Ok, after having a glance over a great many maps in the past 2 hours, i have some things i would like to share with the map making community.
First of all, for those that do not know me, i am, also, a map maker. I love brood war, and i love making maps. I also know that it can be a damn hard thing to do. I spend more time on my maps than the typical map maker (i think) with all of my released maps taking between 14 and 26 hours to complete. I know it can be a bitch.
However, i have some things i would like to impress upon you.
1) STOP USING MINERAL WALLS. IT WAS A GOOD IDEA ONCE. MAYBE TWICE. BUT THE IDEA IS FINISHED. On the occaisonal map, it might really be quite the thing to top off the map, but if that is the case, all of you, so far, have failed to realize that moment. Since the making of Coulee, i have not enjoyed a single mineral wall.
2) Before incorporating new unique ideas into your map, think about the strategy aspect of this game before making your final decision. Your thought process cannot only consist of 'oh this is cool and has never been seen before, im going to do it!'. New unique ideas are a fundamental of map making, but only because they improve strategical gameplay. If your new fancy idea is not balanced for all 3 races, its a bad idea.
3) When you do come across a good/new idea, do not exploit it to the point of excess! And do not exploit your map by making every feature on it a new idea! You need classic straight forward elements on your map to make it playable. If you do not have 1 spot on the map that is open, and covetted for strategical reasons, you're going to have a boring map!
4) Free expansions are not all they're cracked up to be. I'm not talking about natural expo's that need defense. I'm talking about free-expo-behind-the-base-like-bladestorm-make-me-gag expansions. Again there are exceptions to the rule, but these exceptions are so rare that i'm really reluctant to even mention that there are exceptions at all. Unless that free expo behind your main adds a fun and/or necessary element to the gameplaydo not bother.
5) Double, Triple, and Quadrouple choke points make me want to choke. I am shocked and appalled at how many choke points people feel are neccessary to make their map whatever it is they're feeling it should be. I've come across more than 1 too many maps today where they have a mainbase - chokepoint - expansion - choke point - 2nd nat - chokepoint - middle of the map - 4 exitting choke points. Do i really need to explain this one?
6) If you are going to have a single path leading to an expansion, do not make any more expansions along that same path. Taking an expansion should be it's own reward. You do not need to give a 2nd and/or 3rd expansion to that player for free after taking the first one. hello?
Thats all i have to gripe about at the moment. Not all map makers fall into this category, and if you don't, good on you. Keep up your map making. And to the rest of you who do fall into this category, just try to spend a little more thought and/or time on your map(s). Try to take a look at the most popular maps, and figure out why they are popular. You do not need to (and should not) make clones of these maps, but by figuring out fun aspects of the map/game, you can incorporate your own ideas around those concepts.
Good luck to all in your future map making endeavours. Especially to those contestants in the BlizzCon contest. (i did not submit a map).
Imbroglio of Mishap is, although it has a gay name (:D), the best map I've seen in a very long time. Map makers, take these tips for granted, this guy knows how to make a good map
On August 15 2005 12:57 Carnac wrote: i think that for example the mineral blockades on neo forte add a good strategical element...
Agreed. I love that they are only "pathway-thinning-strips" rather than complete blocks. It allows cool stuff like toss early expo PvZ, where you can block up the hole entirely and rather than that being a dead giveaway for sair/reaver you can eat away at one or 2 patches a little later and let the army you've massed with your 7 gate break out without killing your own buildings, etc. Or if you're contained you can chew out the mineral block and give yourself a larger area to break out from.
I'd like to add that Mora has been an essential part, along with Bill, for the creation of 2 of my maps which made league map pools. My newest map, Barren Realm fuckin ownz tho and needed no mora help (just joking). I'm gonna talk to mora about it later and fix it up some even tho a shittier version was submitted to blizzcon.'
btw mora, the map i submitted to blizzcon had a couple faults i didnt realize, I fixed them an resbumitted =\
i want the stupid git to get hit by a bus for stealing my name. 'Verisimilitude' is patented by none other than myself. It is my favourite word and i have been saving it for a map that really suits the name. But he used it first. And the map does not suit the name whatsoever. And for some reason i think i've seen the map before, which means the little bugger knows me, and heard the word from me in the first place.
I think my wish may have been a little off-kilter.
1) agree, we had enough mineral walls for a century. mineral blocks preventing terrans from taking fly-only expands should be used with care, too. 2) Imo, you just need to try. If your map is imbalanced because of a new feature (and it really is, not just a few tankophobics crying because you can hit something from somewhere with tanks or anything), you and others might learn from it for their next map. It is not like every map ever made will get serious playing exposure anyway. 3) Maps should allow more than one strategy, therefore you need certain spots where one strategy has an advantage, and others where other strategies are preferable. agree. 4) I agree. Free expansions kill gameplay imo, you. It is not fancy anymore. 5)It depends on the map, but having more than one choke point might help balance some matchups. Do you have any example for a map with a lot of choke points following each other? Can't think of any. 6) you mean like on azalea? It is quite annoying, but good map makers don't do that very often imo.
The thing with mineral blocks (with a significant number of minerals) is that although you introduce a new element into the gameplay -- the decision of whether or not to mine it away -- you also take away elements from the gameplay by restricting when and how that path can be used. Forcing a player to mine it away first can greatly restrict the times and situations in a game when that pathway can be mined clear advantageously. So ultimately it might be better to just leave the pathway open and allow players to utilize it freely at any point in the game.
With smaller mineral blocks (e.g. 8 or 16 mins per patch), you have to ask yourself: are there any significant benefits to leaving these paths closed? If not, then why should you force players to waste time mining away the blocks, time that they could otherwise spend harassing their opponent or doing something fun.
Just because a player has a choice of whether and when to open a path, doesn't necessarily mean the map is going to have a greater depth of gameplay, or encourage more creativity, or be more fun to play.
That may be true Bill, but it's like anything else. If overused it becomes annoying, but used properly it adds something new and cool to the map that wouldn't be there otherwise.
On August 15 2005 13:53 Teroru wrote: Verisimilitude is actually a pretty good map.
i want the stupid git to get hit by a bus for stealing my name. 'Verisimilitude' is patented by none other than myself. It is my favourite word and i have been saving it for a map that really suits the name. But he used it first. And the map does not suit the name whatsoever. And for some reason i think i've seen the map before, which means the little bugger knows me, and heard the word from me in the first place.
I think my wish may have been a little off-kilter.
I hope u get hit by a bus. Twice.
.
I feel hated T.T... for using a cool word for my map name -_- that actually has a cool meaning.
Ok, here is the deal. I have no personal issue with You, and therefore i will try to be as factual as possible although i believe this to be the most bullying post ive read in a long time. You make some good points, although some of the statements are not for you to decide, but to post an article like this and simply stomping on everyones creations since they don't exactly fit Your taste, that's not very nice. I am in no position right now to review any of Your maps for creativity and gameplay, I have only my own opinions which i'll keep to myself. And therefore i humbly ask of You -and the rest of this community- who has tested a permillage of the maps posted here to do the same unless there is actually some -useful- critique included.
