Doodsmack Profile Blog Joined August 2010 United States 7089 Posts #141 I think we need to test the change before drawing conclusions about it.

blade55555 Profile Blog Joined March 2009 United States 17373 Posts Last Edited: 2014-11-09 18:30:27 #142 On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?









That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? When I think of something else, something will go here

fire_brand Profile Blog Joined October 2009 Canada 1012 Posts #143 It might not be a perfect solution, but I would like to see how it plays out.



It's extremely encouraging to see that Blizzard is at least considering to make changes to the way the economy works though. It means they have been listening to the community and watching niche groups like starbow, etc.



I don't nessecarily think that SC2's economy is as dreadful and broken as a lot of people say it is, but I wouldn't mind seeing some tweaking. I do agree though with the OP that the changes they are outlining will push towards more deathball, front door clashy engagements. I do think the tempo of LotV will be much more frenetic and aggressive than the last to iterations, but I don't see the economy changes enhancing that. I wouldn't mind seeing how it plays out a little, before I just write it off completely though. Random player, pixel enthusiast, crappy illustrator, offlane/support

Thieving Magpie Profile Blog Joined December 2012 United States 6752 Posts #144 On November 10 2014 03:31 fire_brand wrote:

It might not be a perfect solution, but I would like to see how it plays out.



It's extremely encouraging to see that Blizzard is at least considering to make changes to the way the economy works though. It means they have been listening to the community and watching niche groups like starbow, etc.



I don't nessecarily think that SC2's economy is as dreadful and broken as a lot of people say it is, but I wouldn't mind seeing some tweaking. I do agree though with the OP that the changes they are outlining will push towards more deathball, front door clashy engagements. I do think the tempo of LotV will be much more frenetic and aggressive than the last to iterations, but I don't see the economy changes enhancing that. I wouldn't mind seeing how it plays out a little, before I just write it off completely though.



Totally agree.



Personally I'd like it if they added collision + reduced the number of patches. But before we cry bloody murder that they didn't just port BW into SC2, lets fucking try it and show them what it looks like. Give the best games we can and then tweak from there. Totally agree.Personally I'd like it if they added collision + reduced the number of patches. But before we cry bloody murder that they didn't just port BW into SC2, lets fucking try it and show them what it looks like. Give the best games we can and then tweak from there. Hark, what baseball through yonder window breaks?

Superbanana Profile Joined May 2014 2369 Posts Last Edited: 2014-11-09 19:04:49 #145 What if bases are built faster? Its a clean way to reward more for expansions, and to reduce punishment for losing one o_O

Workers could also mine slower, altough it reduces the economic pace of the game (im ok with that), the goal is to reward more for oversaturated bases. This works great with more initial workers. Or they can just get more minerals per trip to compensate.

edited In PvZ the zerg can make the situation spire out of control but protoss can adept to the situation.

Big J Profile Joined March 2011 Austria 16272 Posts #146 On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?





I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.

The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.



For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.

The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400. I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400.

Musicus Profile Joined August 2011 Germany 23392 Posts #147 On November 10 2014 03:49 Big J wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?





I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.

The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.



For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.

The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400. I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400.



Well you still get some extra Chrono and 14 supply, which are almost worth 200 minerals . Well you still get some extra Chrono and 14 supply, which are almost worth 200 minerals Maru and Serral are probably top 5.

[PkF] Wire Profile Joined March 2013 France 22019 Posts #148 On November 10 2014 03:49 Big J wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?





I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.

The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.



For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.

The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400. I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400.



The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

Squat Profile Joined September 2013 Sweden 7821 Posts #149 On November 10 2014 04:13 [PkF] Wire wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 03:49 Big J wrote:

On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?





I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.

The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.



For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.

The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400. I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400.



