EPTNew iCCup Map Pack - Page 4
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Ty2
United States1434 Posts
| ||
|
ninazerg
United States7291 Posts
On August 04 2014 14:02 fearthequeen wrote: I for one am confused by some (most) people in this thread wanting to remove maps just because they know (think) they are imbalanced or simply don't like them. Just because a map is MOTW doesn't "force" you to play it. Also, getting rid of maps because they don't support modern gameplay doesn't make sense either. Why give players less variety before you have good replacement map versions? Using Mist to replace 1 map is probably the best thing that could come of this initiative. Yeah, that's basically my thought on the matter, but people never listen. If a map doesn't support "standard" play, I don't care. But if each spawn position has disadvantages and other spawns have various advantages, as in the case of Lost Temple, Luna, Gaia, etc., then you kind of have to just cross your fingers and pray you get a good spawn. I feel like that is an unnecessary element of luck that the StarCraft community knows how to remedy. When the maps were made, the extent to which that luck element would be critical was not fully understood, but now we know better. Also, a map which seems to disproportionately favor one race over another is arguably a grounds for making the map obsolete, however, an 'imbalance' may only be perceived because the map is indifferent to the 'modern' patterns of player strategy. For example, in PvZ, whenever I pick a map, the Protoss will go "Oh, that's a Zerg map." and it doesn't matter which map I choose, but it's definitely a 'Zerg map'. Some maps are disproportionately skewed in certain match-ups (Battle Royale) but usually, this is not the case. My only beef with Pamir Plateau is that if you get contained, there is no way out except to fight upwards onto high ground. This, obviously, does not jive well with "standard play", but if you recall the original Sniper Ridge, there was a similar dilemma: a high ground outside of the natural that was unbreakable. In the new version of Sniper Ridge, there is a little ramp that allows you to go around that, sort of like the mineral patch backdoor that lets you go around the double bridge on Destination, which can be equally frustrating to break out of directly, except that it's not high ground. My main beef with Lost Temple and Luna are they have none of the balance features that make them optimal for competitive play, because competitors demand impartiality, so an 'unfair' starting position is silly to give a serious competitor. For a good ol' fun game between buddies, sure, why not? You could even play a FFA on Orbital Death. But that's not the issue here. The issue is people advocating for a map which is clearly not fit for competition in a competitive arena, and might I add, against the majority opinion. | ||
|
GeckoXp
Germany2016 Posts
On August 03 2014 14:24 xboi209 wrote: IMO, we should add a few untested maps...to get them tested Understandable line of thought, yet one not working on ICCup. We both know what kind of fight it is to get even small updates done, not because of the BW admins, but... Aside from that, you would need to have regulars reporting in what they thought about the map and more than just two or three really good foreigners write their suggestions. Then you need a mapmaker willing to update his map and the new map has to be re-added to the pack as well, in turns new maps have to be downloaded again and again by the users, else they'd start to wonder why the older version doesn't work. The constant change during an outgoing season is a lot more work than just using one we already had tested, nor do I think the casuals, non-native English speakers, etc. would really get why it's updated all the time. Maybe, one solution would be for the ICCup Admins (and anyone else wanting to) host tournaments with untested maps. From that we would at least have a good observation. Not sure if there's enough time left before ladder reset. | ||
|
wmb
Sweden282 Posts
 | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1529 Posts
On August 04 2014 08:41 ninazerg wrote: I agree with this; but only partially. If the map was modified, it might be quite a bit better. My favorite map from the mapmaker tournament was Gemlong. Gemlong was in no map maker tournament, only in the BWMN open. And isn't it already in the current map pack? At least I have seen people hosting this one multiple times, mostly as 2v2 as it seems. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1529 Posts