Teroru.. i think we dont make maps for you? Or do we?
I think map making is some kind of art and everyone has their own styles and ideas. You can't say what is wrong and what is right. "DONT MAKE FAST EXPOS PvZ ANYMORE IT'S USED!!!" If u really know how to make maps then send ur own map to blizz. And the last thing. It doesn't mean shit if u make ur map in 50 hours or in 5 hours. You can make good and balanced map in 5 hours. Ofcourse good map needs lots of testing but u can pass that by thinking before you start to make ur map.
1) u should say DONT ABUSE MIN WALLS, by forbiddening min walls cuz its an old idea u should forbidden every choke too. its has become kind of a standard element which just shouldnt be used too much.
2) balance is a relative issue, its related to variosity of discovered strategies and SKILL, above all. Unfortunatly i dont know any other maps than LT, LUNA, NOS which claimed to be nearly-perfect balanced in nearly-all skill-levels, and all those are old-old-old maps. I personally think that now after 7 years its impossible to create a revolutioning map which isnt imba, and so a mappool of a tournament should contain both standard-macro maps and new maps favouring each sides.
On August 16 2005 06:11 GrooVe wrote: Teroru.. i think we dont make maps for you? Or do we?
I think map making is some kind of art and everyone has their own styles and ideas. You can't say what is wrong and what is right. "DONT MAKE FAST EXPOS PvZ ANYMORE IT'S USED!!!" If u really know how to make maps then send ur own map to blizz. And the last thing. It doesn't mean shit if u make ur map in 50 hours or in 5 hours. You can make good and balanced map in 5 hours. Ofcourse good map needs lots of testing but u can pass that by thinking before you start to make ur map.
On August 16 2005 02:06 Starparty wrote: Ok, here is the deal. I have no personal issue with You, and therefore i will try to be as factual as possible although i believe this to be the most bullying post ive read in a long time. You make some good points, although some of the statements are not for you to decide, but to post an article like this and simply stomping on everyones creations since they don't exactly fit Your taste, that's not very nice. I am in no position right now to review any of Your maps for creativity and gameplay, I have only my own opinions which i'll keep to myself. And therefore i humbly ask of You -and the rest of this community- who has tested a permillage of the maps posted here to do the same unless there is actually some -useful- critique included.
First of all, the post was made half in jest. Please don't take it too seriously. Second of all, they are only guidelines, not criticisms or rules, and they aren't set in stone. I thought i made that fairly clear though where in each point i said 'there are exceptions to the rule'. You can disagree with me all you want, but when your (or someone elses map) doesn't win in a contest, and you've violated some of the afore mentioned guidelines, don't bother wondering why.
I'm not sure what exactly your goal is when you make a map. Every map i make and release i expect to be played hundreds of times by hundreds of different players. Every single map. I don't just sit down and throw all of my ideas into a map, and show it to the community, and let it die out. If that is someones intention, all the power to them, for violating most of the guidelines will result in exactly that. (Again, i feel that you might take my point too literally, so i will just make it absolutely fucking clear that broken guidelines can still exist in a good map. The more guidelines you break while managing to keep your map a quality one the better your map will be).
As for reviewing my maps, feel free to do so. Infact, i encourage you to do so. I have always encouraged the community to offer there critique, and can do so as harshly as they want. I put a great deal of thought, effort, and time into my maps. A negative critique can either be 1) accurate, and will help me improve my map or 2) be inaccurate, and prove my map to be all the better. More importantly, the highest tiered players outside of korea like my maps and consider them balanced. For every 1 player (at their level) who dislikes my map, there are 9 who love it. The exception would be Umbra Locus, as i went 'outside the box' and tried to incorporate some really new concepts to the map. They were embraced less so than my other maps.
When i invented the mineral wall, i didn't expect it to become a staple of map making. It was my hope, at that time, that people would see "oh! you can think up new ideas that will really add to the gameplay!" and would be inspired to do so themselves. Oops, my bad. As i said before, sometimes mineral walls really add to the map, but i have so far not seen a map utilize it do so. So far, every mineral wall is used to be 'quirky', and in my opinion, detracts from the gameplay. On Coulee, the mineral wall had the potential to change an island map to a land map. It added a drastic element to the map. Not only did it make for unique gameplay, but it also helped to balance an island map for zerg.
It's a shame that you do not consider my critique useful. Believe it or not, it was not my intention to be anything but helpful. I thought i could do it in a way that was fun to read, and would make people smile at the same time. It saddens me that you took it for 'bullying'.
On August 16 2005 06:11 GrooVe wrote: Teroru.. i think we dont make maps for you? Or do we?
I think map making is some kind of art and everyone has their own styles and ideas. You can't say what is wrong and what is right. "DONT MAKE FAST EXPOS PvZ ANYMORE IT'S USED!!!" If u really know how to make maps then send ur own map to blizz. And the last thing. It doesn't mean shit if u make ur map in 50 hours or in 5 hours. You can make good and balanced map in 5 hours. Ofcourse good map needs lots of testing but u can pass that by thinking before you start to make ur map.
Im sorry if i have used same words as u before.
Hello? Mora and Bill307 were on blizzard's map staff for the Mystery map invitational. Mora won the WGT map contest. You have no room to challenge him by saying "if you really know how to make maps send one in"
On August 16 2005 06:11 GrooVe wrote: Teroru.. i think we dont make maps for you? Or do we?
I think map making is some kind of art and everyone has their own styles and ideas. You can't say what is wrong and what is right. "DONT MAKE FAST EXPOS PvZ ANYMORE IT'S USED!!!" If u really know how to make maps then send ur own map to blizz. And the last thing. It doesn't mean shit if u make ur map in 50 hours or in 5 hours. You can make good and balanced map in 5 hours. Ofcourse good map needs lots of testing but u can pass that by thinking before you start to make ur map.
Im sorry if i have used same words as u before.
You are absolutely correct. I cannot tell any map maker out there what is or is not right and wrong. I can, however, tell them what will and will not be successful in the community at large. Both as an experienced map maker, and a relatively high skilled player.
If u really know how to make maps then send ur own map to blizz
I do feel i know how to make maps. And i have done 3 projects for blizzard thus far, so apparently they think so too.
I did not suggest that anyone spend any amount of time on a map, nor will i now. You can spend as much or as little time on ur maps as you want. I couldn't care any less. That was not a guideline, and i have no desire to make it one.
On August 16 2005 07:34 NeVeRDiEDrOnE wrote: good points, but i think
1) u should say DONT ABUSE MIN WALLS, by forbiddening min walls cuz its an old idea u should forbidden every choke too. its has become kind of a standard element which just shouldnt be used too much.
