@ErrorAsh I think it should be possible for all matchups, but it obviously is much more difficult to do it for only two races instead of all three (two additional matchups need to be considered by having three races instead of two)
@nateZinger I like the idea of being able to change terrain at startup. It is certainly something to consider for skilled map makers. It bears resemblance to some tabletop turn-based strategy games I have played at some point. My initial thought is for melee, but the idea of UMS with user supplied initial terrain is a very good one.
@RileyStarcraft I would not expect people to use asymmetric maps in pro leagues and such - it is far too controversial for that. But one would hope that in time, provided that some people find asymmetric maps fun and their balance proven, that organisers of tournaments, leagues, etc. would not be so conservative as not to allow them?
I will start developing some asymmetric maps as soon as SC2 is out. Do you have any ideas as to statistics to balance of map? These are of course only guidelines, testing is the only way to properly balance such things.
I have some ideas (each apply to each starting location vs. the others):
- Tiles needed to make a choke
- Distance from main to choke
- Initial minerals per minute (assuming, for instance 1 gold patch)
- Rush distance air/ground (I don't know if there is a standard for this)
- High ground to low ground jump spots (isolation by water or space would be better for defence)
- Distance from main to natural
- Is natural on high ground
- Expansion clustering (some measure to determine total distance between possible expansions)
My impression of the map design in the beta until now has been that melee maps are mostly symmetric. This makes sense from a balancing point of view, as it is essentially "easy" to make a balanced symmetric map. There are, of course considerations to make in order to make races relatively balanced with regards to terrain and expansions and rush capabilities, but for a proficient map designer these are things possible to tweak.
The question is whether it is possible or not to make an asymmetric map that is balanced in such a way that it is possible to use for high-level competitive play as well as for casual ones. I believe it is possible and that it would open for new and interesting strategies for the different races. Suppose, for instance a starting location with only one gas, but with one or two gold patches. For a 1v1 map, the other starting location would have to compensate with terrain or expansion placement or resources within the main.
Naturally, balancing such a map would be more difficult than for the symmetric case. For one - race vs. same race would not automatically be balanced, and it would be more things to tweak in order to balance an initially unbalanced map, but I believe it could be worth the effort if done correctly.
0
@ErrorAsh I think it should be possible for all matchups, but it obviously is much more difficult to do it for only two races instead of all three (two additional matchups need to be considered by having three races instead of two)
@nateZinger I like the idea of being able to change terrain at startup. It is certainly something to consider for skilled map makers. It bears resemblance to some tabletop turn-based strategy games I have played at some point. My initial thought is for melee, but the idea of UMS with user supplied initial terrain is a very good one.
@RileyStarcraft I would not expect people to use asymmetric maps in pro leagues and such - it is far too controversial for that. But one would hope that in time, provided that some people find asymmetric maps fun and their balance proven, that organisers of tournaments, leagues, etc. would not be so conservative as not to allow them?
I will start developing some asymmetric maps as soon as SC2 is out. Do you have any ideas as to statistics to balance of map? These are of course only guidelines, testing is the only way to properly balance such things.
I have some ideas (each apply to each starting location vs. the others): - Tiles needed to make a choke - Distance from main to choke - Initial minerals per minute (assuming, for instance 1 gold patch) - Rush distance air/ground (I don't know if there is a standard for this) - High ground to low ground jump spots (isolation by water or space would be better for defence) - Distance from main to natural - Is natural on high ground - Expansion clustering (some measure to determine total distance between possible expansions)
0
Melee maps - need they be symmetric?
My impression of the map design in the beta until now has been that melee maps are mostly symmetric. This makes sense from a balancing point of view, as it is essentially "easy" to make a balanced symmetric map. There are, of course considerations to make in order to make races relatively balanced with regards to terrain and expansions and rush capabilities, but for a proficient map designer these are things possible to tweak.
The question is whether it is possible or not to make an asymmetric map that is balanced in such a way that it is possible to use for high-level competitive play as well as for casual ones. I believe it is possible and that it would open for new and interesting strategies for the different races. Suppose, for instance a starting location with only one gas, but with one or two gold patches. For a 1v1 map, the other starting location would have to compensate with terrain or expansion placement or resources within the main.
Naturally, balancing such a map would be more difficult than for the symmetric case. For one - race vs. same race would not automatically be balanced, and it would be more things to tweak in order to balance an initially unbalanced map, but I believe it could be worth the effort if done correctly.
What do other people think?