed lings is because with the recent tank upgrade they really need to be able to get on top of tanks fast in order to counter them. But if I get enough feedback on these abilities I will consider adjusting them.
5) Marines OP
I hope that with the new Tank upgrade all Marines wont be as OP, feedback on this would be appreciated.
6) Increase Starting Minerals
This is another one of those things that I could add to another mode but for the current mode I really don't want to see players build a tank in the first round. I think that it would result in to much camping in the first round and I want the first round to be more exciting for new players and not turn into a stalemate quickly.
7) Gas, too Much of it, Nothing to do with it...
I am currently implementing a conversion system of gas to mineral, the only thing that is holding me up is the conversion rate. Right now I was thinking of going with 25 gas will get you 50 minerals and you will only be able to buy minerals when you at least have 25 gas. This would be so players that decide to save their gas for upgrades aren't penalized for saving while other players just convert their gas to minerals early game.
8) Tanks OP with the New Upgrade
Tanks needed to get a buff because they are a great counter to Marines, and Marines were very strong without Tanks to blow them away. I think the new upgrade gives players more options as far as playstyle. If Marines are nerfed then I will probably nerf the Tank upgrade to keep them even but right now I think tanks are in a good spot.
9) Cannon Damage Output
I actually saw this comment and will probably implement this in the next patch...
Is it possible To Make cannons effect armored units or just rines or lings seperately to rest? or to even have a Cannon Upgrade? like 25 gas upgrades cannons or something.. just some cool ideas. broodling a tank or an anti tank unit or spell would be awesome with the sci vessel
I like that solution as far as buffing Cannons because this will make them more effect later in the game but not overpowered early game. It also will give players more things to do with their gas and more options for playstyle.
10) Aggression Income
I saw one post that talked about the amount of aggression earned from units didn't take upgrades into account. I could actually make it so that more upgraded units would give a player more money when killed but this would really change the style of the game and some players might feel like it's unfair that other players will be making more money off their units just because they are upgraded. I will need more opinions on this before I decide to implement anything.
I hope that covered the bigger of issues that have been brought up, if I missed anything feel free to bring it up again, and I would really like some feedback on some of the things I brought up like Chokes and such.
Also Please let me know what you guys think about creating another Mode in the game. I need a lot of feedback on this if I'm going to implement it. To clear it up for anyone who didn't understand it would basically be the same map but I would adjust the units stat through triggers in order to create another game mode that players could vote to play at the beginning of the map.
Hello new Article, Welcome and Based Off My Friends Findings.. And considerable testing.. And assuming The Speed for Ling RinE Tanks Is same as Sc 1 Original.. We should Not have a problem here and u should love the new settings.. Please give it a shot With me Before You Knock it.. Please.. Because it does fall into Proper and appropriate placing. opening a whole new venue of options and opportunities. which i will get into such as micro and such. Thank You + Enjoy!
First of all thanks for all the support and being interested in improving my map!
Tanks starting attack. In Regular 85, in Seige 130 :) trust me its perfect starting settings try it without upgrades First =) Also,..
Ok now regarding these changes I just want to say that the problem I encounter with making changes like these is that these are pretty huge changes and would completely change the game play of the map. Now I'm not saying they are not good changes but I'm worried that it would be to much of a change for some people and result in some rage from the people who like the system the way it is.
With that said I agree we need a bit of balancing, but I realize that everyone has a different idea of balance so I have to get a lot of feedback about the same type of things before I make any major changes. I would be open to making minor adjustments though, keep in mind we need to aim around the numbering system that is already in place but we can manipulate the number ratios until they feel right.
starting Minerals I believe should be adjusted based off new settings to 11 Minerals Rather than 9 . should also be able to buy tank off start in my opinion. if u feel like taking japan and turtling.. thats up to u.. Which brings me to map design and layout.. im seeing almost No.. I repeat little to no chokes.. like japan.. i kinda wish japan was a capital city that gave u a +2 bonus each round but thats another topic for another day.. i have amazing ideas on capital citys for risk.. i own every risk board game ive seen.. (pysical Cop8ies) I* think vantage locations are an important part of the game =) hehe
I would not like to encourage a tank in the very first round, it would frustrate players who want to build other things. As far as chokes, chokes tend to favor excessive camping and tanks, I can adjust areas of the terrain but I don't want to make anything to narrow because it cripples zerglings which are one of the only things that counters tanks. I will most likely makes chokes that are one sided if anything, having one side that is a choke and one side that is open, but we wont be seeing any super tight chokes protecting key areas like the connection between Asia and Australia.