2) balance is a relative issue, its related to variosity of discovered strategies and SKILL, above all. Unfortunatly i dont know any other maps than LT, LUNA, NOS which claimed to be nearly-perfect balanced in nearly-all skill-levels, and all those are old-old-old maps. I personally think that now after 7 years its impossible to create a revolutioning map which isnt imba, and so a mappool of a tournament should contain both standard-macro maps and new maps favouring each sides.
thx for the tips though
I did not forbid mineral walls. I said 'stop using them' because every map i have seen so far has not used them well. I mentioned in my first point in my first post that there very well might be another 'perfect moment' for a mineral wall. Feel free to find that moment. It's sort of like a fast expansion protoss being countered by a 4hatch hydra rush. There is a very brief moment where the zerg can come in and kill the protoss 5 seconds before his storm is finished researching. But if you happen to be wrong, and the protoss does have storm, you have missed your moment and the game is over. Unfortunately for map makers, 4hatch hydra rushers have a far higher success rate than map makers do with their mineral walls, and hence my 1st point and guideline.
While you may think it impossible to create a well balanced map after such a long time, i think you are very much wrong. Every map maker should be aimed at balancing the map as best they can, and i believe that with some time, thought, and testing, relative balance (if not perfect balance) can be achieved.
On August 16 2005 06:11 GrooVe wrote: You can make good and balanced map in 5 hours.
You can also win the lottery with just 1 ticket.
Actually 5 hours is plausible for the initial design and first draft stages (i.e. no decoration, no playtesting, and no mineral/gas testing), assuming the map is simple (e.g. no ramps to balance) and doesn't introduce any particularly new ideas. Enmity was a 5-hour map because it was very simple, didn't try anything too new/risky, and was easy to symmetrize (if that's a word). In contrast, Counterpoint took at least 15 hours, mainly because it was VERY difficult to symmetrize. And if you look at the jpeg, you can see that even after 15+ hours of work, it still came out blatantly skewed. The nat areas were particularly troublesome: those were easily 4-5 hours of work right there. In the future, I doubt if I'll ever design another map with the same ideas behind Counterpoint because it's just so damn hard to make it positionally fair.
Of course none of those numbers take into account the time needed to test mineral formations, test wallins, and to do a good job of decorating the place. On my three maps combined I'd say I spent about 15-20 hours decorating them, and it really shows in-game where nearly every screen has various doodads and stuff on it. Ironically, a lot of people seem to praise maps that have a nice design on the jpeg, when ultimately the players or observers themselves will never see more than a screen at a time. But I have never in my life seen a comment on any map about the level of screen-by-screen decoration that it has. Ever. Unless I gave one, which is unlikely because I rarely see it in other people's maps. I mean obviously it's not as important as balance and gameplay, but considering the (utterly ridiculous) amount of attention attractive jpeg designs receive, you'd think that BW-level decoration would be given at least a sliver of attention.
Anyway, I think the point Mora was trying to make is that mapmakers generally need to spend more time working on their maps. In particular, a) they need to spend more time analysing the balance of their map, and b) they need to spend more time balancing their map positionally
If people want to make remarkable maps, then they need to hold themselves to higher standards and be willing to invest a lot of time into their creations. If I tried to throw together a new map using a new idea in just a few hours, I can almost guarantee that it would suck, just like I can almost guarantee that 1 lottery ticket won't win you the jackpot. Heck, maybe one of the main reasons why Mora and I are so successful is because we just spend a lot more time on our maps than the average mapmaker.
And, we don't release a new map for every single new idea we get, which I think is another common problem for young mapmakers. It's harsh, but sometimes you just gotta face yourself (or your enthusiastic friend) and say, "I'm sorry, but this idea is not going to work."
On my three maps combined I'd say I spent about 15-20 hours decorating them, and it really shows in-game where nearly every screen has various doodads and stuff on it. Ironically, a lot of people seem to praise maps that have a nice design on the jpeg, when ultimately the players or observers themselves will never see more than a screen at a time. But I have never in my life seen a comment on any map about the level of screen-by-screen decoration that it has. Ever. Unless I gave one, which is unlikely because I rarely see it in other people's maps. I mean obviously it's not as important as balance and gameplay, but considering the (utterly ridiculous) amount of attention attractive jpeg designs receive, you'd think that BW-level decoration would be given at least a sliver of attention.
alot of the tilesets dont have nearly the same number of usable doodads for decoration as jungle does. when i was making the maps i submitted to blizzcon, i had a lot of trouble because i used space for one, and twilight for the other, and both of them have almost no doodads that obstruct unit paths, so I was forced to place them near the edges and in places where it wouldnt frustrate the player.
do you have any suggestions as to how to decorate maps on other tilesets that have very few decorative resources (such as the ash tileset, which only has like 8 doodads) or tilesets that have no doodads that are walkable?
On August 16 2005 05:59 Djin)Xuul( wrote: Teroru is totaly right... once i critizised u with the same arguments Starparty, but u didnt want to listen... u just felt personally attacked :/
the most usermaps are really shitty and short excursions at staredit tell me: "playing that map is a waste of time"
several months ago we had a mapcontest at broodwar.de where i took part at the jury... many many maps were sent in and 90% of them were total crap
most mapmakers should rly read those suggestions of Teroru and take critics seriously
Xuul, im glad you posted this, because this is the first time you got through to me (no im NOT sarcastic). this post is excelent and made me understand exactly what your point were. Couldnt you said this before instead of tons of random "this map is crap", "this map sux" without any motivation. Then we could have had this argument along time ago instead of now.
The problem with terorus article here is that he actually doesn't give any suggestions at all. he is only putting up "rules" as i was very very very flamed for trying to do when I saw a bunch of totally unplayable maps. Mapmaking is atleast 50% artistic freedom too, and saying that something is right or wrong when ultimately noone cares anyway just creates a bunch of angry kids, including me. Nothing else. Making maps is a personal hobby of mine and I will make maps the way i want, cause noone here or anywhere else will ever care anyway.
On August 16 2005 02:06 Starparty wrote: Ok, here is the deal. I have no personal issue with You, and therefore i will try to be as factual as possible although i believe this to be the most bullying post ive read in a long time. You make some good points, although some of the statements are not for you to decide, but to post an article like this and simply stomping on everyones creations since they don't exactly fit Your taste, that's not very nice. I am in no position right now to review any of Your maps for creativity and gameplay, I have only my own opinions which i'll keep to myself. And therefore i humbly ask of You -and the rest of this community- who has tested a permillage of the maps posted here to do the same unless there is actually some -useful- critique included.
First of all, the post was made half in jest. Please don't take it too seriously. Second of all, they are only guidelines, not criticisms or rules, and they aren't set in stone. I thought i made that fairly clear though where in each point i said 'there are exceptions to the rule'. You can disagree with me all you want, but when your (or someone elses map) doesn't win in a contest, and you've violated some of the afore mentioned guidelines, don't bother wondering why.