The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

I'm a little concerned about P lack of ground based AA in this situation. Warping in stalkers against mutas harassment is going to be tantamount to suicide, and gateway units still suck in a straight fight. It's just how stupidly powerful a warp-in ability is, you can't make the actual units very good or it breaks the game. Hard nut to crack. I'm a little concerned about P lack of ground based AA in this situation. Warping in stalkers against mutas harassment is going to be tantamount to suicide, and gateway units still suck in a straight fight. It's just how stupidly powerful a warp-in ability is, you can't make the actual units very good or it breaks the game. Hard nut to crack. "Digital. They have digital. What is digital?" - Donald J Trump

[PkF] Wire Profile Joined March 2013 France 22019 Posts #150 On November 10 2014 04:17 Squat wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 04:13 [PkF] Wire wrote:

On November 10 2014 03:49 Big J wrote:

On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?





I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.

The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.



For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.

The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400. I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400.



The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

I'm a little concerned about P lack of ground based AA in this situation. Warping in stalkers against mutas harassment is going to be tantamount to suicide, and gateway units still suck in a straight fight. It's just how stupidly powerful a warp-in ability is, you can't make the actual units very good or it breaks the game. Hard nut to crack. I'm a little concerned about P lack of ground based AA in this situation. Warping in stalkers against mutas harassment is going to be tantamount to suicide, and gateway units still suck in a straight fight. It's just how stupidly powerful a warp-in ability is, you can't make the actual units very good or it breaks the game. Hard nut to crack.



The current proposed changes to warp-ins definitely open up the Pandora's box of a general gateway units buff.



I'd like them to consider having warp-ins taking more and more time / taking additional damage the further you warp them from your warpgates. Still gives Protoss enough defensive options while heavily nerfing the offensive power of warpgates.

The current proposed changes to warp-ins definitely open up the Pandora's box of a general gateway units buff.I'd like them to consider having warp-ins taking more and more time / taking additional damage the further you warp them from your warpgates. Still gives Protoss enough defensive options while heavily nerfing the offensive power of warpgates.

Superbanana Profile Joined May 2014 2369 Posts #151 On November 10 2014 04:17 Squat wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 04:13 [PkF] Wire wrote:

On November 10 2014 03:49 Big J wrote:

On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income? That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?





I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.

The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.



For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.

The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400. I'm talking about the bases that have run out! Sorry if I've not been clear about that.The new base is of course not semi-useless. But the old Protoss base that has no mineral/gas left is. While old Zerg and Terran bases are still quite useful after they are outmined.For example if you compare Terran with Protoss, the Terran floats his CC to the next base when one base runs out. Hence the that base has an investment cost of 0.The Protoss builds a new Nexus. He has an investment cost of 400.



The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

The real problem is, with defensive warp-ins heavily nerfed, overcharge not hitting air, and no overhaul of gateway units in sight, Protoss lack of mobility will still make it horribly difficult for them to establish and defend 3+ bases. If you don't want every map to be have to be a Deadwing like so that Protoss can sustain their economy, I doubt you can take the game in that direction. I don't see the good sides of mining out quicker to be honest.

I'm a little concerned about P lack of ground based AA in this situation. Warping in stalkers against mutas harassment is going to be tantamount to suicide, and gateway units still suck in a straight fight. It's just how stupidly powerful a warp-in ability is, you can't make the actual units very good or it breaks the game. Hard nut to crack. I'm a little concerned about P lack of ground based AA in this situation. Warping in stalkers against mutas harassment is going to be tantamount to suicide, and gateway units still suck in a straight fight. It's just how stupidly powerful a warp-in ability is, you can't make the actual units very good or it breaks the game. Hard nut to crack.

If Stalkers are buffed, might as well split some with mutas on the field. But im wating for a robo unit that shoots air. If Stalkers are buffed, might as well split some with mutas on the field. But im wating for a robo unit that shoots air. In PvZ the zerg can make the situation spire out of control but protoss can adept to the situation.

Thieving Magpie Profile Blog Joined December 2012 United States 6752 Posts #152 On November 10 2014 03:29 blade55555 wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 02:33 Big J wrote:

Obviously 1500-->1000 change has quite some effects on balance. But what I want to mention in particular is that it favors Zerg and Terran over Protoss.

Disregarding whether you can actually take and defend the bases, when Terran runs out on a base they can reuse the CC by floating. When Zerg acquires a new base, they get another production facility. They might stop building macro bases when they have to build more hatcheries, but that's not a huge deal.

Protoss on the other hand gets to have a lot of semi-useless nexi. You don't want to pay 400/0/14 just for an extra chronoboost...