Next I also think a mild buff should occur to the Rebellion starting with 3 minerals per round.. even after death.. and i think u should get 3 ghosts and i think the ghosts should be able to use some sort of special ability such as lockdown from sc 1 to create a problem for tanks or gols..
Right now you do get minerals for being a Spectre every turn, lock down would be a nice ability to add. As far as the number of Spectres I touch on that a bit below further down in this post.
ps. The lowering Of the the Damge will fix the cannon issue.. After the Cannon issue and the upgrades should fall into place also fixing the issue with early game tanks being of use now.. cause cannons will be/being so strong will forcibly put everyon into one tank 20 rines.. to conquer a continent feeling much more like the board game bringing me back to my original point of micro being increased dramatically. nice? do u like so far.. im not quite finished hehe. and because goliaths is your thing and being OP as it is.. You'll have to adust that accordingly =) tone them down also or whatever to integrate in with my 7 -11 85/130 combo/perfected mathematics... do it mathematically it works out perfectly paper rocks scissors, if u work it out.. and it even adjusts for chokes mid game and late game.. just working in your upgrades.. will be perfection . so if u'd Like i can do the math on the Goliaths at a later point.. perfecting them also.. but as i stated.. thats yur department i dont like that stupid unit lolz. although great for late game lack of room and space and handling chokes :) / turrtles* over population of units also.
I am wondering how the cannon buff against armor units is doing, if you could give me more broken down feedback, like how we can adjust the number system I am currently using that would be the most helpful.
and can we change the channel name to like elite riskers united or something more attractive so i can get people hanging there.. have like 5 people in there at all hours.. for games and challenges. That way we can start to create a really good community Another thing u wont have units instantly dying leaving much more room for micro off of the start.. cause of lower attacks.. and ull really be able to feel the upgrades this way.;.. msg me let me know.
Lol, seems like you're way ahead of me! Anyway you can name it whatever you want as long as people know how to find us ;)
- The text that says "you are receiving bonus units for XXX continent" is wrong. It shows continents I do not own.
Is it displaying the text for continents you previously owned and have lost? I'll check the triggers to see if it's not removing the text once you lose a continent.
- The marine stimpack ability should not count as an action. But it does, so it stops my current action. The result is that if I attack to a location my marines start moving there. When I use stimpack on them when they are close, they stop in their tracks and stand there doing nothing while stimmed, even though I told them to attack first.
This makes sense because I actually had to make the Marine Stimpack Ability from scratch, the new patch 1.5.4 messed up the data with the exsisting Stimpack so I had to make a custom one. I look into fixing asap.
- You should not destroy the units of a leaving player. I have played many games where someone has a ton of countries and units/tanks/etc. and several people team up to try to stop them from winning. If they leave in this situation, everything is destroyed and all their countries become freebies to the first person to take them. Nearly every time this causes problems. Just leave the units there and start adding a marine to every country.
Originally unit did not get destroyed, but this became a problem because if someone who had a very fortified position and owned most all of the countries dropped, it became very tedious for players who had less territory to be able to move them and it was weird to be fighting against someone who wasn't really there.
And, of course, please give 3 rebels each turn not just one. I suggest giving 3 and reducing life down to a base 200 or so.
I will consider this, but I don't like the idea for the reason that sometimes player don't use there spectres automatically and will get additional spectres over a few turns, this might not be a problem if they have two or three spectres but it does become a problem if players are saving up six to nine spectres and then attacking someone with them. I can buff spectres in other way but I really don't want a large army of spectres running around the map.
But with that said thanks once again for your feedback I will be looking into those issue and trying to get a patch out in the next few days.
Hey! Just made an account so I could say this, great map! I was a huge fan of risk on wc3 and I got to say I'm lovin' your risk map. Good job and thanks for the fun. Do you think you'll be adding profiles or achievements? Also, have you considered making a bigger risk map so more people could comfortably play at once, maybe with transport ships? Sort of like WoW Risk on wc3.