On August 04 2014 14:02 fearthequeen wrote: I for one am confused by some (most) people in this thread wanting to remove maps just because they know (think) they are imbalanced or simply don't like them. Just because a map is MOTW doesn't "force" you to play it. Also, getting rid of maps because they don't support modern gameplay doesn't make sense either. Why give players less variety before you have good replacement map versions? Using Mist to replace 1 map is probably the best thing that could come of this initiative. LT being generally considered the prototype of all "modern" 4 player/open middle/macro maps (these three concepts basically being synonymous...). All it has to offer that a few dozen other maps (and that's only counting former korean pro maps!) haven't is terible imbalances of all sorts, a lot ot awkward spots and tremendous room for abuse. That's not more variety, that's really bad limitation. LT is not and has never been a good map, even back when it was argualbly without any real alternative. It's infamous for positional lottery and spawn location wins... That neither fun nor fair nor competitive and the metagame would have never nearly reached the level it has today if mapmaking hadn't come a long way since then. @Nina: Yeah, Luna should go, too. It's not as bad as LT balance wise, but has the added "bonus" of being incredibly more boring.... | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1529 Posts
On August 04 2014 16:40 GeckoXp wrote: Aside from that, you would need to have regulars reporting in what they thought about the map and more than just two or three really good foreigners write their suggestions. Actually having one really good player of each race analyse/test a map is worth more than some hundred unqualified opinions of people who do not really know what they are even talking about. Then you need a mapmaker willing to update his map and the new map has to be re-added to the pack as well, in turns new maps have to be downloaded again and again by the users, else they'd start to wonder why the older version doesn't work. We should really talk some time. You are vastly overestimating some problems here, mostly because you are probably underestimating the level of competence that we mappers have reached nowadays. The only thing that cannot be guaranteed on any new map nowadays is racial balance, and that's probably not a reason to make changes to a map during a running season... Besides, you aren't updating FS or Dante's Peak, despite the fucked up unit stack bugs on some ramps, you aren't updating Jade (and, arguably, a lot of other maps) despite the significant positional imbalances due to unequal mining rates, you haven't updated Wind and Cloud although it has a lot of bad problems and newer versions are available, and as far as I know the current version of Medusa in the ICCup map pack is still 2.1. although 2.2 has been available for years... | ||
|
GeckoXp
Germany2016 Posts
On August 05 2014 00:22 Freakling wrote: Actually having one really good player of each race analyse/test a map is worth more than some hundred unqualified opinions of people who do not really know what they are even talking about. We should really talk some time. You are vastly overestimating some problems here, mostly because you are probably underestimating the level of competence that we mappers have reached nowadays. The only thing that cannot be guaranteed on any new map nowadays is racial balance, and that's probably not a reason to make changes to a map during a running season... Besides, you aren't updating FS or Dante's Peak, despite the fucked up unit stack bugs on some ramps, you aren't updating Jade (and, arguably, a lot of other maps) despite the significant positional imbalances due to unequal mining rates, you haven't updated Wind and Cloud although it has a lot of bad problems and newer versions are available, and as far as I know the current version of Medusa in the ICCup map pack is still 2.1. although 2.2 has been available for years... I am not an admin at ICCup anymore and I haven't been involved in any executive decision in the past twelve months. You might confuse my status as person with narrowly limited admin rights, if you have seen me announcing streams on the server. That's almost all I do nowadays. Aside from that, I don't think you have an idea how ICCup internally works. The decision and the access to change maps is limited to a few positions, not even the Senior/Super Admins can do that. This needs mainly the developers to do stuff for you. We all know by now that, even if the Brood War staff does everything they can with neglecting other things (e.g. Clan League, Ladder), developers are not the BW staff. It might take up to one week for them to apply changes, and only if it's urgent. I'm not sure if changing a new, untested map would be "urgent" to them. That's the sad truth. That being said, my personal experience with high level players is that most of them are not perfectly unbiased and I don't see how they could be. Compare Skzlime's comments about Oxide with the ones of other players from the STL coverage. You need at least two players per race to get a good overview. And you need them to type more than just one or maybe two sentences about each match up. And here's one thing the few could do better, describe in detail why something's bad instead