are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
When I read SSL, I really thought about Sonic first.
The maps look really good, aside from the double backyard map. I don't know how that would play out, but I believe zerg would have win early or die
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
Yeah, wouldn't this be like the third starleague abbreviated SSL? Not even counting the SC2 ones
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
It also works with stew starleague, simmered starleague or we could go PSL for potage starleague
If you re not into soup, how about FSL for forest starleague? Since 숲 means forest anyway
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
I didn't follow the later SSLs at the time, why do you say "tainted"?
My hot take (or is it?): what's the point of Pantheon, Deja Vu and Illusion. They're just variations of the "standard" maps we've seen over the years.
In fact they are shittier versions of those maps. Pantheon is Radeon with more chokepoints and awkward high grounds. Deja Vu is Allegro in twilight and looks even worse. Illusion is Vermeer but with those high grounds made bigger.
Call me that annoying grateful guy - but I'm just really happy ASL isn't dead without a replacement.
Every tournament needs at least one weird map. 3 early gasses and only 6 mineral patches at each seems like it would be good for Zerg, no? Terran and Protoss generally want more minerals against Zerg. Also, each backyard expo is highly defensible as a 4th. I suppose this is balanced by making the wide entrance difficult to defend in the early game - but I don't think it will be too hard to defend it early, and I think it'll be a pretty good map for Zerg. Maybe I'm just dumb though :D
Pantheon looks like Fighting Spirit's older, jacked cousin who rides horses for fun and has already slept with your girlfriend.
Deja Vu is aptly named.
Illusion is quietly awesome. I thought the nat was the 4th, which made me think it was a boring map, but when I realized that's a 4th I got giddy. Seems pretty awesome.
On May 31 2024 00:20 TMNT wrote: My hot take (or is it?): what's the point of Pantheon, Deja Vu and Illusion. They're just variations of the "standard" maps we've seen over the years.
In fact they are shittier versions of those maps. Pantheon is Radeon with more chokepoints and awkward high grounds. Deja Vu is Allegro in twilight and looks even worse. Illusion is Vermeer but with those high grounds made bigger.
Agree. We don't need 5 different versions of Allegro/Polypoid in rotation at once.
I think generally good map pools have been like: - 1 new standard 4-player map - 1 returning map from last season (any player count) - 1 old classic map brought back for 1 season (at this point they could go back to some earlier ASL maps that were pretty cool like Transistor IMO, not JUST kespa maps) - 1 new standard 2 player or 3 player map - 3 different maps (any player count) that are at least sort of conceptual (or like 1 super conceptual map, and then 2 standards). dont want EVERY map feeling super weird.
last Monday, 4 maps above has been announced for 4 players maps candidates. this Monday, we will see another 2-3p candidate maps, and next Monday another some candidate maps.
not all of them will be in the league. official map pool will be announced on 15th, July
On May 31 2024 01:04 zlald wrote: last Monday, 4 maps above has been announced for 4 players maps candidates. this Monday, we will see another 2-3p candidate maps, and next Monday another some candidate maps.
not all of them will be in the league. official map pool will be announced on 15th, July
Cool sounds, looks like there will be a good amount to choose from!
Seems like you guys are not reading description of the maps carefully Illusion is not just standart map at some things, it has 3 50k mineral patches at each main, 2 50k mineral patches at the nat and 4th base, rest mineral patches on entire map is 1200 minerals only. And 50k gas on each main as well btw. I don't know how really it will affect gameplay itself but i think its interesting (?) feature.
Oh in that case quite interesting idea. But not sure if it affects gameplay much because up until when the main and nat mine out, the thing that matters most for all races is how many patches they get access to, not how long. I doubt that 3 patches in main and 2 patches in nat would help turn the game around when you're stuck on 2 bases.
How does the total amount of minerals in main/nat compare to conventional maps? If significantly fewer, it would probably encourage timing all-ins and discourage turtle style.
On May 31 2024 04:46 bochs wrote: How does the total amount of minerals in main/nat compare to conventional maps? If significantly fewer, it would probably encourage timing all-ins and discourage turtle style.
Bsaically it means that your base will run out faster (sans the 3 50k mineral patches). But turtling on two bases with basically only 5 mineral patches when you mine out is not a great or feasible way to play the game so it's sort of enticing players to be more aggressive when expanding.
So actually, the other patches having only 1.2k is the more important thing, rather than the 50k patch gimmick. Normally a patch has 1.5k. So for example Terran and Protoss on 2 bases will mine out those patches in roughly 13-14 mins instead of 17-18. But the problem is the gameplay in the first 13 min is still the same.
Without a doubt this a Zerg favored map and I can see PvZ being a huge problem.
On May 31 2024 01:04 zlald wrote: last Monday, 4 maps above has been announced for 4 players maps candidates. this Monday, we will see another 2-3p candidate maps, and next Monday another some candidate maps.
not all of them will be in the league. official map pool will be announced on 15th, July
Maps need to both satisfy the players and the viewers, only a compromis is ever possible here. Without players there is no tournament and without viewers there is no prizepool and thus no players. The lower the prize pool, the more you have to adhere to which maps the players prefer to play on (and that's usually not the ones viewers care a lot about).
Luckily for us viewers ASL SSL still has its prestige. So despite only making top 4 would make it financially worthwhile for those who actually could, most players still care to play in it. Anyway... Let's see those 2/3p maps already ^^
On May 31 2024 22:56 Volka wrote: Wait, what? No more ASL? What is this SSL thing? any info in english?
Afreeca rebranded to Soop, so now its SSL instead of ASL. It's the same thing, just with a different name.
Really hoping that the 2 and 3 player maps that will be released can show us some variety. Or just bring back some classics like Sylphid honestly. Other old classics that could be reintroduced like Gladiator if they wanted another reused 4p map.
Like it or not, the best Brood War games are played on what we would today call a standard macro map.
These maps allow players to express their skills and play the game the way they have practiced.
It's important to understand that maps with unusual features, such as additional blocked entrances with minerals, eggs, or buildings, additional expansions, weird expansions, and other quirky elements, are likely to be unbalanced.
While it might be entertaining to see Messi and Ronaldo play football in high heels, it would not result in a better game of football.
However, I'd be glad if we had more 2-player or 3-player maps. Due to the symmetries and expansion placement constraints, much of the possible design space on 4-player maps has already been sufficiently explored. This is not yet the case for 2-player and 3-player maps.
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
I didn't follow the later SSLs at the time, why do you say "tainted"?
Hyo Jin “Sonic” Hwang, founder of the Sonic Starleague (SSL) and the shoe brand Sbenu, experienced a dramatic rise and fall in his career. Initially, Sonic gained popularity as a broadcasting jockey for AfreecaTV, capitalizing on the growing eSports trend in Korea. He founded SSL in 2009, creating a platform for amateur and retired professional StarCraft players, and used profits from his online shoe store to fund these tournaments.
Sonic's business, initially named Shinbal Farm and later rebranded as Sbenu, quickly grew due to his aggressive marketing strategies, including endorsements from K-pop stars like IU and AOA, and even sponsoring Manchester United. However, the company faced issues with product quality and accusations of design theft. The real trouble began when suppliers and franchisees filed complaints, accusing Sbenu of defaulting on payments and engaging in financial mismanagement. Sbenu’s excessive marketing expenditures, combined with unpaid debts, led to a severe cash flow crisis. Sonic was ultimately found guilty of embezzlement and fraud, leading to his downfall and the collapse of both Sbenu and SSL.
Obligatory "Bring Back Sparkle" post... but I guess for an "inaugural" starleague they might be playing it safe.
Definitely a -1 on rebranding but it is what it is :\ I guess 8 years of ASLs was a good run. Wonder how liquidpedia is gonna deal with the SSL names colliding.
On May 31 2024 22:56 Volka wrote: Wait, what? No more ASL? What is this SSL thing? any info in english?
Afreeca rebranded to Soop, so now its SSL instead of ASL. It's the same thing, just with a different name.
Really hoping that the 2 and 3 player maps that will be released can show us some variety. Or just bring back some classics like Sylphid honestly. Other old classics that could be reintroduced like Gladiator if they wanted another reused 4p map.
Wow!!! All of the newly uploaded maps look AMAZING! I can't contain my excitement :D
To that guy who said that all good games come from standard maps - Best vs Light on 76 is contrary proof. I'm not sure if I can defend Sparkle being a good map - but I'd 100% rather have a Sparkle in the pool than no risks being taken. Some pros are absolute optimizers, and some pros are the more creative sort. I want the creative pros to get more love - and the maps I'm seeing here look like that's what's happening!
On May 31 2024 22:56 Volka wrote: Wait, what? No more ASL? What is this SSL thing? any info in english?
Afreeca rebranded to Soop, so now its SSL instead of ASL. It's the same thing, just with a different name.
Really hoping that the 2 and 3 player maps that will be released can show us some variety. Or just bring back some classics like Sylphid honestly. Other old classics that could be reintroduced like Gladiator if they wanted another reused 4p map.
monkey's paw curls, we get a 3p gladiator.
I can't stop laughing at the absurdity. You're welcome everyone.
I love Minstrel, definitely my favorite of the lot so far. The other 2p and 3p maps are a bit too wonky for me to wrap my head around atm (except for Dominator). Don't like the look of Random forest personally, think there's too much going on for my eyes. With 0 ramps, it honestly almost feels like some random blizzard map.
Catalyst is just slightly better Chain Reaction imo.
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
I didn't follow the later SSLs at the time, why do you say "tainted"?
Hyo Jin “Sonic” Hwang, founder of the Sonic Starleague (SSL) and the shoe brand Sbenu, experienced a dramatic rise and fall in his career. Initially, Sonic gained popularity as a broadcasting jockey for AfreecaTV, capitalizing on the growing eSports trend in Korea. He founded SSL in 2009, creating a platform for amateur and retired professional StarCraft players, and used profits from his online shoe store to fund these tournaments.
Sonic's business, initially named Shinbal Farm and later rebranded as Sbenu, quickly grew due to his aggressive marketing strategies, including endorsements from K-pop stars like IU and AOA, and even sponsoring Manchester United. However, the company faced issues with product quality and accusations of design theft. The real trouble began when suppliers and franchisees filed complaints, accusing Sbenu of defaulting on payments and engaging in financial mismanagement. Sbenu’s excessive marketing expenditures, combined with unpaid debts, led to a severe cash flow crisis. Sonic was ultimately found guilty of embezzlement and fraud, leading to his downfall and the collapse of both Sbenu and SSL.
Thanks for this! Reading it I do have vague memories of the financial mismanagement but had completely forgotten until I read it! Is Sonic still around?