Great map! Keep it up :)
Thank you :) I'm glad you like the map. Also I really like the idea of adding an achievement system but I'm not ready to implement it because I'd need to build a SHA128 encryption system including other security features to make sure save files wouldn't be abused. I could actually make a larger map quite easily, the triggers could be transferred without much hassle but I would like to work out the kinks in the current version before I create another larger version of the map.
See this is a much better more thought out post and I agree with you 100% that some of the over critical comments in this thread are a little premature. But I guess that even if other people are saying stupid things it is always the best to rise above their immaturity, because they will eventually make themselves look stupid and lose credibility and in the end the person who keeps there composure and puts up a well thought out argument will win by default.
But the problem is that I agree with your opinion but I don't agree with how you deliver it. You can be straight forward without being rude. In fact the cussing and anger in your post only distract from the point you are trying to make, you would get much further if you just put up a good sound argument without resorting to highly emotional statements.
It's better to just stat your opinion in a constructive well thought out manner from the beginning, there is no reason you need to cuss excessively to prove a point. Or to put people down in order to further your argument when they call you out for being rude.
I believe the problem with the majority of all animation and sequences nowadays is that it is extremely hard to make a fresh animation because everything has been done already. Let's just face facts, if this was the first animation of it's kind everyone would praise it for being ground breaking. But it's not the first of it's kind, we have seen this type of animation before. This doesn't mean it wasn't very well made, it means that all of us are very jaded because we see things like this all the time. So in reality the real problem is that we, the public, are bored with this type of animation because it's been overdone, and it will most likely continue to be overdone.
Another problem is that when you're a big company like Blizzard and you are spending millions of dollars on making cinematics you don't really want to take any risks because tons of money is involved in those risks, instead you go for something safer that has been tried and true. This type of animation appeals to the masses, it's a good choice if you are aiming for the average Joe who likes to see things explode. Blizzard is not trying to make something truly original, they are just trying to make something that is going to be entertaining to the majority of people and sell. I think that the majority will be very happy with this trailer and be stoked about it.
Just uploaded it right now but basically it will now give you the proper number of minerals for the units you kill. Right now this is the amount you gain in minerals for kills.
+1 Mineral for Every 2 Marines Killed
+1 Mineral for Every Zergling Killed
+5 Minerals for Every Tank Killed
+15 Minerals for Every Golith Killed
Since the fix players should not be getting mass amounts of income like they were before :)
I've pinpointed the problem and it's a bug related to the StarCraft engine. I've also created a work around.
Put simply, Kills of each unit type are recorded into a array where they're retrieved at the end of the round to determine income. The problem is that the function OwnerOfUnit(KillingUnit) returns a different player number than PickEachPlayerInPlayerGroup(). This is because the one begins counting the array[] at 0 and other begins counting at 1.
I've implemented a Search Needle Integer to bypass using OwnerOfUnit(KillingUnit) and determine the proper array storage #.
I'm going to be posting a new Patch right now to fix the problem.
Regarding the beacon problem, there is an event for when a unit dies. You can trigger off that event to check if the unit death should hand the territory off to a new player. You should also verify that you are correctly handling the unit-leaves-region event so the territory ownership changes properly if you are on the beacon and the owner runs away.
This may be a solution and I did look into it slightly when making the trigger, but I will need time to make sure it doesn't create other bugs. As far as the owner running away that is already part of the trigger there is an invisible region that surrounds the territory and when the Event fires it runs a Condition to check that enemies aren't with the bounds of that region.
Regarding the goliaths, yes if a player has a ton they are definitely over fed. Increasing the minimum minerals will help keep this balanced. But the goliaths themselves attack much too fast. Keep in mind that in SC1 the goliaths had an autocannon attack that fired a sequence of three shots (with corresponding sound effects). The cooldown did not happen until after all of this. I'm guessing the actual attack speed in SC1 would be something like 2.0 to 2.25. If you are willing change this I can spend some more hours with the map and see if that fixes the balance issues. In any case, we know there is a problem. I vote for correcting it (maybe even overcorrecting it) and rebalancing it back the other way if you went too far.
I will change their attack speed from 1.5 to 1.75 and then increase it to 2 if they still seem OP, I don't want to overnerf them in one patch but I'll try to easy in a little nerf here and there until they feel right. Also this is an interesting Idea but I could nerf their attack range from 6 to 5 then give them a range upgrade that players can buy for gas.