I'm not sure what exactly your goal is when you make a map. Every map i make and release i expect to be played hundreds of times by hundreds of different players. Every single map. I don't just sit down and throw all of my ideas into a map, and show it to the community, and let it die out. If that is someones intention, all the power to them, for violating most of the guidelines will result in exactly that. (Again, i feel that you might take my point too literally, so i will just make it absolutely fucking clear that broken guidelines can still exist in a good map. The more guidelines you break while managing to keep your map a quality one the better your map will be).
As for reviewing my maps, feel free to do so. Infact, i encourage you to do so. I have always encouraged the community to offer there critique, and can do so as harshly as they want. I put a great deal of thought, effort, and time into my maps. A negative critique can either be 1) accurate, and will help me improve my map or 2) be inaccurate, and prove my map to be all the better. More importantly, the highest tiered players outside of korea like my maps and consider them balanced. For every 1 player (at their level) who dislikes my map, there are 9 who love it. The exception would be Umbra Locus, as i went 'outside the box' and tried to incorporate some really new concepts to the map. They were embraced less so than my other maps.
When i invented the mineral wall, i didn't expect it to become a staple of map making. It was my hope, at that time, that people would see "oh! you can think up new ideas that will really add to the gameplay!" and would be inspired to do so themselves. Oops, my bad. As i said before, sometimes mineral walls really add to the map, but i have so far not seen a map utilize it do so. So far, every mineral wall is used to be 'quirky', and in my opinion, detracts from the gameplay. On Coulee, the mineral wall had the potential to change an island map to a land map. It added a drastic element to the map. Not only did it make for unique gameplay, but it also helped to balance an island map for zerg.
It's a shame that you do not consider my critique useful. Believe it or not, it was not my intention to be anything but helpful. I thought i could do it in a way that was fun to read, and would make people smile at the same time. It saddens me that you took it for 'bullying'.
Know that i have the outmost respect for your smooth tounge! This post adds what the article lacked. I still will not agree with You, but then again you are free to think whatever You want. Mapmaking to me is artistic freedom. No user map will be used for a greater purpose unless you have some "powerful friends". Since i currently don't I will make maps for myself, and they will look exactly they way I want. I have no reason to make them unplayable just because of that.
I actually have no reason to believe that you were pecking on me anyway so i have no idea why im arguing at all.
On August 16 2005 06:11 GrooVe wrote: You can make good and balanced map in 5 hours.
You can also win the lottery with just 1 ticket.
Actually 5 hours is plausible for the initial design and first draft stages (i.e. no decoration, no playtesting, and no mineral/gas testing), assuming the map is simple (e.g. no ramps to balance) and doesn't introduce any particularly new ideas. Enmity was a 5-hour map because it was very simple, didn't try anything too new/risky, and was easy to symmetrize (if that's a word). In contrast, Counterpoint took at least 15 hours, mainly because it was VERY difficult to symmetrize. And if you look at the jpeg, you can see that even after 15+ hours of work, it still came out blatantly skewed. The nat areas were particularly troublesome: those were easily 4-5 hours of work right there. In the future, I doubt if I'll ever design another map with the same ideas behind Counterpoint because it's just so damn hard to make it positionally fair.
Of course none of those numbers take into account the time needed to test mineral formations, test wallins, and to do a good job of decorating the place. On my three maps combined I'd say I spent about 15-20 hours decorating them, and it really shows in-game where nearly every screen has various doodads and stuff on it. Ironically, a lot of people seem to praise maps that have a nice design on the jpeg, when ultimately the players or observers themselves will never see more than a screen at a time. But I have never in my life seen a comment on any map about the level of screen-by-screen decoration that it has. Ever. Unless I gave one, which is unlikely because I rarely see it in other people's maps. I mean obviously it's not as important as balance and gameplay, but considering the (utterly ridiculous) amount of attention attractive jpeg designs receive, you'd think that BW-level decoration would be given at least a sliver of attention.
Anyway, I think the point Mora was trying to make is that mapmakers generally need to spend more time working on their maps. In particular, a) they need to spend more time analysing the balance of their map, and b) they need to spend more time balancing their map positionally
If people want to make remarkable maps, then they need to hold themselves to higher standards and be willing to invest a lot of time into their creations. If I tried to throw together a new map using a new idea in just a few hours, I can almost guarantee that it would suck, just like I can almost guarantee that 1 lottery ticket won't win you the jackpot. Heck, maybe one of the main reasons why Mora and I are so successful is because we just spend a lot more time on our maps than the average mapmaker.
And, we don't release a new map for every single new idea we get, which I think is another common problem for young mapmakers. It's harsh, but sometimes you just gotta face yourself (or your enthusiastic friend) and say, "I'm sorry, but this idea is not going to work."
None of my maps will be better because i waste precious time on looking at it or moving the mouse very slow to create the map. Don't judge a map by the time it takes to make it. Judge it by the gameplay it results in. Dont forget that its your <b>position</b> that adds to you being a more succesful mapmaker, not the fact that you waste way too much time on making the actual map. You could release just about anything and people would raise their eyebrows. You should try sometime.
I don't think that's exactly fair StarParty. Do you think Bill started out famous?
Or me for that matter?
I believe my maps raise eyebrows because they are raise-the-eyebrows worthy.
And if you make a good map (i'm talking good in the eye of the map maker, good in the eye of the average player, and good in the eye of the high tiered player) it will be recognized as such. And you will be respected all the more for it.
And if you make a good map (i'm talking good in the eye of the map maker, good in the eye of the average player, and good in the eye of the high tiered player) it will be recognized as such. And you will be respected all the more for it.
On August 16 2005 09:16 Teroru wrote: While you may think it impossible to create a well balanced map after such a long time, i think you are very much wrong. Every map maker should be aimed at balancing the map as best they can, and i believe that with some time, thought, and testing, relative balance (if not perfect balance) can be achieved.
i agree with u, the impossible thingy was just an exaggeration of the fact that since sc is such an old game, an revolutioning map has to contain really shocking ideas and so comes that its really hard to find the balance, as seen on Alchemist. and i was thinking that before every league OGN did map balancing tests which confirmed the stability of the maps, then in the leagues it turned out horribly imba like every time.
And if you make a good map (i'm talking good in the eye of the map maker, good in the eye of the average player, and good in the eye of the high tiered player) it will be recognized as such. And you will be respected all the more for it.
You can't argue that logic.
but that seems the most natural thing for me 0.o provided that mapper didnt make it for masturbating alone, and publishes his work.
Starparty: This entire topic concerns maps that are created with the intention of being highly-balanced and fun, to meet the standards desired by the Blizzcon organizers. If you have no higher aspirations for your maps, then none of this applies to you anyhow =P.