On May 30 2024 06:15 GTR wrote: are they legitimately rebranding it to the soop star league because it is one of the dumbest decisions of all time given the fact the SSL abbreviation has been tainted by sonic (not to mention it has been used by multiple tournament organizers in the past, which will cause inevitable confusion)
I didn't follow the later SSLs at the time, why do you say "tainted"?
Hyo Jin “Sonic” Hwang, founder of the Sonic Starleague (SSL) and the shoe brand Sbenu, experienced a dramatic rise and fall in his career. Initially, Sonic gained popularity as a broadcasting jockey for AfreecaTV, capitalizing on the growing eSports trend in Korea. He founded SSL in 2009, creating a platform for amateur and retired professional StarCraft players, and used profits from his online shoe store to fund these tournaments.
Sonic's business, initially named Shinbal Farm and later rebranded as Sbenu, quickly grew due to his aggressive marketing strategies, including endorsements from K-pop stars like IU and AOA, and even sponsoring Manchester United. However, the company faced issues with product quality and accusations of design theft. The real trouble began when suppliers and franchisees filed complaints, accusing Sbenu of defaulting on payments and engaging in financial mismanagement. Sbenu’s excessive marketing expenditures, combined with unpaid debts, led to a severe cash flow crisis. Sonic was ultimately found guilty of embezzlement and fraud, leading to his downfall and the collapse of both Sbenu and SSL.
Thanks for this! Reading it I do have vague memories of the financial mismanagement but had completely forgotten until I read it! Is Sonic still around?
I haven't heard him mentioned in relation to Starcraft since he was in trouble with the law.
Minstrel is the only one that stands out to me. I like the exposed mineral lines, however isn't that extremely terran favored. Unless some of the minerals are low yield and allow units through after being mined, tanks will be very good. I like its design though.
Random forest feels like a fun version of huntress, I'm interested in playing it
On June 05 2024 00:45 ThunderJunk wrote: The neutral siege tank on Catalyst is just to show the ramp is wide enough, right?
Like, there isn't actually a neutral siege tank at the bottom of the ramp between the main and the nat, right?
"By placing a tank (siege mode) at the entrance, play using one-search techniques such as gas rush and advance gate, which Protoss frequently uses in existing two-player maps, was suppressed to some extent. - As a result, the limited build fights that have been occurring in recent 2-player maps have been suppressed and more diverse strategies have been encouraged. ▶ Features Neutral Siege Tank (Siege Mode) - Only Zergling can pass through until the tank is removed. (Ghosts, Spidermines, and Scarabs can also pass through, but tanks are removed after the beginning, so only zerglings are described.)"
Oh wow interesting... so this is trying to discourage PvT gas steal and forward gates. ZvP: better cover the ramp because if lings run by, zealots can't go back up the ramp if you go forge fe on the low ground. ZvT: you can still low ground 8 rax and then kill the natural if zerg goes 12h but lings can freely go up and down so it still protects. 9 pool is pretty bad now since the ramp is really narrow from the neutral tank. ZvZ nothing changes basically, PvP I'd expect 12 nex and low ground gates to counter such strategy, lots of mind games. TvT same thing, probably low ground rax and 14cc style builds unless you want to also build low ground factories to add pressure but I doubt it.
2p maps are the sole reason PvT is a somewhat balanced matchup, and that's not because of the lower number of bases. If there are no early game shenanigans from P, T would love 2p maps even more than 4p maps. Plus, P can't 12 Nexus anymore because the zealot(s) will be ~ 15 seconds late to help prevent the bunker rush.
And before anyone can think "Oh but it can stop lings runby in PvZ", lings can still pass through, which makes it actually even worse because zealots can't lol.
Yeah I'm not a huge fan of the idea. I think it's interesting in theory but bad in practice, and it neuters Protoss. Protoss can still 12 nex but they'd need to put a gate on the lowground to get units out. I think the map introduces too much build order RNG. If Protoss thinks Terran is going CC first, they might want to go low ground gate and pressure with zealots. But if Terran opens standard then Protoss is shit out of luck. Terran at least has the option to float buildings up and down from the high ground.
Played a bit of Dominator yesterday, not a fan of the base layout for the top left and bottom left bases. Typical shitty mineral lines and tough to defend against muta harass as an example.
Minstrel I need more reps on but feels like a pretty interesting map.
Any vods from people testing the new maps ? When will we know the final picks ? They really tried new things in the 2 players maps. Apart from Catalyst ( that is heavily inspired from Chain reaction ) Funny that Gladiator is making a comeback as a 3 player map now called Dominator.
Wait until free mind controls those tanks and wins to show the best game of post KeSPA era. The only thing that sucks is that you can't unsiege (?) since siege mode isn't avaliable.
On June 08 2024 01:14 outscar wrote: Wait until free mind controls those tanks and wins to show the best game of post KeSPA era. The only thing that sucks is that you can't unsiege (?) since siege mode isn't avaliable.
While waiting for games, let's try to predict how the maps will play out. I'll rate the perceived balance and the potential for interesting games. A high rating in the excitement category means that players will be able to interact with features of the map, resulting in dynamic back-and-forth scenarios where creativity and player skill can be showcased. A low rating means that map features lead to a constrained or repetitive game flow, or frustrating game states wherein players seem to fight the map features themselves rather than their opponents.
One of the solid maps in the pack. Resource allocation, expansion setup and the center design closely mirror other standard macro maps. The low-to-low ramp makes a return, which I think is a good addition to the set of commonly used map features.
The expansion layout in particular makes it pretty easy to take and defend new expansions. The high amount of expansions (16) and the absence of gas at the mineral-only might make this map tend towards Z>P.
One of the maps I'm looking forward to the most - it's been some time since we last had the unconditional-3-expansion-setup combined with a regular open center.
This map has reduced ressources (1200//3000) on expansions other than the starting positions, which is supposed to force players to "expand earlier". However, this is typically not what is happening and players just tend to run out of ressources earlier, which is more or less severe depending on the matchup.
Balance will probably we questionable at best, but I think we're likely to see a few interesting builds and games before the optimal play has been figured out.
I'm hoping for games where e.g. Protoss might go for a defensive split map scenario due to early access to a lot of gas PvZ, but I'm afraid of ZvT games with crazy Zerg on 6 gas and 20 sunkens.
A standard macro map with a slightly harder to take third base compared to some other modern maps. Maps with a central highground tend to be somewhat problematic, but it's hard to say how the ring-shaped structure will play out. I assume zergs might struggle in ZvT.
Generally a standard map reminiscent of many other modern 4p maps, however with a big gimmick where mineral patches have 1.2k minerals apart from a few patches with 50k each, in particular 3 in each of the mains.
As previously mentioned, I think that reduced minerals only result in players running out of minerals earlier, which, depending on the matchup, is either very severe or doesn't matter. To me it seems very unlikely that such a change will result in what players perceive as a fair.
Regarding the 50k patches I agree with others in the thread in that this change will be much less important than the reduced patches. One strange scenario which we might run into is when one player secured 3 of the 4 starting locations, thus having 9x 50k mineral patches.
It's hard to predict the effects overall, but I'd say either the 50k patches turn out to be irrelevant or we'll get a few games which showcase why this is overall a bad idea. I think it's unlikely that this feature will make a return in the future.
I dislike this map for a few reasons but I think it could turn out one of the balanced ones in the batch.
Just in case you didn't notice - there is a random-ass neutral tank blocking the main ramps (zerglings can fit). This will be irrelevant in most situations but make some builds slightly worse.
Then we have the additional pathway from the natural to the third, blocked by 10x0 mineral patches. In some cases this means you can take a third while being otherwise contained, but most of the time it means that particular timings and all-ins become stronger. I tend to dislike this type of changes, but assuming it turns out to be a defensive rather than offensive feature, it could be fine.
Further, there are big parts of unwalkable terrain in the center which heavily constrain army movement and make it impossible to take engages in some matchups. Last, access to all expansions can be defended from a highground position.
I think overall we might end up with repetetive games, but similarly to Neo Dark Origin, it could somehow turn out to be balanced.
Maybe the worst candidate in a long time. We were making maps like this 15 years ago and they never turned out to be playable.
First of all this is a vulture heaven for TvP - apart from the corner bases, all expansions are wayyy too open.
Then we have the gimmick expansions with mineral lines which block unit movement - they are both exposed and low on ressources, thus obviously they will be taken later in the game when there is no other option. This means that for the most part of the game, those mineral lines will block unit movement and do nothing else. While those pathways are closed, the distances on this map become too large.
I expect games with pathing problems and frustrating, long and slow army movements and a general feeling of having to fight the map.
I don't know whats on the menu, but the map maker was cooking here. This is like a midlife crisis impersonated as broodwar map. + Show Spoiler +
The expansion layout is similar to (2) Destination with a second main entrance with a free mineral only backyard, which is otherwise guarded by the third base.
Then there is another expansion accessible via a floor gate (accessible only early and for workers) from the main, ramp blocked by 3x5k hp temples. The expansion itself and the corner mineral-onlys are blocked by neutral turrets which need to be killed first.
Last, the very center of the map can be permanently closed.
Some of the expansions have reduced resources.
Honestly I've no idea how this will play out. Maybe the assimilators in the center will turn out to be an annoying feature. I'd also like it more if the XelNaga expansions could be taken by either player, i.e. make the mineral lines not tankable from inside the main.
A so-called concept map. It's one of those that will result in dumb games and be veto'd by almost everyone, should it somehow make it to ladder at some point. Very likely to be broken in specific matchups.
What is nice though is a new mechanic that is used for the water areas - highground water tiles are copy/pasted onto the water, which blocks direct vision. + Show Spoiler +
Standard macro map. The inspiration for this map (Gladiator) was not super balanced, so it'll be interesting how this will turn out. I feel like the general tightness and the defensive features might give an edge to the defensive races in each matchup.
On June 07 2024 18:25 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: Any vods from people testing the new maps ? When will we know the final picks ? They really tried new things in the 2 players maps. Apart from Catalyst ( that is heavily inspired from Chain reaction ) Funny that Gladiator is making a comeback as a 3 player map now called Dominator.
On June 07 2024 18:25 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: Any vods from people testing the new maps ? When will we know the final picks ? They really tried new things in the 2 players maps. Apart from Catalyst ( that is heavily inspired from Chain reaction ) Funny that Gladiator is making a comeback as a 3 player map now called Dominator.
Agree with Kraekkling's analysis of Minstrel, personally my most aesthetically pleasing map of the lot and the map that I really want to succeed. But as mentioned, the bases are all way too open which makes securing a 3rd base literally impossible in ZvT. I was thinking that you could reduce the mineral walls (down to like 32 or something) and move the bases against the main high ground instead. Gives players more of an option to try to open them up and create access points. Or just leave the mineral lines as is and reduce a couple patches to like 32. Idk, as it stands, I think the map looks really cool but doesn't play particularly well. The exposed close base is just not a good option to take meaning you're forced to default to the farther, more difficult to take 3rd.