Regarding the marine range, why would you exclude this upgrade just because it has other upgrades available? The SC1 risk map (which I used to play for hours) had both range and stimpack upgrades available. They provided unique changes to the unit. Besides, for a cost of 25 gas, you are paying a lot for it.
I really want players to not get rewarded for just upgrading one unit, I feel like if marines get to many special upgrades they will become overplayed and Zerglings will be pushed aside. Now I would consider bring the range upgrade back if Zerglings also received an addition special upgrade so the upgrades were even. But what could we upgrade on Zerglings?
- I believe the rebels in SC1 risk had super long range. Maybe like range 8? They didn't outrange a sieged tank, but they outranged everything else by far.
- It should spawn 3 rebels each time, not just one.
Believe it or not Spectre do currently have a range of 8 and do outrange everything but tanks, even cannons only have a range of 7. Also addressing the number of Spectres spawned I am going to be adding a very short duration cloak to Spectres. It will will cloak them for 5 seconds and increase their movement speed from 1 to 1.5. This will allow them to sneak by tanks. So I think I will continue to give out one spectre and see how the buff works until I decide to add more.
- The leader board should show total units and total minerals/gas too.
This can be done but I'm going to try to focus on game play issues first and then work on things like this. There is a 50% chance it will be in the new patch depending on how much work goes into the other fixes.
- One of the SC1 risk maps had a trigger where if you got more than 100 gas, it would subtract 25 gas and give you like 50 minerals. I think it was called gas hoarding.
I will implement this, but I was also considering the possibility of being able to by minerals with gas.
Regarding the gas, what is the rate of gas accumulation? In the SC1 risk map, you got 1 gas per 10 minerals worth of kills. So killing 10 marines gave you 1 gas, killing 2 zerglings gave 1 gas, killing 1 tank gave 1 gas, killing one goliath gave 5 gas. How does your map handle this?
Right now you get 1 gas per five units killed. Doesn't matter what kind of units at this point. The minerals do give different amounts for different units so it would be easy just to use those triggers for gas as well.
Like I said I'm going to put out a big patch probably late tonight so look for the changes ;)
First off thank you for all your feedback :) You noticed I had already implemented some of your suggestions from your first post and I will be launching another new patch soon.
- Several territory beacons do not work properly. For instance, if you are already on a beacon and kill all enemy units, you don't get the territory until you leave the beacon and move back on it. This does work correctly on some territories though.
Regarding this issue... I can probably get this to work but their are some limitation by the map editor itself that will make this extremely hard if not impossible to do.
You see the code needs an Event in order to fire the Action, unfortunately the only Event available to me is "Unit Enters Region" so the Action is firing when the unit enters the region, there is no Event for when a unit is already inside the region (aka Beacon). I hate to say this but there might not be much I can do to fix that problem, it is a limitation of the map editor itself.
- The golaiths. OMG the goliaths. In the original SC1 map, the goliaths were very strong, but nothing like this. They need to do less damage to light and the attack speed needs to be slower. They are so powerful that it is unbalanced. In the SC1 map, they were useful but not overpowering. In this map, every single game ends because someone goes only goliaths. Please balance them. EDIT: After looking into this some more, it appears that goliaths did do full damage to light, but their attack speed may have been significantly slower in SC1. They had a cooldown of 22, which is approximately 1.5 like you have in your map. But in SC1 the cooldown didn't seem to start until after the weapon animation finished. This additional delay may be the cause of the goliaths new found powers in your map. Try setting the goliath weapon speed to 2.5.
I will do something with Goliaths, but the problem with them is not so much that they are individually OP. By themselves a dozen of Zerglings and Marines can kill them. But in mass numbers they are becoming more of a problem.
But a better question would be "If someone has a mass number of Gols and is killing me with them, are the Gols OP or is the Player just insanely fed." Cause if you think about it when someone has 4 Gols that means they spent 200 Minerals, in other words they are a very fed player. So addressing this issue in general I actually need to fix a bug where players are being awarded extra minerals for aggression, less minerals will mean players will have to be pickier about what they buy and hopefully having less money will result in less Gols.
But regardless I am very open to the idea of nerfing them in some way I just need more feedback before I decide how to nerf them.
I will probably not be adding the range upgrade for marines considering they have the Combat Shield ability and the Stimpack allows them to get in range much faster than they could before.
