New PTE build up

I could dig random generated maps with mirroring.

Then again, that is because I grow weary of Zaphod and Duellist systems. I also don't personally find them entirely balanced. This competitive stuff isn't all I was told it was lol.

It never is.

ofc not, but if the maps are generated by a computer it is much easier to generate balanced maps if they are symmetrical. Even HUMANS have huge troubles of building balanced asymmetrical maps.
Going "an unbalanced game isn't too bad" basically means "it is okay if one player in a competitive game has a disadvantage from the start based on a dicerole".
No it is not.

I cannot envisage a situation in which getting randomly fucked over would be fun in a competitive game.

What he means is less simple than that.

Essentially, the idea that you really don't know what you are walking into. Not the idea of it not being fair.

So let me get this straight.

Basically, it's ok to get fucked over, as long as you don't know you're going to get fucked over before hand.

I don't exactly find it enjoyable to spawn in the middle of a forest, or in the middle of some random mountains with nowhere to build. Just because my opponent spawns the same way doesn't make it any less dumb.

It's not about getting ****ed over. It's about things being fair without the need for symmetrical maps. The maps don't have to be symmetrical for them to be fair.

I agree. However, assymetry does not equal randomness. This is a false dichotomy and an over reaching assumption.

That is true, an asymmetrical map can be purposely made, it doesn't have to be randomly generated. But I still prefer asymmetrical randomly generated maps.

You (again) completely missed what I said.

Let me lay it out in terms you can understand. (oh God he's being condescending again)

Players should adapt to the map when it is presented at the beginning of the game.
Set ranked maps make this completely null and void. Randomly generated symmetrical maps with symmetrical spawns for each side keep it fair, while also keeping the element of adaptation. They also keep the initial discovery and intel phase (which is a bit unique among RTS games, from my understanding).

If we could get some sort of algorithm that can make asymmetrical maps fair, I'd use that instead of symmetrical maps. Not because I want a 50-50 chance of getting shot in the ***, but because it's fun. It's fun to be scrambling to out-think your opponent on a playing board neither of you have seen before. Not out-maneuver. Not out-micro.

Mind you, that algorithm would (probably) have to be self-aware before achieving the desired result while still keeping the random factor.

No, you seem to have missed what i said.

Spawn in teh middle of some mountains or some forest with no build space? Map geometry that makes pathing an absolute nightmare?

Adapt? Sure. Fun? no.

.....Dude. You are making mincemeat of one the basic assumptions here:

The spawn system won't give you TWO of those. You'll have at least one viable choice.

Uber is constantly improving their spawning mechanism. It isn't perfect, but I think it will get a sight better than it is now before this is all said and done.

So you want purely random maps, but you're ok with imposing design assumptions about what the map will and will not give you.

Sounds familiar... Oh that's right, custom designed maps.

Also, how are you so confident the spawn system won't give you two of them? Do you control RNG or predict the future? And if it won't give you two, why give you one in the first place?

In Top level gameplay 1 or 2 more mex near you (read in your base) can win you the game as they are much less suseptible to get killed off in a raid. Take a look at Capital N. The most balanced A-symmetric map on the PAstats ladder. Both spawns have around the same metal. 1 spawn has its metal more spread out and the other more in a cluster. The one in the Cluster is favored by far because it is really easy to defend. The other spawn is really suseptible to raiding.

The diffrence is minor and non existant in low to normal play. But in Top Level play that minor diffrence can cost you the game.

This, in my opinion, is ridiculous. The balance should favor a slower developing strategy (like SupCom does) but still allow for early raiding at the cost of later development.

Right now, that just isn't true. And it's a little sad, imho. Little thought is given to the actual game and exploring edge strats. Rather, most thought is given to slightly modifying the existing *winning* strats (this meta, that means one fab or two fab or three fab).

I'm not assuming ANYTHING about the map other than the spawns are fair.
There are multiple ways to accomplish this task. All of them involve having a competent Spawning algorithm in the code.

For me, dealing with a random situations makes matches much more dynamic and it should be the strength of a good player to deal with random surroundings and not by hitting the same "three" possible build orders out as fast as you keyboard allows you to do all the time.

Age of Empires 2 also has randomly generated maps and after Starcraft it's THE rts game. So I don't see that there is a " pure must be" of symmetrical maps. I can agree on the point the right now PA really can **** up your start, which is unfair. But the way to go should be that there is a balanced number of x metal spots in the starting area for each player (maybe even extent this by a buffer zone around the start with y metal). [Another possibility would be to sum the average distance to the x (maybe 5-10) closest metal spots which should be the same to both players]. But like stated, total symmetry is neither fun to watch nor challenging to play (in my opinion).

I'd even would go so far to assume that strong players that having slightly worse starting positions have still good chance to win because they play much more daring. Just watch some matches from zeroempires or so.

I have to admit though, that I'm more of a consumer of casted matches, than being the uber pro in playing myself, but still liked to share my opinion on the topic.

Im honored you think my map is the most balanced Battlebear. I actually want to fix the problem you said right now but i can't once i touch it i probably destroy more then i can add.

I Agree to certain extend with you, But with this post I only want to remind you that the game is really new. It just hatched its egg, Not all mechanics are even in the game. Balance needs too develope over time and takes a LONG time to get right and I know you know it. I agree a balance pass in the near future would be very much appreciated. However your near perfect balance might only come around in a few years from now.

End of this week we get ranked matches and that will give Uber a lot of data in which they can experiment. 100 games are not enough leverage to force a balance change. A 100o games is getting closer. Preferably you want as many as you can get. (And yes, Its been a while now since the last balance pass so a shitton of games have been played and thus a balance pass is, IMO, reasonable in the near future.)

Copy / Paste and work on the copy keeping the system how it is original. Save it as a test and go forth.. Nothing to worry about

Lol thats how i make every system, it costs lots of time. But this one has positive feedback and looks pretty balanced so i don't want to change something that might not need changing.