On June 07 2024 18:25 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: Any vods from people testing the new maps ? When will we know the final picks ? They really tried new things in the 2 players maps. Apart from Catalyst ( that is heavily inspired from Chain reaction ) Funny that Gladiator is making a comeback as a 3 player map now called Dominator.
How do Terran and Protoss defend against 9 Pool on Kick Back? The entrance is too big to do any kind of sim city and you don't want Lings to run around your main early in the game especially for PvZ?
Terran have it easy with just walling, which you can get a tight 2 depot and rax diagonal wall on all spawns. the only issue is if Terran spawn in either of the top locations, as your marines will spawn on the outside of the wall.
For Protoss, there's not really a good option. Here are images trying to reach as far out on the diagonal as possible. Pylon at the bottom doesn't seem like a great move since you're limiting your pylon field range, so I think in the middle with gate above and forge below is your best bet, then pull probes. Bottom right and top left spawns are the worst for pylon on bottom as your gate is in a really weird and awkward position. Pylon in the middle means you might have a sizeable hole, but it's only one hole compared to the traditional pylon at the bottom walls.
On June 08 2024 10:43 FlaShFTW wrote: Terran have it easy with just walling, which you can get a tight 2 depot and rax diagonal wall on all spawns. the only issue is if Terran spawn in either of the top locations, as your marines will spawn on the outside of the wall.
For Protoss, there's not really a good option. Here are images trying to reach as far out on the diagonal as possible. Pylon at the bottom doesn't seem like a great move since you're limiting your pylon field range, so I think in the middle with gate above and forge below is your best bet, then pull probes. Bottom right and top left spawns are the worst for pylon on bottom as your gate is in a really weird and awkward position. Pylon in the middle means you might have a sizeable hole, but it's only one hole compared to the traditional pylon at the bottom walls.
Pylon in the middle, you have another hole between the Pylon and the Gate too. But I mean the point is the big hole is wider than usual. You'd have to pull 3 probes at least to plug it and even so it seems like a bad solution. It's more like donating probes to lings rather than actually plugging the hole lol. I feel like 9 pool speed is almost free win for Zerg on this map.
been watching some games and some maps seem underwhelming. Sure, they need a bit more time to figure some maps out and optimize, but some maps look like they wont make it.
On June 08 2024 10:43 FlaShFTW wrote: Terran have it easy with just walling, which you can get a tight 2 depot and rax diagonal wall on all spawns. the only issue is if Terran spawn in either of the top locations, as your marines will spawn on the outside of the wall.
For Protoss, there's not really a good option. Here are images trying to reach as far out on the diagonal as possible. Pylon at the bottom doesn't seem like a great move since you're limiting your pylon field range, so I think in the middle with gate above and forge below is your best bet, then pull probes. Bottom right and top left spawns are the worst for pylon on bottom as your gate is in a really weird and awkward position. Pylon in the middle means you might have a sizeable hole, but it's only one hole compared to the traditional pylon at the bottom walls.
Pylon in the middle, you have another hole between the Pylon and the Gate too. But I mean the point is the big hole is wider than usual. You'd have to pull 3 probes at least to plug it and even so it seems like a bad solution. It's more like donating probes to lings rather than actually plugging the hole lol. I feel like 9 pool speed is almost free win for Zerg on this map.
Right, that's what I meant by still having the sizeable hole for Protoss. I think the choke should be angled a bit more either horizontal or vertical so to help Protoss with walling. The only other idea would somehow to, like how Zerg gets their sunken, to give Protoss spawns an additional energy field to build buildings closer to the top egg so they can make a more diagonal wall and only have one hole, but idk how a map maker would ever code that into the game.
Hello. I am NEMEC, the map creator of Deja Vu, Illusion, and Catalyst. This is my first time greeting you here. I will briefly share my thoughts.
I understand why you are disappointed with the new maps.
While SOOP(AfreecaTV) allows us to create the maps we want, retired professional gamers in Korea do not.
They prefer simpler maps. They are currently finding it difficult to play on (Catalyst, Minstrel, BackStreet, RandomForest) as well. and are asking to reduce the number of candidate maps. To create easy maps, we inevitably end up with formats similar to existing maps.
I want to create diverse maps, but due to the limitations of the StarCraft editor, it is very difficult to find something new.
As gamers' demands increase when creating maps, freedom in design decreases. For example, starting layouts like Python or 5-8 player maps are hard to make. (This is due to issues like Mutalisk balance and rush distances.)
There are also rush distance problems, and each race's gamers have different interests, so it is regrettable that we cannot create as diversely as before.
Currently, they are boycotting the ASL 17 map, Troy. In addition to balance problems, they dislike playing on Troy because it requires a lot of micro-management.
To reduce such micro-management, I created two concept maps (Catalyst, Illusion) with less complex terrain this season, but Illusion also did not receive good reviews. It is not a balance issue (there are not many games played on it in the first place), but because it falls outside the range of maps they prefer.
I will leave additional comments on the meanings behind the maps I have made so far.
1. Blitz Y Blitz X is a map I like. It's not particularly fun, but it’s my favorite because it was my friend’s first official map. However, the original creator did not make any changes to Blitz X, and the title was arbitrarily changed by the modifier. Since the map was modified against the original creator's wishes, most of it was boring.
I wanted the concept of this map to involve not only the final battle on the island but also significant fights on the opposite side. However, it wasn't a 100% successful map. It's unfortunate that it was close to a failure in terms of balance. (In that context, the game between Snow and Soulkey was impressive.)
This map has many hidden attempts. For example, the central map image Blitz Y design, improved gas collection speed at the 5 o'clock natural expansion (which you wouldn't notice in-game as it was modified at the pixel level), and the island expansion where buildings can be placed in any direction with the same gas efficiency.
Since it was the first time being used in ASL, I think I tried to show too much.
2. Deja Vu During the process of modifying the Blitz Y map, I went through a lot of stress and had many discussions with the tournament production team. The balance was so broken that there were talks about a mid-season hotfix.
While making maps, I wanted to create a 4-player map that anyone could play at least once. The map Deja Vu was made with the intention of seeing my friends play on an easy map I made.
There was another map, but it was excluded from the candidates. (You can see it on the AfreecaTV ASL map forum; it’s a map called Sudoku.)
Deja Vu is a concept map that flips Jade. That's why the map title is an anagram of Jade, named Deja + Vu. The meaning of the word also gives a similar feeling to the original.
3. Catalyst Catalyst is a 2-player map influenced by Chain Reaction and Ridge of Heartbreak. The terrain of the map is actually simple, but as you know, it uses Siege Tanks.
I'll explain why I used Siege Tanks. I think the most unique design should come out in 2-player maps, but since it started to be evaluated that 2-player maps are too advantageous for Protoss, they became less fun. I created this map to counter that. If this map succeeds, I think more diverse formats of 2-player maps will come out.
4. Illusion Illusion is a concept map with changed resources. (The map title also has that meaning.) The 50k minerals and gas caught people's attention, but I never intended to keep 50k as it was. So, in version 0.85, the 50k resources were adjusted to 2.4k minerals and 8k gas. (There were broadcast and game time issues, and the reason for setting 50k was to gather data on how much would be harvested during the test period.)
The reason for this resource placement is that if left as is, Terran would seem very advantageous. As you know, Terran is the slowest race to take expansions because they prefer defending in narrow areas. To counter this, I introduced 1.2k resources. The 1.2k resources disappear about 3 minutes faster than in other maps. To prevent confusion in game tempo, resources were given as a reward.
However, gamers focused only on the 50k, thinking this map was just for fun, which makes me upset. I didn't express it because I didn't want to create trouble.
But honestly, I am beginning to doubt whether I should continue making maps. It seems that gamers don't like new maps, and this incident has significantly diminished my passion for SCBW, leaving me feeling bitter. I'm worried that I might have to keep making factory-style maps. If you don't want that, please show that viewers have a stronger voice than gamers.
On June 10 2024 00:38 Rainalcar wrote: Pro players should not have that much of a say. The more successful they are, the more they want to preserve status quo.
BW is entertainment, period. If the entertainment value, abd viewership, is much higher, this justifies "non standard" maps.
I agree with your comments. The reason we were enthusiastic about Boxer. Most map creators like Boxer because he best expressed the fun in the maps. Also, This is why I like Snow. He has an open stance towards maps.
However, I honestly think it is impossible to completely ignore the pro-players. I don't want gamers to be stressed because of the maps I make.
I will try to do better. Capturing novelty, fun, and balance is something not only I but all creators strive for. not just Starcraft map creators but many game developers too.
Thanks a lot for your comments, NEMEC. They are highly appreciated.
Your work is invaluable to the community, and it's evident that a lot of effort and thought go into creating and updating a new map pool every season. Please do not be discouraged by critical comments.
Last season, I found Blitz-Y to be the most interesting map by far, and it's a real shame that it turned out to be unbalanced.
As for why I think players might dislike some of the maps in the candidates, it's because the modern meta relies on the standardization of features in the main and natural expansions.
The more creative the changes to the main and natural expansion, the more it changes the optimal way to play the game.
Broodwar is quite old, and so are most of the players, so they expect their builds to work as usual and are probably reluctant to relearn how to play the game.
I believe there is room for creativity and new mechanics, but it might be better to apply these conservatively to the main and natural expansions.
Instead, such elements could be placed on the map where they'll become relevant at a later stage of the game. (For instance, I think Troy would be much less disliked if there were no double-assimilators connecting the main and natural. It would still be unbalanced but also less frustrating for the players.)
I also very much agree that it's not easy to come up with new and interesting designs, especially for 4-player maps.
When the main and natural are fixed in their design, already 2x4 expansions are placed on the map. Thus, on a 4-player map with 12 expansions, there is only a single expansion left to be designed (e.g. FS, Luna). It is obviously very hard to create an original map with such restrictions, and by now, we have probably seen almost all possible configurations.
As time goes on, it will become harder and harder to make maps with these constraints that don't "feel very similar to an older map."
As you mentioned, a possible solution to this is 2- and 3-player maps, and I agree with that sentiment. For example, on a 3-player map with a total of 15 expansions, 3 expansions need to be designed, providing much more creative space.
Regarding the PvT imbalance on 2-player maps, if there is sufficient data on this, we should consider addressing it, and the neutral tank on Catalyst could be a interesting idea in this regard. However, I think we should not disregard specific types of maps (e.g., 2-player maps) because of perceived imbalances in some matchups, unless it is established that this effect is intrinsic to the map type.