- You need to get 1 gas every turn, ALWAYS. Without this gas is nearly impossible to get. With it, it will still take 25 turns to get enough gas to use, but at least you will eventually get there.
I will definitely implement this hopefully by later today, I really appreciated the suggestion :)
- The MINIMUM minerals per turn should be 9. Unless you have rebels only. If you have no territories it should be at least 3. But if you own any territories you should get a minimum of 9. Anything less than that makes it too hard to win back anything.
This will also be implemented but I want to make sure I release it at the same time that I fix the aggression minerals so players aren't getting to fed. This will also hopefully happen tonight
- The Greenland territory should be part of North America, not Europe.
I've seen this issue for a while and I will most likely change it but the issue is that it will just involve an incredible amount of work. Basically all of the territories and listing in separate Arrays depending on the country, changing a territory to a different country means a complete rearranging of my Arrays in the coding. It's somethings a really don't look forward to doing but will do if enough people request it.
Thanks for all of the feedback, I really appreciate that you are interested in improving my game :)
So I've made One Upgrade that has 100 set as Max Level so that I didn't have to make 100 separate upgrades. But the problem I'm having with this method is that while the upgrade works perfectly and has the desired effect I wanted, I cannot find a way for the upgrade level number to display on the unit that has been upgraded. All it is showing is zero for upgrades even if the unit have been upgraded several times. Does anyone have a solution to this, even if it's a very complex solution?
0
If I was to change the aggression bonus now it would completely change the way the game was played... Now this might not be a bad thing but at the same time other people might like the aggression bonus so it really is more a matter of opinion regarding gameplay style opposed to something that needs to be changed asap. Also as I suggested before I could make another mode that would be more slow paced and implement a lower aggression system but it will take time and I'm also working on another map atm.
What you described doesn't sound unbalanced as much as it sounds like an intelligent player can manipulate the system. Teaming up against a larger player is strategic. I really don't see how it's unbalanced currently, everyone has equal opportunity to take over the empty bases after a player leaves, and destroying the units after a player leaves prevents other problems like...
Maybe I'll consider adjusting this if I get more feedback but so far no one else seems to have an issue with this in particular.
Marines are already on the fringe of being OP, if I was to give them another upgrade they would definitely be OP unless other units got buffed of they got nerfed. So if you do want me to implement the Range upgrade a better solution would be for you to give me an idea of how to do it without Marines being to strong.
I can add +1 Range to the Goliaths air attack if everyone feels it's necessary.
These are simple adjustments and I could implement them in the next patch if no ones opposed to it.
I will implement this when I do my next patch, I actually already know how to do it I just have been a little short on time lately so haven't gotten a chance to sit down and work on it.
Africa was actually a suggestion that was implemented in order to give players more incentive to upgrade zerglings. As far as the rest of the countries their numbers are all based off of the original maps add or subtract one or two. Africa also technically has four points of attack and two large openings on either side of it so I don't see the problem with the amount of bonus they are getting. As far as Europe though I could give them an extra unit.
I hope this helps clear up some things and I will be making a patch this next week. Also if I do get more feedback on things like aggression and leaver units I will consider changing them so feel free to disagree with me if you feel it's a necessary improvement to the game.
0
Hello :) Welcome to Mapster!
I'm curious how you feel like you failed at data editing? But besides that I think that is a very nice terrain and I would search for the Weekly Terrain Exercises threads in the search if you want to be inspired by some truly amazing terrains.
Also if you are interested into getting into data again there are a lot of great tutorials on this site that I found really useful and you can always create a thread asking for help with something specific.
0
Nice to see all the feedback, since there are a few issues I see coming up in a few different posts I'll be addressing those in topics.
1) Damage Numbers for Units
I've noticed that one topic that keeps coming up is that of the numbering system regarding Marine and Zergling damage, it seems that a lot of the posts are talking about reducing that damage and tank damage, from the current 15,25, and 75/150 to something like 11,17 and 85. Now this is a fine idea and I will consider implementing it but I have noticed that it doesn't take unit Hp into account and it also doesn't specify how Goliaths would be handled. Reducing unit damage without reducing unit Hp would make units like tanks and Goliaths even harder to kill. Now as far as the idea itself I think I might have a solution to the issue but I will need to have a lot of feedback on it before I proceed.