of just saying "it's bad". Hence, somtimes the masses give you a better overview if the overall criticism goes in one way or another. Either two opposing parties critize the opposite (indicator it's balanced for me if toss whines about z imba, and z whines about toss imba), or everyone's fine. Personally speaking again here, to me the voices of the majority of 'scrubs' often mattered more in decision making, as the majority made up most games, not the minority of the best players. Even if maps are slightly biased on top level play, it's still better than an overcomplicated map no newb likes. Be that as it may, it's just a detail along the road and I think I agree with you that any kind of feedback would be nice. I'm not sure if the mapmakers got any of that in the past without having to annoy dozens of people in the first place. Well, seeing as the progress of testing a map needs people and quick solutions from the administrative site, I don't see how that will work out in the current state of any server. Fish, quite frankly, doesn't give two shits about foreigners, ICCup overall doesn't care enough about BW anymore. Then, if the admins start a testing phase, it might very well make the mapmakers and the BW staff look like morons, if they can't fix bugs right away. And both can't, regardless of their abilities - I do not doubt that the mapmakers are good (I liked the STL maps a lot and tried to add them back when I was admin), nor do I doubt the BW staff would appreciate help, but neither are the developers with the much needed access. Also, nobody is fine with a somewhat broken testing phase. Not even 10% of the users on the server will read this discussion, or the one at ICCup. All they'll see is an unknown map in the midst of time proven MOTWs. Not sure if anyone would just play it and give feedback or know where to put it. Hence, my other suggestion. If the commuity itself would host regular fun tours on unknown maps, the sample size, the feedback, the overall fun, anything related to this topic, would help out a lot more. It would generate the data needed, the stuff can still be advertised as fun third party tour with everything on ICCup. The only thing changing would be that the map would be added as already improved or in a best case scenario final version. A limited amount of publicity is doable for ICCup admins, delivering constant updates is not. | ||
|
iCCup.Face
Italy447 Posts
I've changed the poll with something more professional, so vote again! New Poll Regards | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1529 Posts
On August 05 2014 04:01 GeckoXp wrote: I am not an admin at ICCup anymore and I haven't been involved in any executive decision in the past twelve months. You might confuse my status as person with narrowly limited admin rights, if you have seen me announcing streams on the server. That's almost all I do nowadays. Aside from that, I don't think you have an idea how ICCup internally works. The decision and the access to change maps is limited to a few positions, not even the Senior/Super Admins can do that. This needs mainly the developers to do stuff for you. We all know by now that, even if the Brood War staff does everything they can with neglecting other things (e.g. Clan League, Ladder), developers are not the BW staff. It might take up to one week for them to apply changes, and only if it's urgent. I'm not sure if changing a new, untested map would be "urgent" to them. That's the sad truth. I am familiar with the problems on ICCup, at lest to some degree. But if there is really no one to talk to on ICCup, at least no one who really cares or has the power to get anything done (which is the feeling that I always get whenever I talk to some one somehow involved with ICCup), what is the point in even discussing, what is the point of this thread? (I mean, as "fun" as bashing LT and Luna is, it's just kicking a dead horse, which has been done countless times for years...) And if the people who actually run ICCup have no strong interest in BW any more, lack expertise and don't really want to deal with it, why don't they delegate more of that to the people who do? That being said, my personal experience with high level players is that most of them are not perfectly unbiased and I don't see how they could be. Compare Skzlime's comments about Oxide with the ones of other players from the STL coverage. You need at least two players per race to get a good overview. And you need them to type more than just one or maybe two sentences about each match up. And here's one thing the few could do better, describe in detail why something's bad instead of just saying "it's bad". Hence, somtimes the masses give you a better overview if the overall criticism goes in one way or another. More opinions are always good. But 100 people saying stuff like "too tight, tank imba" tell you nothing at all. Basically what you need is people with a thorough understanding of the metagame and the will and ability