On June 10 2024 00:20 POPsNemec wrote: Hello. I am NEMEC, the map creator of Deja Vu, Illusion, and Catalyst. This is my first time greeting you here. I will briefly share my thoughts.
I understand why you are disappointed with the new maps.
While SOOP(AfreecaTV) allows us to create the maps we want, retired professional gamers in Korea do not.
They prefer simpler maps. They are currently finding it difficult to play on (Catalyst, Minstrel, BackStreet, RandomForest) as well. and are asking to reduce the number of candidate maps. To create easy maps, we inevitably end up with formats similar to existing maps.
I want to create diverse maps, but due to the limitations of the StarCraft editor, it is very difficult to find something new.
As gamers' demands increase when creating maps, freedom in design decreases. For example, starting layouts like Python or 5-8 player maps are hard to make. (This is due to issues like Mutalisk balance and rush distances.)
There are also rush distance problems, and each race's gamers have different interests, so it is regrettable that we cannot create as diversely as before.
Currently, they are boycotting the ASL 17 map, Troy. In addition to balance problems, they dislike playing on Troy because it requires a lot of micro-management.
To reduce such micro-management, I created two concept maps (Catalyst, Illusion) with less complex terrain this season, but Illusion also did not receive good reviews. It is not a balance issue (there are not many games played on it in the first place), but because it falls outside the range of maps they prefer.
I know it's boring for map makers to follow the same map blueprints because you wanna make something original/fun but there's also a balance that needs to be maintained for competitive integrity. Unique maps are great but when the map pool becomes entirely filled with them it makes it very hard for players to practice. The quality control on these maps isn't the best because everyone wants to out do each other on originality which lowers the playability of the maps (balance issues etc).
When players invest time into practicing they want to enjoy playing the game and don't wanna feel disadvantaged from the start. I think the issue in KR leagues now is that the players are so good that people think it would fun to experiment with crazy map layouts just to see how players deal with them, but imo the players probably think they're being taken advantage of.
Competitive players play in tournaments because they wanna see who's #1 skill-wise (mechanics etc), they don't really care about who the best player is at figuring out/abusing a new map (which is more about adaptability).The problem is it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map vs a balanced standard map.
BW is a game that doesn't have any added content, without new maps the game would start to feel really boring so map making is extremely important to the scene. BW players need map makers to spice the game up for them and map makers love their hobby and need players to play on their maps. There's a good symbiotic relationship but we should always think about all parties involved in order to have a healthy scene.
From my experience as a player/viewer and I also help out a few map makers, I think there's also a lot of skill required in making a great fun/standard map like say Polypoid. Figuring out how to make those type of maps can be very rewarding as well imo. Fun/non standard maps are great (when done well) but when it becomes the default thing to do it starts to become very overwhelming/demotivating for the players.
With all that being said, I know how hard and time consuming map making is. BW wouldn't be BW without great map making, your work is extremely appreciated, thanks for everything you guys do. I know map making can feel very unrewarding at times, you invest a lot of time into something that many people take for granted. When a map is done well you won't hear much from anyone.. but when it's not it feels like you hear about it from everyone;;. Many people understand how valuable you guys are even if you don't get praised and there's also people working to improve BW's infrastructure to help support you guys in the future.
I could probably name 20 maps that would be better submissions than many of these yet the soup team don’t recognize any map makers outside of their map team.
On June 10 2024 03:27 MeIIOw wrote: I could probably name 20 maps that would be better submissions than many of these yet the soup team don’t recognize any map makers outside of their map team.
It’ll be like this forever
I also have no connection with the SOOP production team. Hasn't SOOP been the most open to map creators among the BW tournaments? (For example; Overwatch, Inner Coven, Polypoid, Good Night, Tempest, Butter, 76, etc.) I have never seen Kespa era.
If you have good maps, please submit them to aslstarleague@naver.com when preparing for the next season. I just submitted my maps after seeing the notice.
On June 10 2024 02:09 Kraekkling wrote: Thanks a lot for your comments, NEMEC. They are highly appreciated.
Your work is invaluable to the community, and it's evident that a lot of effort and thought go into creating and updating a new map pool every season. Please do not be discouraged by critical comments.
Last season, I found Blitz-Y to be the most interesting map by far, and it's a real shame that it turned out to be unbalanced.
As for why I think players might dislike some of the maps in the candidates, it's because the modern meta relies on the standardization of features in the main and natural expansions.
The more creative the changes to the main and natural expansion, the more it changes the optimal way to play the game.
Broodwar is quite old, and so are most of the players, so they expect their builds to work as usual and are probably reluctant to relearn how to play the game.
I believe there is room for creativity and new mechanics, but it might be better to apply these conservatively to the main and natural expansions.
Instead, such elements could be placed on the map where they'll become relevant at a later stage of the game. (For instance, I think Troy would be much less disliked if there were no double-assimilators connecting the main and natural. It would still be unbalanced but also less frustrating for the players.)
I also very much agree that it's not easy to come up with new and interesting designs, especially for 4-player maps.
When the main and natural are fixed in their design, already 2x4 expansions are placed on the map. Thus, on a 4-player map with 12 expansions, there is only a single expansion left to be designed (e.g. FS, Luna). It is obviously very hard to create an original map with such restrictions, and by now, we have probably seen almost all possible configurations.
As time goes on, it will become harder and harder to make maps with these constraints that don't "feel very similar to an older map."
As you mentioned, a possible solution to this is 2- and 3-player maps, and I agree with that sentiment. For example, on a 3-player map with a total of 15 expansions, 3 expansions need to be designed, providing much more creative space.
Regarding the PvT imbalance on 2-player maps, if there is sufficient data on this, we should consider addressing it, and the neutral tank on Catalyst could be a interesting idea in this regard. However, I think we should not disregard specific types of maps (e.g., 2-player maps) because of perceived imbalances in some matchups, unless it is established that this effect is intrinsic to the map type.
3 player maps are actually harder to make than 4 player maps. Drawing an equilateral triangle inside a square makes the map feel much smaller. (It becomes even more challenging when considering air units.)
Additionally, in Zerg vs. Zerg matches, Overlord searching luck can decide the game's outcome, leading to games that rely too much on luck.
Catalyst is just a candidate map, and if any issues arise during the testing process, we can simply exclude it. If it performs well, it can become an official map.
Only one out of the 2 player map candidates revealed so far has been selected as an official map. So, should we limit the test games? I think it's worth trying when we have plenty of candidates because the risk is lower.
Creating maps from limited resources naturally leads to dissatisfaction. Even reading the posts here shows that everyone has different opinions.
On June 10 2024 00:20 POPsNemec wrote: Hello. I am NEMEC, the map creator of Deja Vu, Illusion, and Catalyst. This is my first time greeting you here. I will briefly share my thoughts.
I understand why you are disappointed with the new maps.
While SOOP(AfreecaTV) allows us to create the maps we want, retired professional gamers in Korea do not.
They prefer simpler maps. They are currently finding it difficult to play on (Catalyst, Minstrel, BackStreet, RandomForest) as well. and are asking to reduce the number of candidate maps. To create easy maps, we inevitably end up with formats similar to existing maps.
I want to create diverse maps, but due to the limitations of the StarCraft editor, it is very difficult to find something new.
As gamers' demands increase when creating maps, freedom in design decreases. For example, starting layouts like Python or 5-8 player maps are hard to make. (This is due to issues like Mutalisk balance and rush distances.)
There are also rush distance problems, and each race's gamers have different interests, so it is regrettable that we cannot create as diversely as before.
Currently, they are boycotting the ASL 17 map, Troy. In addition to balance problems, they dislike playing on Troy because it requires a lot of micro-management.
To reduce such micro-management, I created two concept maps (Catalyst, Illusion) with less complex terrain this season, but Illusion also did not receive good reviews. It is not a balance issue (there are not many games played on it in the first place), but because it falls outside the range of maps they prefer.
I know it's boring for map makers to follow the same map blueprints because you wanna make something original/fun but there's also a balance that needs to be maintained for competitive integrity. Unique maps are great but when the map pool becomes entirely filled with them it makes it very hard for players to practice. The quality control on these maps isn't the best because everyone wants to out do each other on originality which lowers the playability of the maps (balance issues etc).
When players invest time into practicing they want to enjoy playing the game and don't wanna feel disadvantaged from the start. I think the issue in KR leagues now is that the players are so good that people think it would fun to experiment with crazy map layouts just to see how players deal with them, but imo the players probably think they're being taken advantage of.
Competitive players play in tournaments because they wanna see who's #1 skill-wise (mechanics etc), they don't really care about who the best player is at figuring out/abusing a new map (which is more about adaptability).The problem is it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map vs a balanced standard map.
BW is a game that doesn't have any added content, without new maps the game would start to feel really boring so map making is extremely important to the scene. BW players need map makers to spice the game up for them and map makers love their hobby and need players to play on their maps. There's a good symbiotic relationship but we should always think about all parties involved in order to have a healthy scene.
From my experience as a player/viewer and I also help out a few map makers, I think there's also a lot of skill required in making a great fun/standard map like say Polypoid. Figuring out how to make those type of maps can be very rewarding as well imo. Fun/non standard maps are great (when done well) but when it becomes the default thing to do it starts to become very overwhelming/demotivating for the players.
With all that being said, I know how hard and time consuming map making is. BW wouldn't be BW without great map making, your work is extremely appreciated, thanks for everything you guys do. I know map making can feel very unrewarding at times, you invest a lot of time into something that many people take for granted. When a map is done well you won't hear much from anyone.. but when it's not it feels like you hear about it from everyone;;. Many people understand how valuable you guys are even if you don't get praised and there's also people working to improve BW's infrastructure to help support you guys in the future.
Isn't map and build order and strategy adaptation not a skill though? Obviously, the game has been out for so long now that we sort of get the idea of what is "meta" at this point and maps have been designed to mitigate some race's advantages and disadvantages to arrive at a feeling of "ok this is fair for all races," But I feel like this mentality of "this is just how it is, that's the meta and this is what's balanced" also leads to creative constraints and we just end up with the same boring maps, just adjusted ever so slightly and on a different tileset. I don't want maps to get to a point where we might as well not make them anymore, and suddenly we're just recycling old maps over and over again for future ASLs.
On June 10 2024 00:38 Rainalcar wrote: Pro players should not have that much of a say. The more successful they are, the more they want to preserve status quo.
BW is entertainment, period. If the entertainment value, abd viewership, is much higher, this justifies "non standard" maps.
I completely agree with this opinion and I've been saying this for quite some time already.