Maybe that's another common sight in the mapmaking community: few mapmakers are actually determined to "be the best". And if many of the maps Mora has been seeing were made by people who fit this description, then I guess it's no surprise he finds so many glaring issues permeating them all =/.
well starparty's map rock anyway;) I don't know about spending a month on a map, imo when you are experienced and you know what you are doing, and the concept you have of the map has no major flaw to begin with, you don't need so much time. I mean even the most perfectly decorated and balanced map you can imagine will still get hated by so many newbies because they happen to lose their first game on it. At least that's what I experienced (not saying I ever made perfect maps, but you get the point). On the other hand, hunters and fastest are some of the most played maps T_T
Bill said he did some serious playtesting. Do you know decent players that actually try new maps? Or do you just play computer :x
Starparty, you're an artist. That's fine, but that doesn't mean you make fun/balanced maps, it means you make pretty maps. Whenever someone criticizes your maps, you jump out at them(even in here when you weren't directly mentioned). Looking at your maps, its clear that you ignored balance. I've seen someone else make this comment (not here), and you lashed out at them, saying that they were just jealous of you. No, dude.
You should listen to Bill and Mora; BW needs them. They are the best foreign map makers, and they both actually think about what they make.
edit: Every RTS ever made has its money maps; good players simply avoid them, and bringing them into a map discussion about good maps is off topic.
On August 16 2005 12:24 Teroru wrote: I don't think that's exactly fair StarParty. Do you think Bill started out famous?
Or me for that matter?
I believe my maps raise eyebrows because they are raise-the-eyebrows worthy.
And if you make a good map (i'm talking good in the eye of the map maker, good in the eye of the average player, and good in the eye of the high tiered player) it will be recognized as such. And you will be respected all the more for it.
Don't diss him man, he's got "my maps make your face cringe" worthyness.
If rose.of.dream can make a pro map in 2 hours then I dont understand the aspect spending lots of hours just to make a map.
Mapmaking skills increase like everything else... with training and making lots of maps. I have made surley 60+ maps and i can assure you that afther a while you start to learn what looks good and what doesnt. That really speeds some things up.
travin, u are correct, but most map makers (at least outside of korea) do not have enough (playing) skill under their belt to determine balance in such a short period of time.
On August 16 2005 13:58 Teroru wrote: travin, u are correct, but most map makers (at least outside of korea) do not have enough (playing) skill under their belt to determine balance in such a short period of time.
And more often then not, your quick ideas for balance are simply incorrect.
well every pro map isnt that balanced, im thinking more of the decoration process. and the map that i was talking about rose.of.dream said he made in 2 hours was paradoxxx
On August 16 2005 14:03 Travin wrote: well every pro map isnt that balanced, im thinking more of the decoration process. and the map that i was talking about rose.of.dream said he made in 2 hours was paradoxxx
On August 16 2005 14:03 Travin wrote: well every pro map isnt that balanced, im thinking more of the decoration process. and the map that i was talking about rose.of.dream said he made in 2 hours was paradoxxx
Does that include time spent designing the map, and thinking about imbalance? Or just the construction phase?
Also, I've noticed that korean mapmakers (like rose.of.dream) generally don't worry as much about precise positional balance as Mora and I do. You can see this theme illustrated in the way geysers are historically unfair on promaps (although I think that's starting to change). Generally, the korean promaps tend to be fairly asymmetrical compared to our maps. That's not necessarily a bad thing (in fact I would say it's a very beneficial skill to possess), but it would explain why they would spend a lot less time on their maps. Plus the greater amount of experience, and the greater amount of skill (I'm assuming? don't know really). Also, maybe they don't need to spend as much time thinking about balance because they can get other people's advice or get it playtested more easily and frequently than our maps.
On August 16 2005 13:29 panschk[FP] wrote: Bill said he did some serious playtesting. Do you know decent players that actually try new maps? Or do you just play computer :x
I wanted to do some serious playtesting. But things didn't go as planned. I got about 10-15 games total against iD.Insane () and T_v (), whom I asked if they would help me test my maps. Also, 2/3 of that time was spent on Blue Valleys. The other 1/3 was spent on Counterpoint, as Enmity didn't even exist yet. And that was the extent of my playtesting . I was mainly trying to make sure that there weren't any devastating racial imbalances, and just generally getting an idea of how the maps felt in an actual game. And also being creative, coming up with new strategies, and just having fun playing BW (except for ZvT which was so frustratingasdasdfasdsad but better than PvZ at least ).
I would NEVER use computers for playtesting: the whole point was to think of map-specific strategies and how to abuse the map in the most cruel way possible. Comps don't do this AT ALL. I use comps to verify the mineral formations though, while I sit back and try to kill 2 SCVs at the same time over and over and over, or listen to radio free zerg, or just watch the probes mining and get mad at the unit pathing when things go wrong .
I feel much better after reading this thread because as far as I know, my map didn't violate any of Mora's peeves =]
I totally agree with you regarding mineral walls. After Detonation, EVERYONE started using them. In fact, even when Coulee was created, I looked at the map and thought "oh great, mineral walls again" even though it was only like the second map to ever use mineral walls. It was the same with the anti-Terran island expansions - the ones with the single 8-mineral patches that are placed where the Command Center would ordinarily land, so Terrans can't float there. After Namja Iyagi, EVERYONE started using this idea (Coulee, again, incidentally). Really, when great ideas involving clever mineral placement emerged, it was really cool and invited a new dimension of strategy to maps, but they are done to death. Even recycling those ideas for another map is bad enough, let alone tens of maps.
On August 16 2005 19:34 Excalibur_Z wrote: Really, when great ideas involving clever mineral placement emerged, it was really cool and invited a new dimension of strategy to maps, but they are done to death. Even recycling those ideas for another map is bad enough, let alone tens of maps.
I have a solution to overused ideas: map patents, the next best thing after software patents!
Title: CAN5553072: Abolishable Unit Impediment
Country: CA Canada
Inventor: Bill307
Abstract: A construct through which terrestrial motion is prohibited. The hindrance may be disassembled by the executor through means of resource acquisition, thereby facilitating the passage of mobile elements restricted to terra firma.
What patent office wouldn't grant a patent for such a novel and intricate idea??
On August 16 2005 12:24 Teroru wrote: And if you make a good map (i'm talking good in the eye of the map maker, good in the eye of the average player, and good in the eye of the high tiered player) it will be recognized as such. And you will be respected all the more for it.
Tropicanal/Ecuadorsal ( http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=30264 ) could become a perfect example of this. I'm assuming trcc likes it. The average person seems to like it. I like it. Mora likes it. Drone likes it. Many other people will probably like it too once they see it. And I think that everyone who sees it and likes it will regard trcc higher for his achievement .
What's more, if it's used in the Blizzcon tournament, that pretty much guarantees trcc will earn recognition from thousands of players for his work. He goes from "who?" to "I know that guy!" with a single, well-made map. From there, if he stays dedicated there's no telling what might happen. If he's also very proactive and motivated then he might even be able to get his maps into OGN, MBCGame, or WCG. That's (a part of) how you get ahead in the world: be self-confident and proactive: take the initiative with confidence rather than waiting for other people to find you once you're good enough (it can happen, but don't count on it). So probably the next step would be to ask people -- ask everyone -- how to get your maps on mapdori.com . Actually, I suppose if I wanted to I could do that myself. Hmm... well anyway, as this shows, you don't have to "know the right people" or be famous to become a known and successful SC mapmaker. With the right attitude toward mapmaking and a good personality (as opposed to certain people who like to redefine the meaning of the word "nat" to suit their cause ), it's more than possible.
indeed, after looking at several of trcc's maps, it has occured to me that i should really step up and collect his adress. As much as i encourage new talent, he's really making too good of an impression much too fast. Nothing a mail bomb can't fix though.