That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".



How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?









That has to be the worst excuse as a protoss how why you think Protoss gets the shaft because you have to make another nexus for another base? So why get an expansion then? With your logic getting a natural favors terran and zerg as well as you get a "semi-useless nexi".How is it even remotely useless? It gets you another base, it gets you more income?



He's not "wrong"



What he's saying is that more hatcheries for zerg means more production while more orbitals for terran means more mules/scans. (He's assuming of course that Terrans never make Planetaries)



Now, he's also assuming that Protoss can't fall back defensively to an old base and nexus cannon their army for safety. He's assuming that chronoboosts are useless in the late game (although I'll admit they're not as sexy)



So no, he's not "wrong" that the value of having excess Hathceries is much greater than the value of excess Nexi.



I just don't think his conclusion that this is a nerf to protoss is valid being that Zerg and Terran already produce proxy hatch/orbitals as the games progress and so currently have those buildings in todays metagame,they're just not as spread out and vulnerable. He's not "wrong"What he's saying is that more hatcheries for zerg means more production while more orbitals for terran means more mules/scans. (He's assuming of course that Terrans never make Planetaries)Now, he's also assuming that Protoss can't fall back defensively to an old base and nexus cannon their army for safety. He's assuming that chronoboosts are useless in the late game (although I'll admit they're not as sexy)So no, he's not "wrong" that the value of having excess Hathceries is much greater than the value of excess Nexi.I just don't think his conclusion that this is a nerf to protoss is valid being that Zerg and Terran already produce proxy hatch/orbitals as the games progress and so currently have those buildings in todays metagame,they're just not as spread out and vulnerable. Hark, what baseball through yonder window breaks?

eviltomahawk Profile Blog Joined August 2010 United States 11023 Posts #153 It would also be cool if Blizzard was more relaxed about their restrictions on resource placement on ladder maps. Instead of adhering to their 8 minerals 2 gas standard, let mapmakers be more creative with their resource placements. If they're good, implement them on ladder without the predictable Blizzard changes. Maybe eventually something better will come out of this. ㅇㅅㅌㅅ

[UoN]Sentinel Profile Blog Joined November 2009 United States 11241 Posts #154 On November 10 2014 04:51 eviltomahawk wrote:

It would also be cool if Blizzard was more relaxed about their restrictions on resource placement on ladder maps. Instead of adhering to their 8 minerals 2 gas standard, let mapmakers be more creative with their resource placements. If they're good, implement them on ladder without the predictable Blizzard changes. Maybe eventually something better will come out of this.

Is that a Blizz restriction? I miss the old mineral only nats of the early 2000s tbh Is that a Blizz restriction? I miss the old mineral only nats of the early 2000s tbh http://i.imgur.com/aRzS1zl.png | Après nous, le soleil

Uvantak Profile Blog Joined June 2011 Uruguay 1380 Posts #155









Because as a mapmaker i'm highly interested on the economic systems of StarCraft, i took a little time on working some extension mods out for you guys to try out, i have worked out the economic system of LotV from the information we got from David Kim's talk, and the BW economy system from the Starbow mod which is currently in use.



As it stands now, the SCBW system on my mod still needs more work to make the workers bounce more, if anyone wants to try out the full thing it is free to play the Starbow mod, i will keep working to find what's the parameter i need to modify to make the workers bounce more.



Both mods can be found as extension mods in the Custom games section, and can also be downloaded for anyone else that may want to use them for their own investigations.



I highly recommend trying them out, and comparing them, even if the SCBW one is still WiP.



I'll be ready to fix any bug, issue or feedback regarding the mods, just PM me or answer below. Because as a mapmaker i'm highly interested on the economic systems of StarCraft, i took a little time on working some extension mods out for you guys to try out, i have worked out the economic system of LotV from the information we got from David Kim's talk, and the BW economy system from the Starbow mod which is currently in use.As it stands now, the SCBW system on my mod still needs more work to make the workers bounce more, if anyone wants to try out the full thing it is free to play the Starbow mod, i will keep working to find what's the parameter i need to modify to make the workers bounce more.Both mods can be found as extension mods in the Custom games section, and can also be downloaded for anyone else that may want to use them for their own investigations.recommend trying them out, and comparing them, even if the SCBW one is still WiP.I'll be ready to fix any bug, issue or feedback regarding the mods, just PM me or answer below. @Kantuva | Mapmaker | KTVMaps.wordpress.com | Check my profile to see my TL map threads, and you can search for KTV in the Custom Games section to play them.