On June 10 2024 00:20 POPsNemec wrote: Hello. I am NEMEC, the map creator of Deja Vu, Illusion, and Catalyst. This is my first time greeting you here. I will briefly share my thoughts.
I understand why you are disappointed with the new maps.
While SOOP(AfreecaTV) allows us to create the maps we want, retired professional gamers in Korea do not.
They prefer simpler maps. They are currently finding it difficult to play on (Catalyst, Minstrel, BackStreet, RandomForest) as well. and are asking to reduce the number of candidate maps. To create easy maps, we inevitably end up with formats similar to existing maps.
I want to create diverse maps, but due to the limitations of the StarCraft editor, it is very difficult to find something new.
As gamers' demands increase when creating maps, freedom in design decreases. For example, starting layouts like Python or 5-8 player maps are hard to make. (This is due to issues like Mutalisk balance and rush distances.)
There are also rush distance problems, and each race's gamers have different interests, so it is regrettable that we cannot create as diversely as before.
Currently, they are boycotting the ASL 17 map, Troy. In addition to balance problems, they dislike playing on Troy because it requires a lot of micro-management.
To reduce such micro-management, I created two concept maps (Catalyst, Illusion) with less complex terrain this season, but Illusion also did not receive good reviews. It is not a balance issue (there are not many games played on it in the first place), but because it falls outside the range of maps they prefer.
I know it's boring for map makers to follow the same map blueprints because you wanna make something original/fun but there's also a balance that needs to be maintained for competitive integrity. Unique maps are great but when the map pool becomes entirely filled with them it makes it very hard for players to practice. The quality control on these maps isn't the best because everyone wants to out do each other on originality which lowers the playability of the maps (balance issues etc).
When players invest time into practicing they want to enjoy playing the game and don't wanna feel disadvantaged from the start. I think the issue in KR leagues now is that the players are so good that people think it would fun to experiment with crazy map layouts just to see how players deal with them, but imo the players probably think they're being taken advantage of.
Competitive players play in tournaments because they wanna see who's #1 skill-wise (mechanics etc), they don't really care about who the best player is at figuring out/abusing a new map (which is more about adaptability).The problem is it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map vs a balanced standard map.
BW is a game that doesn't have any added content, without new maps the game would start to feel really boring so map making is extremely important to the scene. BW players need map makers to spice the game up for them and map makers love their hobby and need players to play on their maps. There's a good symbiotic relationship but we should always think about all parties involved in order to have a healthy scene.
From my experience as a player/viewer and I also help out a few map makers, I think there's also a lot of skill required in making a great fun/standard map like say Polypoid. Figuring out how to make those type of maps can be very rewarding as well imo. Fun/non standard maps are great (when done well) but when it becomes the default thing to do it starts to become very overwhelming/demotivating for the players.
With all that being said, I know how hard and time consuming map making is. BW wouldn't be BW without great map making, your work is extremely appreciated, thanks for everything you guys do. I know map making can feel very unrewarding at times, you invest a lot of time into something that many people take for granted. When a map is done well you won't hear much from anyone.. but when it's not it feels like you hear about it from everyone;;. Many people understand how valuable you guys are even if you don't get praised and there's also people working to improve BW's infrastructure to help support you guys in the future.
Isn't map and build order and strategy adaptation not a skill though? Obviously, the game has been out for so long now that we sort of get the idea of what is "meta" at this point and maps have been designed to mitigate some race's advantages and disadvantages to arrive at a feeling of "ok this is fair for all races," But I feel like this mentality of "this is just how it is, that's the meta and this is what's balanced" also leads to creative constraints and we just end up with the same boring maps, just adjusted ever so slightly and on a different tileset. I don't want maps to get to a point where we might as well not make them anymore, and suddenly we're just recycling old maps over and over again for future ASLs.
+1 to this one, also.
Hopefully it will never come to that, although we're getting closer and closer to it..
Maps are a soul (in a sense) of professional/semi-professional BW and we should never forget that.
On June 10 2024 00:38 Rainalcar wrote: Pro players should not have that much of a say. The more successful they are, the more they want to preserve status quo.
BW is entertainment, period. If the entertainment value, abd viewership, is much higher, this justifies "non standard" maps.
I completely agree with this opinion and I've been saying this for quite some time already.
cheers
I will add, let the pros rganise a tournament themselves if they want a say. The issue is, unlike eg tennis, they don't really need ASL, but they do benefit tremendously from Afreeca. If ASL attracts crowds, their streaming will also benefit.
I suspect non standard maps draw in more crowds. Sure, terran slow pushing protoss takes good mechanics, but it is not the thing that will sell BW or help it grow. Yes, standard maps are necessary too provided they are actually balanced, which isn't necessarily shown looking at history. We need crazy, memorable games more often, and for this, experimenting is key.
Monty Hall - the map in the third batch definitely falls into the batshit crazy category. However I suspect this is the bad type of craziness (like Neo Arkanoid), not the interesting one (like 76). Expect shit, cheesy games on this map if it makes it into the pool. Like, even the core concept of the map screams RNG.
Don't really see the changes they made compared to the old version. Are they just gonna bring it back like Troy and Arkanoid?
Flash vs Bisu anyone? Love me a map like this. In a longer best of or in double elimination it adds excitement to cheer for the underdog or just see some more creativity in general.
Edit: I just noticed I was reading a page I loaded like 3 hours ago. FlaShFTW already linked the VOD. Good job, mate! ^^
I hope they add in one or two of these concept maps, but keep the other maps more standard. Even with standard maps you can have very interesting terrain designs such as Tempest. Maps dont need to have "gimmicks" or "special features" or "tricks" to them to produce really good and interesting games. More often than not the gimmick or special maps are underwhelming because of balance issues.
I know you all already know this about me - but I'm gonna say it again for good measure. I love weird maps.
ASL/SSL has the prestige needed to attract sufficiently talented gamers - they'll get a full roster of players. Even if 50% of the pros boycott it that's fine. We'll get more new players and that will stimulate growth in the scene. I genuinely don't think that will happen though - I think the pros will join when they see the tournament is going to happen with or without them because this game is their life.
I have never been more excited for a Broodwar tournament than I was when I saw all the weird maps - especially Random Forest. I know it's not perfectly symmetrical, and the top position player will have to deal with more punishing drops than the other positions. I LIKE that. Add variance. It's a good thing.
On June 10 2024 00:20 POPsNemec wrote: Hello. I am NEMEC, the map creator of Deja Vu, Illusion, and Catalyst. This is my first time greeting you here. I will briefly share my thoughts.
I understand why you are disappointed with the new maps.
While SOOP(AfreecaTV) allows us to create the maps we want, retired professional gamers in Korea do not.
They prefer simpler maps. They are currently finding it difficult to play on (Catalyst, Minstrel, BackStreet, RandomForest) as well. and are asking to reduce the number of candidate maps. To create easy maps, we inevitably end up with formats similar to existing maps.
I want to create diverse maps, but due to the limitations of the StarCraft editor, it is very difficult to find something new.
As gamers' demands increase when creating maps, freedom in design decreases. For example, starting layouts like Python or 5-8 player maps are hard to make. (This is due to issues like Mutalisk balance and rush distances.)
There are also rush distance problems, and each race's gamers have different interests, so it is regrettable that we cannot create as diversely as before.
Currently, they are boycotting the ASL 17 map, Troy. In addition to balance problems, they dislike playing on Troy because it requires a lot of micro-management.
To reduce such micro-management, I created two concept maps (Catalyst, Illusion) with less complex terrain this season, but Illusion also did not receive good reviews. It is not a balance issue (there are not many games played on it in the first place), but because it falls outside the range of maps they prefer.
I know it's boring for map makers to follow the same map blueprints because you wanna make something original/fun but there's also a balance that needs to be maintained for competitive integrity. Unique maps are great but when the map pool becomes entirely filled with them it makes it very hard for players to practice. The quality control on these maps isn't the best because everyone wants to out do each other on originality which lowers the playability of the maps (balance issues etc).
When players invest time into practicing they want to enjoy playing the game and don't wanna feel disadvantaged from the start. I think the issue in KR leagues now is that the players are so good that people think it would fun to experiment with crazy map layouts just to see how players deal with them, but imo the players probably think they're being taken advantage of.
Competitive players play in tournaments because they wanna see who's #1 skill-wise (mechanics etc), they don't really care about who the best player is at figuring out/abusing a new map (which is more about adaptability).The problem is it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map vs a balanced standard map.
BW is a game that doesn't have any added content, without new maps the game would start to feel really boring so map making is extremely important to the scene. BW players need map makers to spice the game up for them and map makers love their hobby and need players to play on their maps. There's a good symbiotic relationship but we should always think about all parties involved in order to have a healthy scene.
From my experience as a player/viewer and I also help out a few map makers, I think there's also a lot of skill required in making a great fun/standard map like say Polypoid. Figuring out how to make those type of maps can be very rewarding as well imo. Fun/non standard maps are great (when done well) but when it becomes the default thing to do it starts to become very overwhelming/demotivating for the players.
With all that being said, I know how hard and time consuming map making is. BW wouldn't be BW without great map making, your work is extremely appreciated, thanks for everything you guys do. I know map making can feel very unrewarding at times, you invest a lot of time into something that many people take for granted. When a map is done well you won't hear much from anyone.. but when it's not it feels like you hear about it from everyone;;. Many people understand how valuable you guys are even if you don't get praised and there's also people working to improve BW's infrastructure to help support you guys in the future.
Isn't map and build order and strategy adaptation not a skill though? Obviously, the game has been out for so long now that we sort of get the idea of what is "meta" at this point and maps have been designed to mitigate some race's advantages and disadvantages to arrive at a feeling of "ok this is fair for all races," But I feel like this mentality of "this is just how it is, that's the meta and this is what's balanced" also leads to creative constraints and we just end up with the same boring maps, just adjusted ever so slightly and on a different tileset. I don't want maps to get to a point where we might as well not make them anymore, and suddenly we're just recycling old maps over and over again for future ASLs.
balance is the main issue, it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map compared to a balanced standard map (but basically my main point is opportunity cost)
there aren't a lot of high quality map makers and map making is very time consuming, for every non standard map that gets made that map maker could have spent time figuring out ways to make a more creative/fun standard map (that could be the difference between having the next Polypoid made or not), and as you see from these maps (and the majority of previous ASL seasons) the general trend in map making is heading in the same direction
and yes ppl can spend their time how they want but there's also a trade off happening in terms of the quality of the final product we end up with, also as mentioned the style of maps is overwhelmingly 1 sided now
i rather have staple maps get made that are gonna get played 10-20 years down the line (which adds to BW's long term playability) instead of these 1 off maps that are only gonna get played in 1 tour and discarded, map makers are getting incentivized to make these type of maps so their maps get picked for the main tour
On June 10 2024 00:20 POPsNemec wrote: Hello. I am NEMEC, the map creator of Deja Vu, Illusion, and Catalyst. This is my first time greeting you here. I will briefly share my thoughts.