On August 16 2005 19:34 Excalibur_Z wrote: I feel much better after reading this thread because as far as I know, my map didn't violate any of Mora's peeves =]
I totally agree with you regarding mineral walls. After Detonation, EVERYONE started using them. In fact, even when Coulee was created, I looked at the map and thought "oh great, mineral walls again" even though it was only like the second map to ever use mineral walls. It was the same with the anti-Terran island expansions - the ones with the single 8-mineral patches that are placed where the Command Center would ordinarily land, so Terrans can't float there. After Namja Iyagi, EVERYONE started using this idea (Coulee, again, incidentally). Really, when great ideas involving clever mineral placement emerged, it was really cool and invited a new dimension of strategy to maps, but they are done to death. Even recycling those ideas for another map is bad enough, let alone tens of maps.
To be honest, when i made Coulee, i had honestly thought i had invented the mineral wall. I think that was partially because i used to to truly complete a wall, and not to just screw with unit pathing. Not only that, but it was a vital role in the mechanics of the map, not just 'a nice feature to throw in'.
As for the anti-commandcenter-lift mineral patches, i think those are sometimes neccassery. I don't think that they should be placed at every expansion, but if it comes down to completely removing an expansion on ur map because it favours terran, or simply adding a mineral patch, i'd prefer the mineral patch. On coulee, because the expansion was so easily cc-liftable, i felt it neccessary to add the patch. I also made it so that the CC could not land anywhere even close to the expansion due to unlandable terrain. I also made it that much harder by making the minerals 24 on the patch, instead of just 8, so that if a terran pushed out an scv through the mineral wall, that he'd have to do it an additional 2 times in order to mine away the patch.
However, did you still like Coulee? Or did it really set you off?
However, did you still like Coulee? Or did it really set you off?
I think when I first saw it, I had some mixed reactions. I rolled my eyes at the mineral wall and the anti-CC patches, but I thought it was interesting... how it was an island map, but it wasn't an island map, all at the same time. I had a "wait and see" attitude toward it. Everything theorycraft said that it would produce some really interesting matches, unfortunately that was only the case for a few players. The matches where more traditional and less inventive players participated seemed to drag on because the center made it difficult to gain ground. It's not my favorite map, but it's far from my least favorite.
However, did you still like Coulee? Or did it really set you off?
I think when I first saw it, I had some mixed reactions. I rolled my eyes at the mineral wall and the anti-CC patches, but I thought it was interesting... how it was an island map, but it wasn't an island map, all at the same time. I had a "wait and see" attitude toward it. Everything theorycraft said that it would produce some really interesting matches, unfortunately that was only the case for a few players. The matches where more traditional and less inventive players participated seemed to drag on because the center made it difficult to gain ground. It's not my favorite map, but it's far from my least favorite.
The reason behind this is that the map lacks in neutral expansions so races that requiers less expos dsnt need to attack, ie that zelotito pvz and can make games quite gay.
On August 16 2005 13:40 SexWithTeroru wrote: I agree with Bill and Mora 200%.
Starparty, you're an artist. That's fine, but that doesn't mean you make fun/balanced maps, it means you make pretty maps. Whenever someone criticizes your maps, you jump out at them(even in here when you weren't directly mentioned). Looking at your maps, its clear that you ignored balance. I've seen someone else make this comment (not here), and you lashed out at them, saying that they were just jealous of you. No, dude.
You should listen to Bill and Mora; BW needs them. They are the best foreign map makers, and they both actually think about what they make.
edit: Every RTS ever made has its money maps; good players simply avoid them, and bringing them into a map discussion about good maps is off topic.
I have never ever jumped on anyone who actually commented constructivly on my map. For those who simply says it sucks without any given reasons at all, I say, in different versions: "make a better one yourself". No one ever replied with a creation of their own.
more likely refering to me, but that's kinda funny since he never tried any of my maps.
People look at a picture. If the picture is too good looking, they get too jealous and excuses that reaction with that the map -MUST SUCK- since it looks so amazingly good (and i can't design a map like that). It is so sad. In Sweden that is called "jantelagen", basically meaning "You're not better than anyone else, Don't fool yourself that you are something". In smaller communities and villages around here this is widely spreaden.
This is one of many examples.
I've also seen you say that it is the responsibility of everyone else to prove that a map is imbalanced, not the responsibility of the map maker to prove a map is balanced.
On July 29 2005 06:18 Passion wrote: ugly maps>>>pretty ones.
stop caring about what it looks like, start thinking about how it plays
more likely refering to me, but that's kinda funny since he never tried any of my maps.
People look at a picture. If the picture is too good looking, they get too jealous and excuses that reaction with that the map -MUST SUCK- since it looks so amazingly good (and i can't design a map like that). It is so sad. In Sweden that is called "jantelagen", basically meaning "You're not better than anyone else, Don't fool yourself that you are something". In smaller communities and villages around here this is widely spreaden.
And exactly HOW did this NOT fit into my post above?
I've also seen you say that it is the responsibility of everyone else to prove that a map is imbalanced, not the responsibility of the map maker to prove a map is balanced.
If "everyone else" find a map imbalanced by shouting at a jpeg, then THEY should prove that to the creator, he shouldn't have to defend something he put time into, whilst "they" took a quick glimpse at it.
If I perform a crime I am not considered guilty until someone else proves that I am. Atleast in my country. That's the way of life.
****************************************
here is what your arguments mainly are refering to: Taken from the thread concerning the so-far very succesful map (2)Space pirates by (guess who?) Starparty. here is a picture if it gives any more clarity.
On June 27 2005 13:18 Djin)Xuul( wrote: decorating a map is nice but not essential... many mapmakers think if their maps look nice at the jpg it must be a good map, but thats crap!
what is the mineralconcept ? what is with racebalancing ?
those are the important questons and i cant see that on most of the maps... not on space pirates, not on cohesion and not on soora kingdom which has a more than an ugly racebalancing :/
this map here.. what did u thought bout placing those mineral only expansions in the middle ? they rly make no sense who is gonna hold the expansion at the top of the middle since it is more than easy to harrass ? at which place at the map shall zerg or protoss units be able to flank terran troops ?
though u might have spent a lot of time in the decoration u failed in making a good concept
(i decorated this one in 20minutes thank you very much)
plz dont take those critics too personally, im just saying what im thinking about
im not angry with you if thats what you think although these are offensive comments based on looking at the jpg rather that actually playing the map. play it. post a rep. show me that the center expansions are useless, and not tiebreakers and reasons to actually control the center. Show me that the top expansion really is unprotectable, and not a reason to play it large and controll more of the ground. show me that the map is tight, and not satisfyingliy sized for all races since there are many different routes to travel, but still an obvious route between the bases making it preferable. Then i will thake your thoughts into serious consideration.
many mapmakers think if their maps look nice at the jpg it must be a good map, but thats crap!