The idea I was thinking about implementing was a voting system at the beginning of game that would allow player to choose different modes. This would make it possible to keep the current system that is already in place and then also include another system that would be the adjusted damage and such. Now if I choose to implement this it would result in having to vote at the start of the game for the mode the players want to play, and it would take some time to implement but it is possible so I would like to here some feedback of what you guy think about it.
2) Science Vessels and Goliaths
I have very recently nerfed Science Vessel healing rate as an attempt to hotfix the problem but I will most likely go with a similar approach to this post below in the next patch.
3) Adding Chokes
Now I did end up adding a number of chokes after some of the posts on chokes came up. So how does everyone feel about the new chokes?
4) Stim and Speed Ling Upgrade Removal
This could also be fixed if I decide to create another mode to the game that players could choose at the start. As it is right now I'm not going to remove Stim or Speed Lings but I can nerf those abilities instead until they are in a good spot. I did increase Stims health cost to Marines and one of the reasons I really don't want to remove speed lings is because with the recent tank upgrade they really need to be able to get on top of tanks fast in order to counter them. But if I get enough feedback on these abilities I will consider adjusting them.
5) Marines OP
I hope that with the new Tank upgrade all Marines wont be as OP, feedback on this would be appreciated.
6) Increase Starting Minerals
This is another one of those things that I could add to another mode but for the current mode I really don't want to see players build a tank in the first round. I think that it would result in to much camping in the first round and I want the first round to be more exciting for new players and not turn into a stalemate quickly.
7) Gas, too Much of it, Nothing to do with it...
I am currently implementing a conversion system of gas to mineral, the only thing that is holding me up is the conversion rate. Right now I was thinking of going with 25 gas will get you 50 minerals and you will only be able to buy minerals when you at least have 25 gas. This would be so players that decide to save their gas for upgrades aren't penalized for saving while other players just convert their gas to minerals early game.
8) Tanks OP with the New Upgrade
Tanks needed to get a buff because they are a great counter to Marines, and Marines were very strong without Tanks to blow them away. I think the new upgrade gives players more options as far as playstyle. If Marines are nerfed then I will probably nerf the Tank upgrade to keep them even but right now I think tanks are in a good spot.
9) Cannon Damage Output
I actually saw this comment and will probably implement this in the next patch...
I like that solution as far as buffing Cannons because this will make them more effect later in the game but not overpowered early game. It also will give players more things to do with their gas and more options for playstyle.
10) Aggression Income
I saw one post that talked about the amount of aggression earned from units didn't take upgrades into account. I could actually make it so that more upgraded units would give a player more money when killed but this would really change the style of the game and some players might feel like it's unfair that other players will be making more money off their units just because they are upgraded. I will need more opinions on this before I decide to implement anything.
I hope that covered the bigger of issues that have been brought up, if I missed anything feel free to bring it up again, and I would really like some feedback on some of the things I brought up like Chokes and such.
Also Please let me know what you guys think about creating another Mode in the game. I need a lot of feedback on this if I'm going to implement it. To clear it up for anyone who didn't understand it would basically be the same map but I would adjust the units stat through triggers in order to create another game mode that players could vote to play at the beginning of the map.
0
First of all thanks for all the support and being interested in improving my map!
Ok now regarding these changes I just want to say that the problem I encounter with making changes like these is that these are pretty huge changes and would completely change the game play of the map. Now I'm not saying they are not good changes but I'm worried that it would be to much of a change for some people and result in some rage from the people who like the system the way it is.
With that said I agree we need a bit of balancing, but I realize that everyone has a different idea of balance so I have to get a lot of feedback about the same type of things before I make any major changes. I would be open to making minor adjustments though, keep in mind we need to aim around the numbering system that is already in place but we can manipulate the number ratios until they feel right.
I would not like to encourage a tank in the very first round, it would frustrate players who want to build other things. As far as chokes, chokes tend to favor excessive camping and tanks, I can adjust areas of the terrain but I don't want to make anything to narrow because it cripples zerglings which are one of the only things that counters tanks. I will most likely makes chokes that are one sided if anything, having one side that is a choke and one side that is open, but we wont be seeing any super tight chokes protecting key areas like the connection between Asia and Australia.
Right now you do get minerals for being a Spectre every turn, lock down would be a nice ability to add. As far as the number of Spectres I touch on that a bit below further down in this post.
