| 1 |
[quote]Asymmetry height maps are one thing. Asymmetry metal maps are something else entirely. [/quote]Lets say we have a whole map that is sloped. I start on the higher end of the slope while you start on the lower end. Now my units can reach your base faster than your units can reach my base because your units are slowed down when they are moving upwards. Units that gain longer range when they are higher up than their target like Hammers also give me an advantage on my side.
|
1 |
[quote]Asymmetry height maps are one thing. Asymmetry metal maps are something else entirely. [/quote]Lets say we have a whole map that is sloped. I start on the higher end of the slope while you start on the lower end. Now my units can reach your base faster than your units can reach my base because your units are slowed down when they are moving upwards. Units that gain longer range when they are higher up than their target like Hammers also give me an advantage on my side.
|
| 2 |
You can clearly see that I get an advantage from starting on the higher end of the slope.
|
2 |
You can clearly see that I get an advantage from starting on the higher end of the slope.
|
| 3 |
Now what if you get more metal on your side to compensate for fighting an uphill battle?
|
3 |
Now what if you get more metal on your side to compensate for fighting an uphill battle?
|
| 4 |
At
some
point
depending
on
the
the
amount
of
extra
metal
income
that
you
can
easily
claim
for
yours
will
balance
my
high
ground
advantage.
|
4 |
At
some
point,
depending
on
the
the
amount
of
extra
metal
income
that
you
can
easily
claim
for
yours,
it
will
balance
my
high
ground
advantage.
|
| 5 |
\n
|
5 |
\n
|
| 6 |
Terrain advantages and resource distributions are not separate entities for balancing a map.
|
6 |
Terrain advantages and resource distributions are not separate entities for balancing a map.
|
Archers valley in the next tourney round