Build Orders

[aubergine]

I see your build order template is also up...

Is splitting out "Transitions" and "Adaptations" overkill? Aren't they the same sort of thing?

"Countered by" and "Countered to" sound a bit confusing? For example, would they be better worded as "Effective against" and "Vulnerable to"? Also, is defining "hard" and "soft" perhaps overkill? Would it be better to just have a bullet list and state that items are ordered from certain to uncertain?

For "Map Control" would it be best to start with a description of which maps the order is useful on, and then have two lists of examples "Ideal maps to use it on" and "Avoid using it on these maps"?

[Nameless]

Well, on my wiki I was thinking of adapting it anyway - so while you're guide will be aimed more at players, I might try creating a parallel version that is more aimed at AI developers, for example linking to relevant API features or providing code samples, etc. What do you think?

I think thats a great idea, especially when you consider that the new AI developer may not have a strong grasp or full(er) understanding of WZ dynamics. With the combination of both our wikis, or rather your wiki and my.. thing.. we could at least pave the way for a foundation from which to build on.

Ah so you saw the preliminary version.. read it again

I see your build order template is also up...

Is splitting out "Transitions" and "Adaptations" overkill? Aren't they the same sort of thing?

The 'Transition' section is more of a build-to-build idea i.e.; complete one build then proceed to the next. In the SC world there exist some builds that aren't 'complete' as in their primary purpose isn't leave a player with a situation from which to work from but rather to form the basis of other builds that share a similar beginning. Did that even make sense?

The 'Adaptation' section outlines any potential actions that the player may take. For example, let's say a player begins a build that takes him along the tech-line "X" with a huge economic boost. This section may outline such things as "because this build takes time to develop; you may want build so-and-no units to combat any enemy incursions at so-and-so point."

"Countered by" and "Countered to" sound a bit confusing? For example, would they be better worded as "Effective against" and "Vulnerable to"? Also, is defining "hard" and "soft" perhaps overkill? Would it be better to just have a bullet list and state that items are ordered from certain to uncertain?

The hard and soft sections are optional and perhaps a bit open to interpretation, but it's there for those who like such things . Ideally, a good description of what could happen should be sufficient.

For "Map Control" would it be best to start with a description of which maps the order is useful on, and then have two lists of examples "Ideal maps to use it on" and "Avoid using it on these maps"?

Ideally, just a description of what kind of maps the build would work on or fail would suffice, but the subsections are there for those who like such things. The "Strongest Against" just means "Ideal maps to use it on" and "Weak Against" just means "Avoid using it on these maps" but with a strong sense of open-interpretation whether it be a list or a description.

[Nameless]

New developments!

Read here at; viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10343.