Are you serious? Im sorry if the map itches in your eyes when you look at it, but if you simply ask we will definitely help you doing the same to your maps, understanding it as they weren't as beautiful already..?
I dont want to seem like an ashole, i think you are a good mapmaker and your maps are great. If my reply here seems too offensive, dont take it personally. But your post called for it...
Did he prove me wrong in those points? - NO. Did he post a replay? - NO. Did he even play the map??? - ONLY GOD KNOWS.
I will not argue this anymore since i clearly stated my point, and i've gone far off-topic enough.
First off, I didn't take your post out of context. The meaning of your post did not change at all due to me not copying and pasting the post you were quoting.
"Innocent until proven guilty" pertains only to law. There is really nothing else it should be applied to. Whenever talking about a creation, it is the responsibility of the creator to prove it is worthy; the burden does not lie with others. For example, if Bush decides to go to war, he better damn prove its worth; it isn't the responsibility of everyone else to prove it wrong.
It's funny that you quote that post of yours, because -- like I said -- it's frankly an in-your-face response to perfectly good questions. You seem to think that you're a God, that anything you do is assumed great and others must go to great lengths to prove it wrong (one amatuer replay won't prove anything except for retarded exploits like on Luna the Final or Paranoid Andriod, fyi).
There is a reason that Bill and Mora are held in high esteem; they are obsessive when dealing with racial and positional balance. Though I may be wrong, I highly doubt they simply come up with an idea out their ass and say, "This would be a great map, I'll make it, decorate it, and flame anyone who disagrees with me."
Yes, Bill and Mora could get away with more radical maps than other map makers, but that is because they have a reputation of making thoughtful, balanced maps. So while it's probably safe to assume that any given map Bill or Mora creates is balanced, the same can't be said of someone who says that critiques about his/her maps are made simply because the critic is jealous of his/her artistic ability.
On August 17 2005 17:40 SexWithTeroru wrote: First off, I didn't take your post out of context. The meaning of your post did not change at all because I didn't copy and paste the post you were quoting.
well perhaps you noticed that the quote actually were -in-my-post-. You can't draw a conclusion with only seeing half of the facts. Seeing as how you write your responses you seem to be alot smarter than that. That was a compliment, and please do take it as one.
"Innocent until proven guilty" pertains only to law. There is really nothing else it should be applied to. Whenever talking about a creation, it is the responsibility of the creator to prove it is worthy; the burden does not lie with others. For example, if Bush decides to go to war, he better damn prove its worth; it isn't the responsibility of everyone else to prove it wrong.
w h a t e v e r.
It's funny that you quote that post of yours, because -- like I said -- it's frankly an in-your-face response to perfectly good questions. You seem to think that you're a God, that anything you do is assumed great and others must go to great lengths to prove it wrong (one amatuer replay won't prove anything except for retarded exploits like on Luna the Final or Paranoid Andriod, fyi).
ehh... right...
"many mapmakers think if their maps look nice at the jpg it must be a good map, but thats crap!"
yeah... thats great. Guess he wasn't refering to me.
There is a reason that Bill and Mora are held in high esteem; they are obsessive when dealing with racial and positional balance. Though I may be wrong, I highly doubt they simply come up with an idea out their ass and say, "This would be a great map, I'll make it, decorate it, and flame anyone who disagrees with me."
Yes, Bill and Mora could get away with more radical maps than other map makers, but that is because they have a reputation of making thoughtful, balanced maps. So while it's probably safe to assume that any given map Bill or Mora creates is balanced, the same can't be said of someone who says that critiques about his/her maps are made simply because the critic is jealous of his/her artistic ability.
where exactly did i disrespect Bill and Mora? My concerns have the entire time been around this article and the facts mora stated here - which i clearly disagreed with, whilst you insist in trying to frame me for endless reasons unknown. I KNOW Bill and mora makes great maps, but i also know that I do, and that many else in this community do. They don't need any rules, since what they do definitely is good as it is. And the problem with this article is not really its contents but the way it was written, which made me feel like a target, and also felt like it was directly aimed at other frequently posting mapmakers on this site which obviously made me defend me - and them. Mora stated several days ago that it was not his intention to make anyone feel stomped on and that the way he wrote was to promote some smiles here and there. I accepted that.
So what exactly is the point you're trying to fetch? its seems like its even more drastically fading away.
If the mapmaker and supporters don't "prove" the map is balanced, and the nay-sayers don't "prove" it isn't, then the map's balance is simply undetermined.
And if someone needs a map to be "proven" balanced, then obviously it has to be proven balanced by the creator and/or supporters.
Starparty, i think i understand the most of what you are saying, but something still confuses me. Could you explain to me what criteria a 'critique' needs, that isn't just 'an opinion' and could be 'constructive'? The points i made are very accurate points in map making. Maps are not just about art. They're about broodwar. If the map isn't creating beautiful gameplay, it's not a good map, regardless of how beautiful it is in any other way.
A good map has beauty, balance, and must create interesting gameplay. Falling short on any count means your map is doing just that, falling short. The guidelines i wrote are, for the most part, true. They can be broken while still maintaining good gameplay, but that is hard to accomplish and is why i have 'guided' to not do so.
For god sake they are Bill and Mora! The two most succesfull mapmakers outside korea! Do i even have to say more What did i make? Nothing. Yet. But that doesn't mean that i should accept anyone flaming my creation(s) without motivating why.
"The map sux". Ok, thank you. I feel much more enlightened now.
I know i can give hefty responses, that's just me i guess (unfortunately?) but it has nothing to do with me praising myself to the skies. It has to do with people putting in unmotivated comments which doesnt contribute or atleast drive the conversation forth in anyway. OK, i chose a bad example of Xuuls posts, You should take a trip to broodwarmaps.net and see what he has posted on the many Starpary and Peatza creations and perhaps my jump on him would be just a little bit more justifyed (if you're interested, check the first submissions like Space Pirates or Soora Kingdom). I have stated the same facts in every map thread as soon as someone makes a post like this, Its not only my own. Sure people can think whatever they want, im glad they do, but they doesn't have to shout it out loud just for no reason without any suggestions for improvement. Try implement that in real life and one would be very popular...
This is common among the forumthreads and doesn't just apply to mapmaking threads. It's unfortunate that it all blurred together here, making quite a mess. Atleast it is a good argument.
Basicly we are probably on the same level in this. I began the argument because someone chose a bad combination of words to present something quite harmless, while You argue with me because I chose an even worse combination of words to argue with the first ones Quite ironically actually... I will ofcourse apologize if you, on behalf of mora and bill, feel that i have disrespected them in anyway regarding their mapmaking skills. That was never my intention. However i will still not accept unmotivated flaming for creations I put time and effort into. Simply because someone always just HAS to say "it sux" by having a biased look on a jpg.