to actually talk about it to others. Unfortunately this is rare and you have to know whom to ask or bug people a lot (which doesn't always make them more interested or friendly towards yourself or the maps you are bugging them about...). It may also be that at higher levels players aren't actually very prone to sharing any bugs/imbalances they find with any one else. After all, a known imbalance (that you can potentially get an advantage off of) is better than an unknown balance... On the other hand, take any (more or less) basic 4 player macro map. They're all more or less variations of the same old and proven basic idea, you do not really need any one to tell you that it will not have any major balance concerns, neither will it really take much off any player to adapt to it as a new map (there's an open middle and all the expos are at the same spots as on dozens of other maps before, duh!...). Either two opposing parties critize the opposite (indicator it's balanced for me if toss whines about z imba, and z whines about toss imba), or everyone's fine. Personally speaking again here, to me the voices of the majority of 'scrubs' often mattered more in decision making, as the majority made up most games, not the minority of the best players. Even if maps are slightly biased on top level play, it's still better than an overcomplicated map no newb likes. Be that as it may, it's just a detail along the road and I think I agree with you that any kind of feedback would be nice. I'm not sure if the mapmakers got any of that in the past without having to annoy dozens of people in the first place. See above... And a lot of of people always wine about imbalance. If they cannot actually explain why something is imbalanced, that doesn't help you at all. Well, seeing as the progress of testing a map needs people and quick solutions from the administrative site, I don't see how that will work out in the current state of any server. Let's start with establishing some simple facts: What standard does the ICCup administrtion aply to a map before they consider it "tested enough"? Fish, quite frankly, doesn't give two shits about foreigners, ICCup overall doesn't care enough about BW anymore. Then, if the admins start a testing phase, it might very well make the mapmakers and the BW staff look like morons, if they can't fix bugs right away. And both can't, regardless of their abilities When has ICC ever fixed any bug on any map? They are just like any one else, not touching anything as if it were the holy grail... Or, most likely, they simply do not have any one who would know how to fix them, anyway. I can fix you any bug, at least if it is a generally fixable one... - I do not doubt that the mapmakers are good (I liked the STL maps a lot and tried to add them back when I was admin), nor do I doubt the BW staff would appreciate help, but neither are the developers with the much needed access. This is hard to discuss when the people who actually make decisions and have doubts are not joining the discussion. What do you mean by the last paragraph? Also, nobody is fine with a somewhat broken testing phase. Not even 10% of the users on the server will read this discussion, or the one at ICCup. All they'll see is an unknown map in the midst of time proven MOTWs. Not sure if anyone would just play it and give feedback or know where to put it. Hence, my other suggestion. If the commuity itself would host regular fun tours on unknown maps, the sample size, the feedback, the overall fun, anything related to this topic, would help out a lot more. It would generate the data needed, the stuff can still be advertised as fun third party tour with everything on ICCup. The only thing changing would be that the map would be added as already improved or in a best case scenario final version. A limited amount of publicity is doable for ICCup admins, delivering constant updates is not. Meh... this post is already turning into a jubled mess... The problem is that as long as there are no clear objective criteria for what makes a map worth considering for ICCup, there is no point in even suggesting, discussing or testing any map or in continuing this whole discussion or making this thread in the frst place... | ||
|
GeckoXp
Germany2016 Posts