Thank you for giving feedback :)
I am wondering how the cannon buff against armor units is doing, if you could give me more broken down feedback, like how we can adjust the number system I am currently using that would be the most helpful.
Lol, seems like you're way ahead of me! Anyway you can name it whatever you want as long as people know how to find us ;)
Is it displaying the text for continents you previously owned and have lost? I'll check the triggers to see if it's not removing the text once you lose a continent.
This makes sense because I actually had to make the Marine Stimpack Ability from scratch, the new patch 1.5.4 messed up the data with the exsisting Stimpack so I had to make a custom one. I look into fixing asap.
I can check into this, probably a very simple fix.
Originally unit did not get destroyed, but this became a problem because if someone who had a very fortified position and owned most all of the countries dropped, it became very tedious for players who had less territory to be able to move them and it was weird to be fighting against someone who wasn't really there.
I will consider this, but I don't like the idea for the reason that sometimes player don't use there spectres automatically and will get additional spectres over a few turns, this might not be a problem if they have two or three spectres but it does become a problem if players are saving up six to nine spectres and then attacking someone with them. I can buff spectres in other way but I really don't want a large army of spectres running around the map.
But with that said thanks once again for your feedback I will be looking into those issue and trying to get a patch out in the next few days.
Thank you :) I'm glad you like the map. Also I really like the idea of adding an achievement system but I'm not ready to implement it because I'd need to build a SHA128 encryption system including other security features to make sure save files wouldn't be abused. I could actually make a larger map quite easily, the triggers could be transferred without much hassle but I would like to work out the kinks in the current version before I create another larger version of the map.
0
@Daara87: Go
See this is a much better more thought out post and I agree with you 100% that some of the over critical comments in this thread are a little premature. But I guess that even if other people are saying stupid things it is always the best to rise above their immaturity, because they will eventually make themselves look stupid and lose credibility and in the end the person who keeps there composure and puts up a well thought out argument will win by default.
0
@Daara87: Go
But the problem is that I agree with your opinion but I don't agree with how you deliver it. You can be straight forward without being rude. In fact the cussing and anger in your post only distract from the point you are trying to make, you would get much further if you just put up a good sound argument without resorting to highly emotional statements.
0
@Daara87: Go
It's better to just stat your opinion in a constructive well thought out manner from the beginning, there is no reason you need to cuss excessively to prove a point. Or to put people down in order to further your argument when they call you out for being rude.
0
I'm just going to throw this out there...
I believe the problem with the majority of all animation and sequences nowadays is that it is extremely hard to make a fresh animation because everything has been done already. Let's just face facts, if this was the first animation of it's kind everyone would praise it for being ground breaking. But it's not the first of it's kind, we have seen this type of animation before. This doesn't mean it wasn't very well made, it means that all of us are very jaded because we see things like this all the time. So in reality the real problem is that we, the public, are bored with this type of animation because it's been overdone, and it will most likely continue to be overdone.
Another problem is that when you're a big company like Blizzard and you are spending millions of dollars on making cinematics you don't really want to take any risks because tons of money is involved in those risks, instead you go for something safer that has been tried and true. This type of animation appeals to the masses, it's a good choice if you are aiming for the average Joe who likes to see things explode. Blizzard is not trying to make something truly original, they are just trying to make something that is going to be entertaining to the majority of people and sell. I think that the majority will be very happy with this trailer and be stoked about it.
0
@houndofbaskerville: Go
Let's just be thankful they decided to be inspired by Micheal Bay and not George Lucas...
0
@bobby8934: Go
Just uploaded it right now but basically it will now give you the proper number of minerals for the units you kill. Right now this is the amount you gain in minerals for kills.
+1 Mineral for Every 2 Marines Killed
+1 Mineral for Every Zergling Killed
+5 Minerals for Every Tank Killed
+15 Minerals for Every Golith Killed
Since the fix players should not be getting mass amounts of income like they were before :)
0
@bobby8934: Go
I've pinpointed the problem and it's a bug related to the StarCraft engine. I've also created a work around.
Put simply, Kills of each unit type are recorded into a array where they're retrieved at the end of the round to determine income. The problem is that the function OwnerOfUnit(KillingUnit) returns a different player number than PickEachPlayerInPlayerGroup(). This is because the one begins counting the array[] at 0 and other begins counting at 1.