I think that many critiques are justified. Imagine yourself in their situation:
You play Broodwar, you obviously like balanced maps, and you think it's lame when a victory or loss is caused by the map rather than the players. You see a map that was clearly painstakingly decorated, but, when the decoration is removed, isn't really that great of a map underneath. You make the comment, "You should really devote yourself to balance rather than looks", and the creator of the map gets very angry at you.
That's what it looks like from the other side
In fact, an excellent test of whether a map is really balanced is to simply remove all decoration when judging it. That way, one's judgement isn't clouded by how pretty/ugly a map is.
P.S. One thing that I haven't seen you do is put sprites in maps. That's good. Putting sprites in maps is really a kick in the face to the idea of gameplay over decoration (you're basically saying that added decoration is worth having valkyries become useless sooner, which is ridiculous after a moment's thought).
perhaps. But it will take hella lot of trees to make the valks not fire correctly
I dont like how the sprites are placed. I want my doodads to be placed linear, like in staredit, on their respective square... it looks weird otherwise.
There is a good and a bad way of telling a map is bad. The bad way is the way we stated clearly through many posts. But what you mention above doesnt really fit into the description of those posting dumb comments. Those who play broodwar and actually gives a damn, they usually give some suggestions too instead of just complaining.
MY point was the fact that these are people that havn't or doesn not intend to play the actual map anyway and their comment is completely useless, often since noone else seems to think that way, and since maps are made for the masses (normally) perhaps the majority should rule.. i dunno..
On August 17 2005 20:17 Teroru wrote: Starpart did u read my last post? I feel that addressing it bears more importance than responding to SexWithTeroru.
your last post was not directed to me, and im getting abit confused trying to figure out which one you meant
On August 17 2005 20:17 Teroru wrote: Starpart did u read my last post? I feel that addressing it bears more importance than responding to SexWithTeroru.
your last post was not directed to me, and im getting abit confused trying to figure out which one you meant
The post adresses you specifically. It was posted at 18:47, the same minute you made a post.
Starparty, i think i understand the most of what you are saying, but something still confuses me. Could you explain to me what criteria a 'critique' needs, that isn't just 'an opinion' and could be 'constructive'? The points i made are very accurate points in map making. Maps are not just about art. They're about broodwar. If the map isn't creating beautiful gameplay, it's not a good map, regardless of how beautiful it is in any other way.
A good map has beauty, balance, and must create interesting gameplay. Falling short on any count means your map is doing just that, falling short. The guidelines i wrote are, for the most part, true. They can be broken while still maintaining good gameplay, but that is hard to accomplish and is why i have 'guided' to not do so.
everyone is entiteled to think and believe what they want. But if some one makes an observation and posts an offensive comment just for the sake of it, yes i will probably get angry. I again state the fact that i have never jumped on someone who were open for a discussion about their current observation. Perhaps normal people manage to ignore the rest of the useless comments, but sometimes i just explode. Specially when people tend to believe that i have no gaming experience lasting longer than the previous 2 weeks. Like everyone else here i played this game before this site was made and has continuously done so since then. What does that prove? Nothing. But atleast i believe i have a decent sense of balancing a map.
My bladdering took me so far away from your question that i dont even know how to bladder myself back again.
On August 17 2005 19:34 Starparty wrote: perhaps. But it will take hella lot of trees to make the valks not fire correctly
Sorry I didn't read any of the previous posts about this "debate" or whatever thats going on, but just so you guys know if I remeber correctly the sprite max in broodwar is about 1024. So after that you get the fire glitch.
On August 18 2005 15:07 Empyrean wrote: I'm curious as to who SexWithMora is.
I think probably a guy who wants to get lucky.
hes all mine
Lets fight for him. You make the stipulations, I call the terrain, or vise versa if you like. You call the disqualification rules. I'll fly my ass to where ever you live and we can see who gets to go home with mora at the end of the night. I won't go easy, even though you're a cool guy.
Seeing as a lot of mapmakers will be reading this thread, I need some help with a map idea i have. Please pm me on teamliquid, e-mail me or add me to your msn at jozsef_szabo@hotmail.com I don't actually need much help i just have one question, and i'm just modifying an lt to show some statistics that might be cool/helpful. Anyways please get in touch with me or let me know how i can get in touch with you if you are experienced with triggers.
On August 17 2005 19:34 Starparty wrote: perhaps. But it will take hella lot of trees to make the valks not fire correctly
Sorry I didn't read any of the previous posts about this "debate" or whatever thats going on, but just so you guys know if I remeber correctly the sprite max in broodwar is about 1024. So after that you get the fire glitch.
But perhaps that sums up how much i really care. Im not here to make enemies, but obviously you are, and therefore i will not bother with you anymore. Good luck with your mapmaking.
Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others: an arrogant contempt for the weak.
Well a behind base mineral spot is good occassionally i think except on maps like gorky where terran has an obvious advantage on namja iyaga a 8 mineral makes it balanced...
This is tourning into a battle here. No need to start a war over that. In the end our goal is all to improve the quality of melee maps, the ways and rules we use may be different, but calling SP a bad mapper, or mora, or bill etc is just plain wrong and does not help anyway.
@only)a-game : If you need help with triggers, staredit.net is where to go. melee mappers mostly don't know much about triggers, they care about design and balancing.
Imbroglio of Mishap is certainly not my favorite map, but it may be underrated due to it's very strange style and somewhat difficult to grasp gameplay.
On August 18 2005 17:36 Tfums wrote: omg look at your maps for a few minutes. Doesn't it give you a headache or have you built up an immunity?
lol, i didn't excpect that from the creator of imbroglio of misshap T_____T
what exactly don't u like about imbroglio of mishap?
If you don't like it, thats fine. But its nearly perfectly balanced positionally (and i'd like to see another map maker balance 10 ramps positionally), nearly perfect balanced racially (from tests done thus far), and if its not the prettiest damn thing u've ever seen, you're definately heterosexual.
On August 19 2005 07:34 panschk[FP] wrote: This is tourning into a battle here. No need to start a war over that. In the end our goal is all to improve the quality of melee maps, the ways and rules we use may be different, but calling SP a bad mapper, or mora, or bill etc is just plain wrong and does not help anyway.
@only)a-game : If you need help with triggers, staredit.net is where to go. melee mappers mostly don't know much about triggers, they care about design and balancing.
Imbroglio of Mishap is certainly not my favorite map, but it may be underrated due to it's very strange style and somewhat difficult to grasp gameplay.
Well, the argument is over whether one person's methods are acceptable or not, so this duscussion apparently did help.
EPT
Very cool map.
I'm confused
) and T_v (
. I was mainly trying to make sure that there weren't any devastating racial imbalances, and just generally getting an idea of how the maps felt in an actual game. And also being creative, coming up with new strategies, and just having fun playing BW 
![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/(2)Space%20Pirates(n).jpg)