On August 05 2014 23:15 Freakling wrote: I am familiar with the problems on ICCup, at lest to some degree. But if there is really no one to talk to on ICCup, at least no one who really cares or has the power to get anything done (which is the feeling that I always get whenever I talk to some one somehow involved with ICCup), what is the point in even discussing, what is the point of this thread? (I mean, as "fun" as bashing LT and Luna is, it's just kicking a dead horse, which has been done countless times for years...) And if the people who actually run ICCup have no strong interest in BW any more, lack expertise and don't really want to deal with it, why don't they delegate more of that to the people who do? More opinions are always good. But 100 people saying stuff like "too tight, tank imba" tell you nothing at all. Basically what you need is people with a thorough understanding of the metagame and the will and ability to actually talk about it to others. Unfortunately this is rare and you have to know whom to ask or bug people a lot (which doesn't always make them more interested or friendly towards yourself or the maps you are bugging them about...). It may also be that at higher levels players aren't actually very prone to sharing any bugs/imbalances they find with any one else. After all, a known imbalance (that you can potentially get an advantage off of) is better than an unknown balance... On the other hand, take any (more or less) basic 4 player macro map. They're all more or less variations of the same old and proven basic idea, you do not really need any one to tell you that it will not have any major balance concerns, neither will it really take much off any player to adapt to it as a new map (there's an open middle and all the expos are at the same spots as on dozens of other maps before, duh!...). See above... And a lot of of people always wine about imbalance. If they cannot actually explain why something is imbalanced, that doesn't help you at all. Let's start with establishing some simple facts: What standard does the ICCup administrtion aply to a map before they consider it "tested enough"? When has ICC ever fixed any bug on any map? They are just like any one else, not touching anything as if it were the holy grail... Or, most likely, they simply do not have any one who would know how to fix them, anyway. I can fix you any bug, at least if it is a generally fixable one... This is hard to discuss when the people who actually make decisions and have doubts are not joining the discussion. What do you mean by the last paragraph? Meh... this post is already turning into a jubled mess... The problem is that as long as there are no clear objective criteria for what makes a map worth considering for ICCup, there is no point in even suggesting, discussing or testing any map or in continuing this whole discussion or making this thread in the frst place... I have just short time, so basically a TL;DR version. One of the reasons I don't do much on ICCup anymore is exactly the "why don't they delegate the decision making". I do not know, they prefer Russian speaking developers. There are none. And even if there would be, it'd take some time for them to be trustworthy enough for the portal owners and highest ups. I don't want to flame ICCup owners, because they carried the torch for long and still host shit for free, which is better than nothing, but it's not very helpful either. Hence, the criteria a map has to undergo would be to be no work to add. In an ideal case, a new map gets added at the end of the season. There's no way for mapmakers or BW Staff to update it "for sure" in a running season. Hence, if you can show any reviews (official or via quotes, doesn't matter), it'd be enough for me personally to go to the developers and have it added. But be sure, the BW staff can't guarantee to have an updated version added in an ongoing season. It's sadly not in their hands alone. ICCup also "never" fixed maps, because there was no map maker in the staff (although a couple of maps were fixed under Paladin's era). I could write another lengthy paragraph why we did never contact anyone, but it wouldn't help either. It's mostly because you simply do not have time. You have no impression of how much unrelated stuff you have to work through every day, taking care of maps and bugs (some of which you never get told by users), is just a little too much (and you also have to test them for unrelated issues, e.g. the protection vs. the syntax allowing them to be played in the first place in 1v1 and TvB mode). Just to put it in context, in my days as Head Admin Assistant I got about ten different, yet important queries from admins about this and that (league, tournament, users, script issues), double amount of whispers and PMs from users. And I was not the most important person on the server. Thrice the amount of work shortly before and after season changes, because you have to wrap up stuff. That's easily two hours of work per day if you want to do it correctly. Anyway, just wanted to make clear I don't blame "the mapmakers" for not reacting, nor would I blame the ICCup BW crew. | ||
Falling
Canada11379 Posts
Weird bug on the text suggestion, just kept on saying text was too short despite the paragraphs I wound up writing to be able to post. | ||
|
3FFA
United States3931 Posts
On August 06 2014 00:06 Falling wrote: ...some of you are just voting for FS out of spite. In LoL, you'd probably ban Summoner's Rift and Super Smash Brothers Melee, Battlefield. Weird bug on the text suggestion, just kept on saying text was too short despite the paragraphs I wound up writing to be able to post. Yeah I ended up not writing anything there to circumvent it. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12024 Posts