I've implemented a Search Needle Integer to bypass using OwnerOfUnit(KillingUnit) and determine the proper array storage #.
I'm going to be posting a new Patch right now to fix the problem.
0
This may be a solution and I did look into it slightly when making the trigger, but I will need time to make sure it doesn't create other bugs. As far as the owner running away that is already part of the trigger there is an invisible region that surrounds the territory and when the Event fires it runs a Condition to check that enemies aren't with the bounds of that region.
I just added this to my patch, so this will be on with the new patch.
I will change their attack speed from 1.5 to 1.75 and then increase it to 2 if they still seem OP, I don't want to overnerf them in one patch but I'll try to easy in a little nerf here and there until they feel right. Also this is an interesting Idea but I could nerf their attack range from 6 to 5 then give them a range upgrade that players can buy for gas.
I really want players to not get rewarded for just upgrading one unit, I feel like if marines get to many special upgrades they will become overplayed and Zerglings will be pushed aside. Now I would consider bring the range upgrade back if Zerglings also received an addition special upgrade so the upgrades were even. But what could we upgrade on Zerglings?
Believe it or not Spectre do currently have a range of 8 and do outrange everything but tanks, even cannons only have a range of 7. Also addressing the number of Spectres spawned I am going to be adding a very short duration cloak to Spectres. It will will cloak them for 5 seconds and increase their movement speed from 1 to 1.5. This will allow them to sneak by tanks. So I think I will continue to give out one spectre and see how the buff works until I decide to add more.
This can be done but I'm going to try to focus on game play issues first and then work on things like this. There is a 50% chance it will be in the new patch depending on how much work goes into the other fixes.
I will implement this, but I was also considering the possibility of being able to by minerals with gas.
Right now you get 1 gas per five units killed. Doesn't matter what kind of units at this point. The minerals do give different amounts for different units so it would be easy just to use those triggers for gas as well.
Like I said I'm going to put out a big patch probably late tonight so look for the changes ;)
0
First off thank you for all your feedback :) You noticed I had already implemented some of your suggestions from your first post and I will be launching another new patch soon.
Regarding this issue... I can probably get this to work but their are some limitation by the map editor itself that will make this extremely hard if not impossible to do.
You see the code needs an Event in order to fire the Action, unfortunately the only Event available to me is "Unit Enters Region" so the Action is firing when the unit enters the region, there is no Event for when a unit is already inside the region (aka Beacon). I hate to say this but there might not be much I can do to fix that problem, it is a limitation of the map editor itself.
I will do something with Goliaths, but the problem with them is not so much that they are individually OP. By themselves a dozen of Zerglings and Marines can kill them. But in mass numbers they are becoming more of a problem.
But a better question would be "If someone has a mass number of Gols and is killing me with them, are the Gols OP or is the Player just insanely fed." Cause if you think about it when someone has 4 Gols that means they spent 200 Minerals, in other words they are a very fed player. So addressing this issue in general I actually need to fix a bug where players are being awarded extra minerals for aggression, less minerals will mean players will have to be pickier about what they buy and hopefully having less money will result in less Gols.
But regardless I am very open to the idea of nerfing them in some way I just need more feedback before I decide how to nerf them.
I will probably not be adding the range upgrade for marines considering they have the Combat Shield ability and the Stimpack allows them to get in range much faster than they could before.
I will definitely implement this hopefully by later today, I really appreciated the suggestion :)
This will also be implemented but I want to make sure I release it at the same time that I fix the aggression minerals so players aren't getting to fed. This will also hopefully happen tonight
I've seen this issue for a while and I will most likely change it but the issue is that it will just involve an incredible amount of work. Basically all of the territories and listing in separate Arrays depending on the country, changing a territory to a different country means a complete rearranging of my Arrays in the coding. It's somethings a really don't look forward to doing but will do if enough people request it.
Thanks for all of the feedback, I really appreciate that you are interested in improving my game :)
0
@Taintedwisp: Go
Perfect thanks :)
0
So I've made One Upgrade that has 100 set as Max Level so that I didn't have to make 100 separate upgrades. But the problem I'm having with this method is that while the upgrade works perfectly and has the desired effect I wanted, I cannot find a way for the upgrade level number to display on the unit that has been upgraded. All it is showing is zero for upgrades even if the unit have been upgraded several times. Does anyone have a solution to this, even if it's a very complex solution?