|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
So does anyone know how, when, and why Lost Temple became the de facto standard Blizzard map for Starcraft? I mean, there's like eighty gazillion Blizzard maps, but LT is the only that anyone plays any of them (Hunters being the only other exception, but that map requires massive changes before it can be balanced). Was it before Brood War? Were there other popular maps that faded away as people stopped playing them?
Cause if you think about it, so much in our meta-game has come from this really-balanced Lost Temple map:
* The possibility of Terran walling off on the ramp of Lost Temple is directly responsible for Terran being able to go metal in TvP, among others.
* The approximate base distances between the bases led to the development of all our major builds, to the point where every map these days has to have approximately those same distance.
* The idea of a gas expansion close to one's ramp that is reasonably easily defensible made FE viable
and etc. One might even suggest that if Lost Temple wasn't a default StarCraft map, this whole community would not have developed.
|
This actually could be the smartest weird idea I've ever heard.
|
Here's what I think:
First of all, LT is NOT a balanced map. Terran has a slight advantage imo. The reason why LT is so popular is because of its ableness (can't think of the right word) to MANY different strategies. The other Blizzard maps limited many strategies, but on LT, you could pretty much do anything. You're right, through this, many strategies were spawned from LT. That's why I think LT is special.
Rivalry was another good map, but LT will always be in my <3 
|
On January 16 2007 21:27 GrandInquisitor wrote:
So does anyone know how, when, and why Lost Temple became the de facto standard Blizzard map for Starcraft? I mean, there's like eighty gazillion Blizzard maps, but LT is the only that anyone plays any of them (Hunters being the only other exception, but that map requires massive changes before it can be balanced). Was it before Brood War? Were there other popular maps that faded away as people stopped playing them?
Cause if you think about it, so much in our meta-game has come from this really-balanced Lost Temple map:
* The possibility of Terran walling off on the ramp of Lost Temple is directly responsible for Terran being able to go metal in TvP, among others.
* The approximate base distances between the bases led to the development of all our major builds, to the point where every map these days has to have approximately those same distance.
* The idea of a gas expansion close to one's ramp that is reasonably easily defensible made FE viable
Agreed. All these factors established the foundation that has made starcraft what it is today.
and etc. One might even suggest that if Lost Temple wasn't a default StarCraft map, this whole community would not have developed.
That's a bit extreme. But I do think it was responsible for the micro-oriented play style predominant in progaming's early days.
Oh and Boxer too, can't forget about all the crazy stuff he's started.
|
yeah from how i see it
back then when LT was used, people used to play more smarting and creative, and itd be more fun to watch the different kind of strategies theyd devise and how they would execute it with fun micro
compared to nowdays luna where it's about building execution and macro and timing, even though this is still okay to watch and requires skill, the oldschool play was much more fun to watch.
i attribute the loss of this style of play mainly to the newer macro-oriented maps coming out
|
LT=sex
pretty sure its a proven mathimatical theorem.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
No one answered my original question :x
On January 16 2007 21:53 roadrunner_sc wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2007 21:27 GrandInquisitor wrote:
and etc. One might even suggest that if Lost Temple wasn't a default StarCraft map, this whole community would not have developed.
That's a bit extreme. But I do think it was responsible for the micro-oriented play style predominant in progaming's early days.
Well, why not? Can you imagine this community springing up from like any of the other shitty maps that is ridiculously imba?
On January 16 2007 21:40 Seraphim wrote:
First of all, LT is NOT a balanced map. Terran has a slight advantage imo.
PGT statistics bear out that LT is pretty much completely balanced. I really don't know why Terran doesn't dominate more, either, but I would suggest that Terran just doesn't bother being as gay as he could be (cliff abuse, 12v3 TvP abuse, etc.)
|
I don't think LT resulted in the extremely fast expansion builds we see today on other maps, because the cliff made it easier to harass the expo.
|
yeah
you'd see more early on action too eg TvP terran tries to cliff
protoss gets early shuttle to counter
more tank drop harass in main etc etc
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On January 16 2007 22:11 skyglow1 wrote:
I don't think LT resulted in the extremely fast expansion builds we see today on other maps, because the cliff made it easier to harass the expo.
i was thinking of ZvX, maybe PvZ :x
|
Good old map, very fun too...
it was even used as wcg map once no? oh the map was so versatile... t.t i miss it
|
Its best not to think of what might have happened if LT wasnt the standard for so long...