Thieving Magpie Profile Blog Joined December 2012 United States 6752 Posts #156 On November 10 2014 04:51 eviltomahawk wrote:

It would also be cool if Blizzard was more relaxed about their restrictions on resource placement on ladder maps. Instead of adhering to their 8 minerals 2 gas standard, let mapmakers be more creative with their resource placements. If they're good, implement them on ladder without the predictable Blizzard changes. Maybe eventually something better will come out of this.



There's no reason all expansions past the natural have 2 geysers when 1 gold geyser would suffice.



Heck, there's no reason why the FAR expansions should have 8 norm patches when 4 gold patches would suffice. There's no reason all expansions past the natural have 2 geysers when 1 gold geyser would suffice.Heck, there's no reason why the FAR expansions should have 8 norm patches when 4 gold patches would suffice. Hark, what baseball through yonder window breaks?

Thieving Magpie Profile Blog Joined December 2012 United States 6752 Posts #157 On November 10 2014 05:36 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 04:51 eviltomahawk wrote:

It would also be cool if Blizzard was more relaxed about their restrictions on resource placement on ladder maps. Instead of adhering to their 8 minerals 2 gas standard, let mapmakers be more creative with their resource placements. If they're good, implement them on ladder without the predictable Blizzard changes. Maybe eventually something better will come out of this.

Is that a Blizz restriction? I miss the old mineral only nats of the early 2000s tbh Is that a Blizz restriction? I miss the old mineral only nats of the early 2000s tbh



Original Blizz ladder maps followed the format of



Main => Natural => Min only/Gas only => Islands Original Blizz ladder maps followed the format ofMain => Natural => Min only/Gas only => Islands Hark, what baseball through yonder window breaks?

Plexa Profile Blog Joined October 2005 Aotearoa 38208 Posts #158 On November 10 2014 02:39 Falling wrote:

Haha. Well one thing is for sure, and that is the 1500 to 1000 mineral change is NOT designed for casual play. The casuals, who I convince to play BW lans on occasion, typically hate having mining bases run out. I've found a compromise where I modify all the starting mains to have tons of minerals, but all the other expansions have a normal amount (And gas is always normal.) Dropping minerals down to 1000 puts the casual on a very uncomfortable time clock.

This is actually a good point. Needing to expand was one of the reasons that money maps were a big success in BW (i.e. you didn't need to expand) This is actually a good point. Needing to expand was one of the reasons that money maps were a big success in BW (i.e. you didn't need to expand) Administrator ~ Spirit will set you free ~

[PkF] Wire Profile Joined March 2013 France 22019 Posts #159 On November 10 2014 06:08 Plexa wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 10 2014 02:39 Falling wrote:

Haha. Well one thing is for sure, and that is the 1500 to 1000 mineral change is NOT designed for casual play. The casuals, who I convince to play BW lans on occasion, typically hate having mining bases run out. I've found a compromise where I modify all the starting mains to have tons of minerals, but all the other expansions have a normal amount (And gas is always normal.) Dropping minerals down to 1000 puts the casual on a very uncomfortable time clock.

This is actually a good point. Needing to expand was one of the reasons that money maps were a big success in BW (i.e. you didn't need to expand) This is actually a good point. Needing to expand was one of the reasons that money maps were a big success in BW (i.e. you didn't need to expand)



Yeah the need to expand is not the same thing as the incentive to expand. If every race needs badly to expand, it's just the same on a different economy rate. Expanding should be rewarded, not needed. Yeah theto expand is not the same thing as theto expand. If every race needs badly to expand, it's just the same on a different economy rate. Expanding should be rewarded, not needed.

Orzabal Profile Joined December 2009 France 285 Posts #160 Each mule should cost one supply so you cant call down 10 mule at a time.





Prev 1 6 7 8 9 10 31 Next All