I understand why you are disappointed with the new maps.
While SOOP(AfreecaTV) allows us to create the maps we want, retired professional gamers in Korea do not.
They prefer simpler maps. They are currently finding it difficult to play on (Catalyst, Minstrel, BackStreet, RandomForest) as well. and are asking to reduce the number of candidate maps. To create easy maps, we inevitably end up with formats similar to existing maps.
I want to create diverse maps, but due to the limitations of the StarCraft editor, it is very difficult to find something new.
As gamers' demands increase when creating maps, freedom in design decreases. For example, starting layouts like Python or 5-8 player maps are hard to make. (This is due to issues like Mutalisk balance and rush distances.)
There are also rush distance problems, and each race's gamers have different interests, so it is regrettable that we cannot create as diversely as before.
Currently, they are boycotting the ASL 17 map, Troy. In addition to balance problems, they dislike playing on Troy because it requires a lot of micro-management.
To reduce such micro-management, I created two concept maps (Catalyst, Illusion) with less complex terrain this season, but Illusion also did not receive good reviews. It is not a balance issue (there are not many games played on it in the first place), but because it falls outside the range of maps they prefer.
I know it's boring for map makers to follow the same map blueprints because you wanna make something original/fun but there's also a balance that needs to be maintained for competitive integrity. Unique maps are great but when the map pool becomes entirely filled with them it makes it very hard for players to practice. The quality control on these maps isn't the best because everyone wants to out do each other on originality which lowers the playability of the maps (balance issues etc).
When players invest time into practicing they want to enjoy playing the game and don't wanna feel disadvantaged from the start. I think the issue in KR leagues now is that the players are so good that people think it would fun to experiment with crazy map layouts just to see how players deal with them, but imo the players probably think they're being taken advantage of.
Competitive players play in tournaments because they wanna see who's #1 skill-wise (mechanics etc), they don't really care about who the best player is at figuring out/abusing a new map (which is more about adaptability).The problem is it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map vs a balanced standard map.
BW is a game that doesn't have any added content, without new maps the game would start to feel really boring so map making is extremely important to the scene. BW players need map makers to spice the game up for them and map makers love their hobby and need players to play on their maps. There's a good symbiotic relationship but we should always think about all parties involved in order to have a healthy scene.
From my experience as a player/viewer and I also help out a few map makers, I think there's also a lot of skill required in making a great fun/standard map like say Polypoid. Figuring out how to make those type of maps can be very rewarding as well imo. Fun/non standard maps are great (when done well) but when it becomes the default thing to do it starts to become very overwhelming/demotivating for the players.
With all that being said, I know how hard and time consuming map making is. BW wouldn't be BW without great map making, your work is extremely appreciated, thanks for everything you guys do. I know map making can feel very unrewarding at times, you invest a lot of time into something that many people take for granted. When a map is done well you won't hear much from anyone.. but when it's not it feels like you hear about it from everyone;;. Many people understand how valuable you guys are even if you don't get praised and there's also people working to improve BW's infrastructure to help support you guys in the future.
Isn't map and build order and strategy adaptation not a skill though? Obviously, the game has been out for so long now that we sort of get the idea of what is "meta" at this point and maps have been designed to mitigate some race's advantages and disadvantages to arrive at a feeling of "ok this is fair for all races," But I feel like this mentality of "this is just how it is, that's the meta and this is what's balanced" also leads to creative constraints and we just end up with the same boring maps, just adjusted ever so slightly and on a different tileset. I don't want maps to get to a point where we might as well not make them anymore, and suddenly we're just recycling old maps over and over again for future ASLs.
balance is the main issue, it's much harder to make a balanced non standard map compared to a balanced standard map (but basically my main point is opportunity cost)
there aren't a lot of high quality map makers and map making is very time consuming, for every non standard map that gets made that map maker could have spent time figuring out ways to make a more creative/fun standard map (that could be the difference between having the next Polypoid made or not), and as you see from these maps (and the majority of previous ASL seasons) the general trend in map making is heading in the same direction
and yes ppl can spend their time how they want but there's also a trade off happening in terms of the quality of the final product we end up with, also as mentioned the style of maps is overwhelmingly 1 sided now
i rather have staple maps get made that are gonna get played 10-20 years down the line (which adds to BW's long term playability) instead of these 1 off maps that are only gonna get played in 1 tour and discarded, map makers are getting incentivized to make these type of maps so their maps get picked for the main tour
I don't disagree with any of your analysis regarding the time and energy it takes to try to come up with a balanced non standard map with unique features and designs.
But I will say that with the maps starting to move towards one direction (standard main and natural layout, close by mineral only, 3rd gas base at 3/6/9/12, medium sized center with attack paths surrounding it), the maps all feel and play almost exactly the same. We don't get to see these epic games anymore of unique battles that put players into new and difficult situations, which as I mentioned before, is its own skill that should be rewarded (think Shine's bag of builds where he would throw the other player's preparation totally out of sync, and while his own build wasn't super efficient or optimized, would be able to outplay the opponent from awkward situations).
The same can be said about Chess960 compared to standard Chess. Standard Chess is boring imo. Ultimately so much of it these days is theory and remembering openings rather than actually having intuition about playing chess, which is why 960 is so fun because you're playing with no opening preparation, it's purely off of skill and over the board technique.
Imo, we could incentivize map makers to produce more unique maps but requiring them that if they want to submit a 4 player standard map for a tournament, they also have to design a unique and creative map. This will great a larger pool of unique maps, and out of the many that will be made and submitted, I'm sure we can find and discover some that will survive and be a fun and reasonably balanced map, even if its only there for one tournament.
I've read all the opinions here, and they all make sense. Similar discussions often come up in Korea as well. On the other hand, there are comments that differ slightly from my thoughts or that you may have misunderstood, but I won't extend the conversation any further as it could become lengthy. (I am just a viewer as well.)
I translated a comment 910 left in the community where I am active. I think this information will be helpful to you as well.
" Hello.
I am Kang Kyu-Yeol from SOOP Corporation.
Many of you have sent me messages, and I am currently thinking about what maps to use for the next season.
Since ASL, I have been using maps that are highly complete and liked by users, and SSL will be no different.
Map makers will know, but because StarCraft maps need to be meticulously balanced, they often receive both criticism and praise.
I understand that becoming official maps means additional modifications and balancing issues, which can be very stressful.
However, in order to respect both users and gamers, I hope that StarCraft maintains its popularity by continuing to collaborate with map makers.
If you have any personal questions or inquiries, please feel free to email me at any time. (aslstarleague@naver.com) "
On June 10 2024 00:38 Rainalcar wrote: Pro players should not have that much of a say. The more successful they are, the more they want to preserve status quo.
BW is entertainment, period. If the entertainment value, abd viewership, is much higher, this justifies "non standard" maps.
I have to agree with this. Starcraft 2 maps have been judged mostly by the pros for the past few years, and they tend to automatically dislike anything unusual enough to force them to learn new builds. Consequently Starcraft 2 maps have only gotten more and more standardized, with the range of acceptable deviation from the standard getting constantly smaller.
I love some maps, I hope we will see them at SSL 1
(4)KICK BACK 0.80
This map makes me remember Colosseum maps but double interesting from 2 bases inside the mains. Only bad thing in this one is so small main bases. Lead to players will die from recall, doom drop or lack of land to spend money.
There are so much bases outside, if you are greed to take 2 bases early, maybe you are blocked and wait to die. It's pretty mind game, I love it.
(2)Back Street 0.3
This map combines between Autobahn and (4)KICK BACK 0.80. There are 3 Assimilators, they are useless, it should remove all or add more to split map if all Assimilators are destroy.
The nice thing in this one is 2 backdoors that are blocked by line eggs. This map is encourage turtle strategy with 5 bases, you just sit at home and take them slowly.
(3)Random Forest 0.85
This map is a upgrade from the legendary map aka Hunter. It's so hard to take 3rd bases, this thing makes me remember maps in 2001-2005. Fortunately, 3rd bases also so hard to attack by roadway. It's encourage drop and air units. It's pretty similar Outsider map but (3)Random Forest 0.85 promotes variety strategy, build order... Outsider just a marco map.
It will have so many situations in this map. It belongs to IQ and creative of players.
(2)Monty Hall SE 2.15
I think this is the best map in the map pool.
It's not like (3)Random Forest 0.85, players can rush so easily. (2)Monty Hall SE 2.15 allow cheese, marco or making air units that it's rarely we see on other maps.
There are 2 islands at top left and bottom right. You can control 6 bases at there. It's so funny and amazing!
Some things I want to say:
1. No one cares the map pool, except some guys here. No gosu, no streamer, no audience... all of them just play on FS 1.3 and the map pool came out about 1 year before. They are rather play 10000000000 times on Retro, Polypod, Neo Dark Origin, Apocalypse and try to avoid Blitz Y, Troy SE (2 best maps that they have)
2. Why mapmakers make an effort to create 99% balance maps. Do they know VETO exist in the Earth? and at all league/tournament?
3. If 100% maps get balance, Terran will win 100%. So, it's actually not balance, not fair. Finally, mapmakers can't do what they want to do. It's the same to StarCraft.
4. Do you know why we like playing on ladder and love watching league/tournament? It has CHALLENGE. Everyone (except me) likes easy maps (standard marco maps). So what a challenge in those maps? If you think you are good at StarCraft, just pick Terran and play on Troy SE vs Zerg, Protoss. If your opponents are not computer, your winrate must be less than 10%.
5. I really don't care or love any maps. I am just so bored when I have to play and watch on some maps in 100000000000000000 times.
So Illusion (pointless gimmick), Catalyst (balance issue), Back Street (balance issue), and Random Forest (less said the better) are removed from the candidate pool. I'd say good riddance, although the remaining maps don't strike me with amazement.
Note that this is still not the official map pool (only to be announced in July). Late addition/removal still possible (this is what happened a few seasons ago).
The Dark Origin - Retro - Apocalypse period is such a nice one, for both progamers and casual players on the ladder: - NDO: PvT 49% , TvZ 52% , ZvP 52% - Retro: PvT 51%, TvZ 57% (oops), ZvP 52% - Apocalypse: PvT 52%, TvZ 53%, ZvP 51%
It's quite balanced at pro level and not too hard for casual players to play. I know we have to eventually phase them out just to refresh thing but doubt the new map pool would achieve such balance.