Human minds cannot handle it and will promptly explode
|
hmm, i read some blog by a korean and he talks about maps and stuff
each map has a special 'movement' to it in which units will most likely move, LT has a good, simple movement that we all like, the battle is directed towards the center, and many other maps have copied LT
I think in maps theres 'circle movement' and 'triangular movement' or something
maybe LT and hunters are just the only blizzard maps that have any kind of 'general movement' in them which is why the majority of people started playing those ones.
|
On January 16 2007 22:10 GrandInquisitor wrote:No one answered my original question :x Show nested quote +On January 16 2007 21:53 roadrunner_sc wrote:On January 16 2007 21:27 GrandInquisitor wrote:
and etc. One might even suggest that if Lost Temple wasn't a default StarCraft map, this whole community would not have developed.
That's a bit extreme. But I do think it was responsible for the micro-oriented play style predominant in progaming's early days. Well, why not? Can you imagine this community springing up from like any of the other shitty maps that is ridiculously imba?
It started a nice trend with what a decent map should be like.
Not every map afterwards is a result of LT or is deemed "ridiculously imba." New varieties, some entirely different from concepts behind LT, expanded the range of strategies that this community wouldn't be the same without.
Players/mapmakers innovated along the way to help shape the community today. Give them some credit.
|
I remember LT being the defacto map at least 6 years ago, way before I played low-money even. The main reason is that it was a ladder map so one of those deemed standard for tournament play. However, it was the only true center map (and non-cheesy) and thus also the most accessible and popular. TBH, everyone says the cliff allowed for more options... but I think it was just the straightforward main/nat/min only/center 128x128 set up that made it so popular. Clean and simple.
It's the exact same reason hunters became so popular in a half year that it spawned BGH in... 8 more or less symmetrical positions. It's a 128x128 center map: easy for anyone to figure out without multiple paths, island starting locations, random cliffs, etc. I remember the first time I played SC, I looked through all the 8 player maps just to find one that fit the description for hunters.
|
LT became the "staple map" by the following process
1) most good players acknolwedged that ladder maps were far more balanced than other blizzard maps
2) most of the ladder maps had glaring or stupid imbalances for 1v1 play
3) most ladder players eventually request games only on LT (w/ rivalry being a distant second) for ladder play
4) LT becomes the focus of the community as it appears to be reasonably balanced
tada!
|
Nice finds
I still remember feeling very comfortable and learnable the first time I played the map about 4 years ago. The map has a very newbie-friendly concept to grasp, while also has more complicated factors that the players will gradually learn later.
|
when reps came out, most reps were on it and it really furthered the lower level players only feeling comfortable playing on Lost Temple. I think.
I think anyone who played a lot of BW back before 05 played hundreds or thousands of games on Lost Temple. Its just a really good map and ideal for its variety because most anything you can do on Lost Temple can be applied to other maps, so it just has a lot of fundamentals that are really good to learn. I think its also as close to balanced as it gets, with most of the imbalance coming from locational shit.
Having a break from it for a while has really given the map new life as well. Its great:D
|
On January 17 2007 00:55 red.venom wrote:
when reps came out, most reps were on it and it really furthered the lower level players only feeling comfortable playing on Lost Temple. I think.
I think anyone who played a lot of BW back before 05 played hundreds or thousands of games on Lost Temple. Its just a really good map and ideal for its variety because most anything you can do on Lost Temple can be applied to other maps, so it just has a lot of fundamentals that are really good to learn. I think its also as close to balanced as it gets, with most of the imbalance coming from locational shit.
Having a break from it for a while has really given the map new life as well. Its great:D Yea I think if i add up total games I played on temple it would be more then any other map combined... with the exception of bgh I used to <3 that map
|
anyone want to play on the old ladder maps?  i want to see how they play. come to op tl west if you are interested
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
