|
Thanks Carnac for the mappack.
Why do you say we're whining? Those comments he pulled from that map's thread were mostly joking, how were we to expect them to come true?
Only reason I brought up bwm maps here is because equinox questioned my mapping balance background, and because I wanted to know why these silly imbalanced maps were getting in when bwm has some better maps. Of course mapdori has better maps than these too =/
And as for doing nothing but whining, nah we're doing noting but making great maps 
Why are you whining about us saying these maps suck? Not like you have any background in mapping, unless I am mistaken =/
|
On April 13 2007 18:04 niceplayer wrote:
I like Jericho's honeycomb design, but I'd hardly call placing dweb (even less for swarms) on a map an innovation.
What's wrong with DMZ's dweb placement except for the fact that you don't like it? It's all on lower ground vs. some of these maps where placement doesn't even make sense. Osiris WTF? The 2 raised platforms in the middle have nothing there, why all the hubbubs?
thank god you're not making maps, I would hate to see them...
Well as for DMZ, they just massed dwebs. You know the consequence of this? Most of the map ground units cannot attack, but can be cliffed. Doesn't that sound boring? As for Jericho, I'm not a fan of the dweb use there, but it's not bad. And in Osiris, the dweb is used very strategically and subtly. Just because you know nothign about mapping doesn't mean he doesn't either oO
|
thank god you're not making maps, I would hate to see them...
Well as for DMZ, they just massed dwebs. You know the consequence of this? Most of the map ground units cannot attack, but can be cliffed. Doesn't that sound boring? As for Jericho, I'm not a fan of the dweb use there, but it's not bad. And in Osiris, the dweb is used very strategically and subtly. Just because you know nothign about mapping doesn't mean he doesn't either oO
I was mapping way waaaay before bwmn/se sites, son.
So what if they mass dweb? What idiot would shoot from low ground onto high ground? And strategic and subtle on Osiris? You gotta have your eyes checked if you don't see swarm right after dweb.
|
In my opinion, spells on maps are more of an innovation than the placement of neutral buildings. Having a small place on a map where a unit simply cannot attack could potentially lead to fantastic displays of micro. But, that's just me.
You're right, I should explain why I'm not a big fan of DMZ's webs. Most of it is the fact that Korean maps generally steal a concept and just go completely crazy with it, but apparently I'm not supposed to talk about that. I think that in early game, that dweb placement is going to be intense and will lead to great micro battles. Great. But into middle game, big units will be completely screwed in the webs because they won't be able to shoot at all. Also, once it hits middle game, those passages won't really be used at all anyways.
I do have to disagree that the webs on the maps I posted above don't make sense.
Avatar - check out the dweb in the choke to each base. Leads to cool strategies like putting a pylon there and putting cannons behind it. The lings can't attack the pylon or the cannons if you put the cannons right on the edge of the web. Not balanced, but interesting at least. The webs at the top of the ramps are there because the top of ramps is generally very strategically important terrain. People will be moving their units to the top of the ramp so that their opponents have a 70% hit ratio, and will then have to micro their units around the webs. Osiris has the same deal with webs at the top of ramps.
Last Conflict - the dark swarms right behind the natural. Since this map is semi-island, there will be a lot of fast expansions. But this makes it so the fast expansions are a bit more vulnerable because a unit can land there and deal a lot of damage. Note that a unit can only hit half of your minerals, since the other group of minerals is on the other side of the CC. It's just another strategic possibility.
I guess I can't pinpoint exactly why I dislike DMZ's webs. Good point.
|
There's a very good point about these spells being racially-specific and having a set duration, especially for zerg/swarm where their melee units are typically the key to winning the game.
Now a mapper takes these spells and makes it available for any race, and all of a sudden there's imbalance to exploit. The one good way to mitigate this is to make the spell placements non-strategic, or at least not very advantageous, hence the low-ground placements.
|
well i say those passages can be used as short cuts in middle of game.
|
On April 13 2007 18:32 niceplayer wrote:
There's a very good point about these spells being racially-specific and having a set duration, especially for zerg/swarm where their melee units are typically the key to winning the game.
Now a mapper takes these spells and makes it available for any race, and all of a sudden there's imbalance to exploit. The one good way to mitigate this is to make the spell placements non-strategic, or at least not very advantageous, hence the low-ground placements.
Or don't use them in excess. :D
|
hmm well with spells, I think you have to be subtle with them. You want to effect the game strategically with them, not racially. So if you use a dark swarm, keep it in an open place. A dweb at a choke can make all the difference in the world, and not particularly to any race; just as epidion said it can make micro necessary. On a map with dwebs near an expo or in the middle of a possible battlefield, terran could quick siege and could lose several tanks under a dweb, or terran could siege behind dwebs limiting a protoss attack. That's not racially unfair to any race.
But I'm getting off topic 
With DMZ, on the ground no race can do much with dwebs everywhere. This leaves large portions of the map impossible to really fight in. Races like terran, who can exploit the cliffs very well are at an advantage. With few expos on the map, turtling in your main doesn't seem like too bad of an idea, it will be hard to defend any expo anyway.