My guess: Pantheon is a less balanced Radeon. Kick Back is Zerg heaven. Deja Vu will be just another Allegro. Minstrel probably Terran favored with such layout. Dominator probably balanced as most 3p maps.
For casuals on the ladder, it'd be hard since 3 vetoes are not enough for this pool. We may all have to unban Fighting Spirit lol.
On June 17 2024 20:57 TMNT wrote: The Dark Origin - Retro - Apocalypse period is such a nice one, for both progamers and casual players on the ladder: - NDO: PvT 49% , TvZ 52% , ZvP 52% - Retro: PvT 51%, TvZ 57% (oops), ZvP 52% - Apocalypse: PvT 52%, TvZ 53%, ZvP 51%
It's quite balanced at pro level and not too hard for casual players to play. I know we have to eventually phase them out just to refresh thing but doubt the new map pool would achieve such balance.
My guess: Pantheon is a less balanced Radeon. Kick Back is Zerg heaven. Deja Vu will be just another Allegro. Minstrel probably Terran favored with such layout. Dominator probably balanced as most 3p maps.
For casuals on the ladder, it'd be hard since 3 vetoes are not enough for this pool. We may all have to unban Fighting Spirit lol.
Damn I never realized just how balanced that trio was. That's really really special to have a 2, 3, and 4p map all balanced at the same time (sans Retro's TvZ). Hope they bring back both Apoc and NDO at later dates and find a better 4p TvZ balanced map!
On June 17 2024 20:57 TMNT wrote: The Dark Origin - Retro - Apocalypse period is such a nice one, for both progamers and casual players on the ladder: - NDO: PvT 49% , TvZ 52% , ZvP 52% - Retro: PvT 51%, TvZ 57% (oops), ZvP 52% - Apocalypse: PvT 52%, TvZ 53%, ZvP 51%
It's quite balanced at pro level and not too hard for casual players to play. I know we have to eventually phase them out just to refresh thing but doubt the new map pool would achieve such balance.
My guess: Pantheon is a less balanced Radeon. Kick Back is Zerg heaven. Deja Vu will be just another Allegro. Minstrel probably Terran favored with such layout. Dominator probably balanced as most 3p maps.
For casuals on the ladder, it'd be hard since 3 vetoes are not enough for this pool. We may all have to unban Fighting Spirit lol.
Damn I never realized just how balanced that trio was. That's really really special to have a 2, 3, and 4p map all balanced at the same time (sans Retro's TvZ). Hope they bring back both Apoc and NDO at later dates and find a better 4p TvZ balanced map!
Neo Daek origin went through four versions before it reached a balanced state. First two versions were a terran's nightmare. Retro was more or less instantly somewhat balanced but also required a couple tiny adjustments. Apocalypse was more or less an instant hit.
I didn't love Apocalypse when it first came out but it really grew on me. Fantastic map. It's really hard to make balanced and enjoyable 3-player maps too. To be fair it's basically an evolution on Ascension though.
On June 17 2024 20:57 TMNT wrote: The Dark Origin - Retro - Apocalypse period is such a nice one, for both progamers and casual players on the ladder: - NDO: PvT 49% , TvZ 52% , ZvP 52% - Retro: PvT 51%, TvZ 57% (oops), ZvP 52% - Apocalypse: PvT 52%, TvZ 53%, ZvP 51%
It's quite balanced at pro level and not too hard for casual players to play. I know we have to eventually phase them out just to refresh thing but doubt the new map pool would achieve such balance.
My guess: Pantheon is a less balanced Radeon. Kick Back is Zerg heaven. Deja Vu will be just another Allegro. Minstrel probably Terran favored with such layout. Dominator probably balanced as most 3p maps.
For casuals on the ladder, it'd be hard since 3 vetoes are not enough for this pool. We may all have to unban Fighting Spirit lol.
Damn I never realized just how balanced that trio was. That's really really special to have a 2, 3, and 4p map all balanced at the same time (sans Retro's TvZ). Hope they bring back both Apoc and NDO at later dates and find a better 4p TvZ balanced map!
Neo Daek origin went through four versions before it reached a balanced state. First two versions were a terran's nightmare. Retro was more or less instantly somewhat balanced but also required a couple tiny adjustments. Apocalypse was more or less an instant hit.
Definitely feels like 2p maps will need some major adjustments over time while 4p and 3p maps will be more or less balanced from the start with a few smaller adjustments. 2p being the case where specific matchups will have some wild numbers and changing aspects of the map would maybe overcompensate on other matchups, making adjustments very specific to cater to a specific matchup.
I'm gonna go ahead and write to my heart's content about the entrants in this map pool, because that is something I legitimately love to do. Gratitude to the map makers, tournament designers, and TL.net.
Pantheon 0.8: What an incredible map! It looks like a twist on Vermeer with less oppressive Zergling highground zoning lanes against mech, but with a bigger open center with a hole in it. I like gladiator style maps like this to be in a tileset with less doodads. I think it will play better than Vermeer across just about every matchup. That said, it's important to have an oppressive map like Vermeer adding some fear into the map pool sometimes. I'm glad this got picked, especially over Vermeer.
Kick Back 0.8: This is three-base PvZ but with tiny expansions. Stressful. I mean, we've seen what Snow can do with 3 bases worth of income once the infrastructure was already in place... and we DO get 9 patches in the main. But what's to stop zerg from securing an easy-to-defend pocket expansion with no room to drop on it? This is it boys, it's TIME FOR CONTACT! BRING ON THE DISRUPTION WEB CORSAIR LATEGAME. If we can just prevent an extreme routing for the entirety of 5 bases of action, we can start using D web with storm reaver support and zerg would be forced to GG. They will be forced to play into our hands. Problem is preventing them from getting 5 easy bases. That turns to 6 real quick. We better have 5 when they have 6, and we better prevent 7 for a while. At the end of the day, it's an 8 base grind. This map is anything but relaxing.
Deja Vu 0.81: High-ground takes the win. Undroppable ridges.- attacking that third is a trap in the lategame, and highly necessary earlygame. Preventing Terran from having a full 3-base economy may be the most difficult thing about PvT on this map. Lots of room for maneuverable earlygame shuttle cheese.
Illusion 0.85: Less resources per base was an experiment in Starcraft 2. I assure you, gentle viewers, it went way less balanced than it would be in Broodwar. I was actually pretty excited about the layout before the gimmick was discovered. Why not just make this a legit standard map? It's taking some of the best of Vermeer. Creepy Vermeer as an Illusion?! We won't know this season. But I think this is a great one to keep in the pocket. I practice on Illusion.
Catalyst 0.8: Personally, I would have chosen Catalyst without the siege tanks, and a few hostile goliaths in the center rush path, and one hostile goliath per path on the top and bottom to artificially lengthen those rush distances. Zerg will have to take an inefficient overlord path to overlord scout - but the overlord scout distance still wouldn't be too long.
Minstrel 0.82: This map sucks for Zerg against Terran. It's balanced and cool for PvZ, though. But, it won't feel that way if you just play safe against 9 pool to scrape that MMR off your boot. Zergs would rather cheese and get good at a balanced map than try to learn a map under the oppression of a Terran - which Minstrel surely is. EZ Points. Then PvT comes along and makes you question everything... keeping observers alive is the most important objective of this map.
Backstreet 0.2: TvT playground for the keedz.
Random Forest 0.85: One to two base aggro practice for the keedz.
Dominator: Hard Yes on this map.
Monty Hall 2.15: The GOAT cheese map makes a startling return! Yay
Overall - I'm happy with the maps chosen. This is going to be a very wild SSL!!!
Nice, they got rid of most of the funky stuff and we're guaranteed to have several special games on Monty Hall, Minstrel and Kick Back. Looks like a good mix to me. + Show Spoiler +
On June 17 2024 20:57 TMNT wrote: The Dark Origin - Retro - Apocalypse period is such a nice one, for both progamers and casual players on the ladder: - NDO: PvT 49% , TvZ 52% , ZvP 52% - Retro: PvT 51%, TvZ 57% (oops), ZvP 52% - Apocalypse: PvT 52%, TvZ 53%, ZvP 51%
It's quite balanced at pro level and not too hard for casual players to play. I know we have to eventually phase them out just to refresh thing but doubt the new map pool would achieve such balance.
My guess: Pantheon is a less balanced Radeon. Kick Back is Zerg heaven. Deja Vu will be just another Allegro. Minstrel probably Terran favored with such layout. Dominator probably balanced as most 3p maps.
For casuals on the ladder, it'd be hard since 3 vetoes are not enough for this pool. We may all have to unban Fighting Spirit lol.
Damn I never realized just how balanced that trio was. That's really really special to have a 2, 3, and 4p map all balanced at the same time (sans Retro's TvZ). Hope they bring back both Apoc and NDO at later dates and find a better 4p TvZ balanced map!
Radeon is another map with almost perfect 50% WRs in all matchups (source). Also it is one of the very few maps where Zerg is at 50% WR ZvT, I'm glad it'll be coming back.
I struggle to understand why Radeon is supposed to be better for Zerg compared to all the other 4p maps. Liquipedia even has it at 58% WR ZvT, however on a much smaller sample.
Is it me or progamers are not bothering to use the new maps too much ? I remember in the past everyone was so excited to try new maps. You could see Rush ; Light Mini and Jaedong giving feedback on the organizer afreeca blog. Idk i feel like they are not really testing them. I wonder if Progamers are actually giving up on ASL now that is restarting to be SSL.
They are just idle.. no one wants new or fresh maps instead of maps used to be. They try 1st match with new mappool, 2nd match with old mappool, because there is someone who has not experienced new maps. but it's already 4 weeks from the first some new maps announced.
They used it 2 days then switched back to using the normal map pool. Look at yesterday and today proleague they using the old MP again.
And also they only used the new MP for round 1. I dont see them doing sponsored games on them either.Maybe im trippin tho.
Usually Major Proleague players try the new maps first. Yesterday it was a hybrid one, somewhat similar to K League, so they used the old maps for balance. K-leaguers tend to not play new maps as much as Major leaguers, the reason being they're not likely to play those maps much anyway in ASL (need to qualify first, then pass Ro24).
One of the reasons is this map pool is not confirmed yet so they don't want to put much effort into it now. And after the pool is confirmed, there will be another month for them to get used to the maps, so plenty of time.
There are a lot of university events recently as well, which may pull their attention elsewhere.
They used it 2 days then switched back to using the normal map pool. Look at yesterday and today proleague they using the old MP again.
And also they only used the new MP for round 1. I dont see them doing sponsored games on them either.Maybe im trippin tho.
3 days but yeah, I don't see many sponsored games in them. I don't know how it compares to previous times when there were new maps though. Could it be they're not playing much in them because the final map pool hasn't been decided?
