3 ms·

Imagine how extremely frustrating it would be to have a bad base position in comparison to your enemy, or your enemy having an island-like terrain when you buil

• oneweekwonder 9y ago
  True. But I was thinking in the context of sc where the maps is normally mirrors of each other. So you will still have a good idea where the guy spawn. But your now forced to scout to see where to take engagements and not.
  • RepressedEmu 9y ago
    Procedurally generated but still symmetrical maps would actually be really interesting. It would be like having a new battleground to explore every match without giving an advantage to either side.
    • kilburn 9y ago
      Symmetry is not the only map characteristic that gives advantages to one race over another. Terran is really good at sieging, Zerg is good at expanding early, Protoss is very bad at defending open bases, etc.. The pro-played maps are carefully designed to balance all that, and when they fail the players themselves limit their strategies according to what works and what doesn't on each map. The players even get to choose which maps they'll play (by eliminating some map if they feel it's unfair) and in which order...
      • RepressedEmu 9y ago
        I understand the mechanics of the different races(Zerg for life) and you're right that it would completely remove the current "map selection meta" which I would consider as an important strategic part of the series games.
  • tudelo 9y ago
    I understand what you're saying, but you will also have to realize that SC2 strategies are map and race specific. If you add in randomized maps... it really takes out a dimension of the game. It adds another dimension as well, of course, but that is just randomness.