FoBBish above me is probably right about the paths being shortcuts, but there really is no battlefield area, no strategic place to fight in =/
|
United States7166 Posts
btw for those who downloaded these maps and are wondering what the (TR) versions of maps are, it means if you set it to UMS setting you can choose which player starts at which location. so the name of each team in the screen before starting the game says things like '5 시' which is korean for 5 oclock i believe..but unless you have korean font set you cannot read it
|
Canada7170 Posts
DMZ looks like a hard but fun map to play on. That terrain's unbuildable, right? I love the snake image on Python!
|
DMZ uses dwebs on the map for a different purpose which still changes gameplay but I'd prefer any permanent dark swarm or dweb to be subtle and not overdone. In DMZ I feel that they overdid the usage of dwebs to make it serve as unattackable low ground almost like it's a terrain feature. FYI for all who haven't fully understood the usage of permanent spells, the swarms and dwebs can be used by any race to it's advantage or disadvantage and the spells don't only affect melee units but air units as well. Try and bring an air unit into the dweb and you'll see that it even covers air units, but air units can still shoot so it's advantageous. You can hide or bring air units with your melee army if you decide to take the path of dwebs to help make the journey somewhat safer. (but how much safer is it really if there's sieged tanks on the ledges?)
Read this resourceful article on spells in maps.
I am by no means hating on the map because DMZ will give interesting games nonetheless but you might/will see a bit of racial imbalance by keeping track of the win/loss record of certain races on that particular map... or possibly not since it's only used as a 2v2 map.
Python, I agree looks unfinished. if there was more building space inside the main it'd be better, who would want to build tons of production buildings right in the open? The middle is supposed to be the battlefield, not the base. Since it's a 1v1 map, I guess this problem won't be addressed as players will just have to expand to the other vacant mains or the top left/bottom right exps which are the same sizes of the main bases which i find a little odd but this still affects gameplay. I don't really like it since it makes expanding more important to have the building space for everything so expect alot of macro games on this as the middle is open wide enough for full scale mid-late game epic battles.
... At least they didn't pick Python to be a 2v2 map... then it'd be really bad :S
I've seen submissions on bwmn sometimes from a claimed mapdori mapper so the people at bwmn ARE getting exposure but not the kind they want. The Korean pro gaming community seems to have their own thing going on so it's very hard for top notch mappers (which I believe bwmn also have) from around the world to get their map known or to get the recognition for it (concept or design wise). Bwmn have successfully gotten some maps on other tournies/leagues around the world but not Korea (to the best of my knowledge) because that market is hard to break into for mapping in particular.
I for one am NOT a top notch mapper so even though I frequent bwmn, I am not being biased.
|
Is there going to be a newspost whit more info about this?
|
I think the BWMN community as a whole is too harsh on the pro maps. That's probably because they know maps firsthand and can more easily see imperfections in it, so it's a little understandable, I suppose.
Even imperfect as they are, though, they're still loads better than many of the VERY imbalanced maps in the past (Mercury, etc.). At most the advantage is say 60-40 as opposed to say 80-20. Also, when the minimap images are released we all get our own ideas of how the map will play out and theorycraft what matchups will be imbalanced etc. but the only proof we have is what happens when the pros play their games; that's when our theories about map imbalance are proven right or wrong. When Reverse Temple was released, every man and his dog thought that it would be T > P, but it turned out that P > T on that map (still not balanced, of course, but the point is that the actual play on the maps doesn't always come out the way we expected it to).
On most of the games that I have seen on this season's maps, the player who had better control/strategy won the game. These players are the best in the world, and if they are determined enough then they can overcome the map imbalance and win. That's the fun part of professional SC; seeing pros overcome map imbalances, early game setbacks, and their own flaws to pull out a victory. Just look at sAviOr in Shinhan 3 OSL: in a map pool where all four maps were T > Z (though claims of imbalance on Longinus II and HitchHiker are a bit sketchy IMO) he still won.
At the very least, give the maps some time to be played in proleague, and then we will have more concrete evidence.
(Also, it is difficult to prove that your community was the first to release a map with a new innovation [neutral buildings/dwebs/wide ramps/reverse ramps/mineral blocks on islands/whatever], and almost impossible to prove that your community was the first to come up with the idea of a map with such elements.)
|
A 3x3 match on DMZ would be insane!
|
Belgium6787 Posts
in a map pool where all four maps were T > Z (though claims of imbalance on Longinus II and HitchHiker are a bit sketchy IMO) he still won.
I'm pretty sure most pro's acknowledged that hitchhiker was Z>T, because of the narrow pathways being absolute hell for Z once filers were in the game
Cool maps anyway, I look forward to seeing games on DMZ
|
thanks for the maps! i really like Python.
|
United States10774 Posts
On April 17 2007 14:27 Xeofreestyler wrote:Show nested quote +in a map pool where all four maps were T > Z (though claims of imbalance on Longinus II and HitchHiker are a bit sketchy IMO) he still won. I'm pretty sure most pro's acknowledged that hitchhiker was Z>T, because of the narrow pathways being absolute hell for Z once filers were in the game Cool maps anyway, I look forward to seeing games on DMZ
Once you get defilers hitchhiker is fine but its really hard to stop the Terran hanbang before defiler tech kicks in..
|
On April 13 2007 18:16 niceplayer wrote:Show nested quote +
thank god you're not making maps, I would hate to see them...
Well as for DMZ, they just massed dwebs. You know the consequence of this? Most of the map ground units cannot attack, but can be cliffed. Doesn't that sound boring? As for Jericho, I'm not a fan of the dweb use there, but it's not bad. And in Osiris, the dweb is used very strategically and subtly. Just because you know nothign about mapping doesn't mean he doesn't either oO
I was mapping way waaaay before bwmn/se sites, son. So what if they mass dweb? What idiot would shoot from low ground onto high ground? And strategic and subtle on Osiris? You gotta have your eyes checked if you don't see swarm right after dweb.
Making maps and making good maps are different things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