On August 06 2014 00:06 Falling wrote: ...some of you are just voting for FS out of spite. In LoL, you'd probably ban Summoner's Rift and Super Smash Brothers Melee, Battlefield. Weird bug on the text suggestion, just kept on saying text was too short despite the paragraphs I wound up writing to be able to post. I don't personally feel any of the maps need to be removed, but it would be nice if there was a better system in place for motw selection. If python and FS are ever motw it's near impossible (unless you can host) to get a game on any of the other maps which is rather disappointing. Also some of the maps that should get a chance at motw never seem to like Electric Circuit. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11379 Posts
Some of these old maps are like seeing Kulas Ravine and Steppes of War in SC2 ladder. They just got better over time. Variety isn't inherently good if the map isn't good, adding in Bone Canyon or Discovery for instance. | ||
|
Jukado
805 Posts
(2)Crossgame http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4580 (4)Lilac Unicorns http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4395 (4)Toad Stone http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4699 (2)Queensbridge http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/brood-war/462841-map-2queensbridge13 (4)Roadkill http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4398 (3)Hazard Black http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4582 (3)Demonio Azul http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4607 (4)Chemlab http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4541 (4)Feel My Love http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4618 (4)In The Way Of An Eddy http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4674 (2)Neo Overwatch http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4704 (2)Overwatch http://www.panschk.de/mappage/comments.php?mapid=4599 Thats just a kind of random list I made off the top of my head. | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1529 Posts
But there are at least two maps that could be added without any work at all: (2)Oxide & (2)Neo Overwatch both have: - been extensively updated and bugfixed - used in some minor tournaments - playtested - thoroughly updated again - used in STL1 and gathered a lot of feedback - extensively updated again to adress the concerns and problems that arose - are readily downloadable from BWMN or the map pack I provided If that is not enough for ... whoever ... on ICC to consider it, then the ICC BW staff should just give up on the idea of ever adding new maps, because that's as thoroughly prepared and tested as can be. Unless some one is actually willing to run regular tournaments with a focus on testing new maps, and probably would need to pour a good amount of money into that undertaking as well to generate an adequate interest, or Koreans / in particular Sonic start to develop some actual interest in getting their maps up to high standards, that is... | ||
|
iCCup.Face
Italy447 Posts
- If I opened this thread it means we have the power to change the maps in short time (without developers), we just need good map replacements. - Admins fixed many map bugs, just an example in last season iCCup.xboi209 fixed 4 maps, iCCup.Fry did the same when needed in past, unluckily we haven't map editors actually in the staff so would be nice if some expert mapmaker join the crew and help instead of only criticize. - We will release this new MapPack with the new season (September) if we find worthy maps. - The criteria for a map to be added was to be already tested somewhere to ensure to be good balanced and clean from bugs (we don't mind to spend hours testing maps, we have already a lot to do), but looks like some of the ppl posting here knows what they talking about so if any of you mind to help we can make bigger changes on the pack (> 10 maps). Expert mapmakers contact me if you are interested in this project, PM me on ICCUP (for faster answer) or here. For the former ICCUP Admins posting around teamliquid, pls avoid to write wrong statements if you are not sure about what you saying. Regards | ||
|
castleeMg
Canada778 Posts
| ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On August 03 2014 06:04 -NegativeZero- wrote: It's an awful map and everyone hates it. Thats what the testing showed.You should use Oxide, made by Freakling of broodwarmaps.net - it's a foreign made map but it has already received the highest quality of testing, and it's been used in the SBWI Team League. Layout's extremely good too, and the aesthetic theme is pretty unique. Image: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WK3br9R.jpg) Downloads: Melee Obs edit: if FS gets removed, a map very similar to it will be played obsessively. This always happens, just look at python/luna/LT (and to a lesser extent Desti). | ||
| ||