On June 22 2024 22:02 Qikz wrote: Has anyone got the map download files for the maps that didn't get selected in the end? I can't seem to find them on the website.
They used it 2 days then switched back to using the normal map pool. Look at yesterday and today proleague they using the old MP again.
And also they only used the new MP for round 1. I dont see them doing sponsored games on them either.Maybe im trippin tho.
Usually Major Proleague players try the new maps first. Yesterday it was a hybrid one, somewhat similar to K League, so they used the old maps for balance. K-leaguers tend to not play new maps as much as Major leaguers, the reason being they're not likely to play those maps much anyway in ASL (need to qualify first, then pass Ro24).
One of the reasons is this map pool is not confirmed yet so they don't want to put much effort into it now. And after the pool is confirmed, there will be another month for them to get used to the maps, so plenty of time.
There are a lot of university events recently as well, which may pull their attention elsewhere.
Hmm that makes sense then. I didnt know the lower tier leagues were behind in MP updates. That said if im not mistaken the official MP will be declared on july 1. I dont actually think that gives to much time for testing considering no one is using them. But maybe they dont care to much and when the MP is set they will just give feedback and close the maps to version 1.0 in a later date.
Progamers . specially zerg players are complaining about the new maps. Soulkey been losing everything. I wonder if some players will quit this season. Afreeca should be careful with this madness. There is going to be Competition with other tourneys and progamers know that proleagues and school content is where the money at. At the same time maybe it is a good thing and progamers will have a higher voice with map selection in the future.
On July 14 2024 03:55 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: Progamers . specially zerg players are complaining about the new maps. Soulkey been losing everything. I wonder if some players will quit this season. Afreeca should be careful with this madness. There is going to be Competition with other tourneys and progamers know that proleagues and school content is where the money at. At the same time maybe it is a good thing and progamers will have a higher voice with map selection in the future.
A couple maps are good, but more than half I just think should be scrapped in favor of appeasing the players.
On July 14 2024 16:34 namkraft wrote: Stupid question but, why do maps have a normal version and an Obs version? What new features does the Obs version have?
Why isnt there training (TR) version of those maps like back in the day, where you could select your spawn location. Was quite convenient when practicing a specific position in a match-up.
On July 15 2024 19:06 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote: today they finalize map pool right?
yeah no changes.
sad. With all due respect to map makers, monty hall is one of the worst maps and shouldn't be in there. Really not liking what kinds of play this map forces.
Some stats from eloboard. The sample of games is small so far, so don't read too much into it.
Radeon is a well balanced map, I'm glad it is back in the mappool.
Regarding the new and somewhat experimental maps we can see that (as usual) Terran is best at handling these. The only bad matchup for Terran so far is TvZ on DejaVu.
Both Protoss and Zerg so far seem to struggle quite heavily on specific maps, in particular Minstrel looks to be a Zerg graveyard.
It'll be interesting to see how the players will prepare for multiple maps where their race has a winrate close to 30%.
Really not sure how Zerg is supposed to play on Minstrel. They're screwed in ZvT with no proper safe-ish 3rd, and also screwed in ZvP with a heavily exposed 3rd base. The map looks pretty but is awful balance wise.
On July 16 2024 01:53 FlaShFTW wrote: Really not sure how Zerg is supposed to play on Minstrel. They're screwed in ZvT with no proper safe-ish 3rd, and also screwed in ZvP with a heavily exposed 3rd base. The map looks pretty but is awful balance wise.
ZvT on Minstrel really is
Other issues include the fact that the natural mineral line is less exposed compared to most modern maps, meaning there is no high ground behind the minerals. A 2-hatch or 2.5-hatch muta is by far the most standard opening in ZvT, and Zerg is generally expected to be able to snatch a few SCVs at the natural mineral line for free by leveraging high ground vision. This is not possible here.
Additionally, aside from some cheese or all-in strategies, Zerg cannot win ZvT without having a four-gas economy. Achieving this on Minstrel is much more challenging than usual, as there are no easily accessible expansions.
On July 16 2024 01:53 FlaShFTW wrote: Really not sure how Zerg is supposed to play on Minstrel. They're screwed in ZvT with no proper safe-ish 3rd, and also screwed in ZvP with a heavily exposed 3rd base. The map looks pretty but is awful balance wise.
ZvT on Minstrel really is
Other issues include the fact that the natural mineral line is less exposed compared to most modern maps, meaning there is no high ground behind the minerals. A 2-hatch or 2.5-hatch muta is by far the most standard opening in ZvT, and Zerg is generally expected to be able to snatch a few SCVs at the natural mineral line for free by leveraging high ground vision. This is not possible here.
Additionally, aside from some cheese or all-in strategies, Zerg cannot win ZvT without having a four-gas economy. Achieving this on Minstrel is much more challenging than usual, as there are no easily accessible expansions.
I wonder if putting maybe mineral blockers between the ramp leading from the corner base up to the high ground base would allow for them to at least get lurkers to block one choke, then later for them to open up the minerals and expand to the high ground base for the 4th gas. That seems like the only real possibility to fix that part of the map for ZvT.
Minstrel is such a shit map. After each side takes the 4 bases on the edges of the map, there are 6-7 bases left but none of them are realistically a good option. It's like you're more likely to be harassed from taking those bases and will end up taking a deficit instead of benefiting from them lol. Plus, the different pathways are like a fucking maze, all the fights seems scattered and scrapy because units can't move properly.
Terrans will end up dominating this map since they have superior range and mines and no one can engage them effectively here.
On July 16 2024 04:48 TMNT wrote: Soulkey and Snow better play out of their skin, as Terrans will destroy everyone with this season map pool
Perfect time for Flash to come back.
Also one of the few times we don't want Blizzard to update the ladder's map pool....
Map pool should just be FS, Polypoid, Apoc, NDO, Retro, and Radeon.
nah screw FS. Monty swap with NDO or have just Minstrel as a 2 spawn map. Deja Vu, Pantheon,kick back, Dominator, Minstrel are oke
In what world is Minstrel ok lol. Every Zerg player hates this map, its legit unplayable for them. NDO should be the default 2 player map until we can find another 2p that is reasonably balanced.
For Minstrel ZvT if zerg can somehow take the high ground base on the opposite side of the map as their 3rd it could be ok. Terran can only attack up the ramp by ground or walk a really long way around and pass in front of zerg's natural. It might be the only viable place to secure a 3rd with typical lurkers at the the top of ramp.
As way to change the map to make it more playable for zerg would it make sense to remove the low-ground corner bases and move the high ground bases back into the corner? Could also make the ramp smaller if needed.
On July 20 2024 12:41 ToastedBagel wrote: For Minstrel ZvT if zerg can somehow take the high ground base on the opposite side of the map as their 3rd it could be ok. Terran can only attack up the ramp by ground or walk a really long way around and pass in front of zerg's natural. It might be the only viable place to secure a 3rd with typical lurkers at the the top of ramp.
As way to change the map to make it more playable for zerg would it make sense to remove the low-ground corner bases and move the high ground bases back into the corner? Could also make the ramp smaller if needed.
I don't play BW though so I dunno...
My suggestion is similar to yours where you put mineral block/stacked buildings on the ramp leading from the high ground base to the corner base, thus giving zerg just one choke to guard with lurkers. Terran can take it out later to open up another pathway.
EPT![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FSvdny%2FbtsHCnGlh7n%2FuIAwdzRHQc7EIDHx9MxFEk%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FmARGI%2FbtsHBBFoK8q%2FTCvm8haXzgGCphODGaTuWk%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/BUexr/btsHS1aS6kR/RL0LdlqP1xk37SSo2rLdXK/img.png)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/bfihej/btsHR0RKKOL/m6sYbrtvU3ChatxmkF6Xs0/img.png)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/covxFW/btsHSehJQiM/B0MAyIDzJvuKEevKRoHKZK/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/bxcTqC/btsHTGdJl6q/0Cja0SWlNuJaC4Oj77V3yk/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/begckJ/btsHt1qzflj/BK1Ghf2s1m1uBVBLQasAl0/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/mKbA7/btsHS0QDEl3/jy8T6wPSufdQoyuH7IywKK/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/2ti2T/btsHQhZFDfJ/CiDxuq3Wx5Y8zSRhz1bwb0/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/cGUcqK/btsHSTY7XkI/xBePxLNF5YfXaWzjwKkcx0/img.jpg)
Illusion is not just standart map at some things, it has 3 50k mineral patches at each main, 2 50k mineral patches at the nat and 4th base, rest mineral patches on entire map is 1200 minerals only. And 50k gas on each main as well btw. I don't know how really it will affect gameplay itself but i think its interesting (?) feature.
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FcVrZwf%2FbtsHLu5WaAy%2FItkmKCDWciBf3UBNnKhReK%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FlbYbO%2FbtsHL7PXUGz%2FhNdfckay5EWLelB0b56oPK%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FbegckJ%2FbtsHt1qzflj%2FBK1Ghf2s1m1uBVBLQasAl0%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FbfNxvc%2FbtsHKUqzCXI%2FSLakHcPAdNYg0kt4E4ggk0%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FbatMgG%2FbtsHxAsEfqu%2FDJAIkIkxLwIhzWr7YgUwO1%2Fimg.png)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2F5jP7N%2FbtsHxzmYQ2N%2FJ8GpzLxLTIuq6JSznS3F11%2Fimg.png)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FHtLWw%2FbtsHHbj5rWM%2FrFu3k5X7QS28tNP22DX54k%2Fimg.png)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/batMgG/btsHxAsEfqu/DJAIkIkxLwIhzWr7YgUwO1/img.png)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/bfNxvc/btsHKUqzCXI/SLakHcPAdNYg0kt4E4ggk0/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/aqGg5ep_700bwp.webp)
![[image loading]](https://i.ibb.co/8XMSxLv/SCScrn-Shot-060424-013932.png)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/lbYbO/btsHL7PXUGz/hNdfckay5EWLelB0b56oPK/img.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://blog.kakaocdn.net/dn/cVrZwf/btsHLu5WaAy/ItkmKCDWciBf3UBNnKhReK/img.jpg)
vs Killer 
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/wJqFxQB.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/lVc71WV.jpeg)
![[image loading]](https://tl.net/tlpd/images/maps/271_Triathlon.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FcGUcqK%2FbtsHSTY7XkI%2FxBePxLNF5YfXaWzjwKkcx0%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://img1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R1280x0/?scode=mtistory2&fname=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.kakaocdn.net%2Fdn%2FJBNS5%2FbtsDdEEibMn%2F3x5gKvqjdP9sMQmCS5NllK%2Fimg.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.ibb.co/c27NjCj/asdffff.png)
