EPTedit: a lot of concepts that were submitted in the new worlds map contest a few years ago would be perfect.
[ASL21] Potential Map Candidates - Page 5
| Forum Index > BW General |
GTR
51640 Posts
edit: a lot of concepts that were submitted in the new worlds map contest a few years ago would be perfect. | ||
|
[sc1f]eonzerg
Belgium7004 Posts
| ||
|
Kraekkling
728 Posts
back then I used to have a Terran training buddy so we would meet up on bnet at a fixed time to "train like the koreans" so we would play like 30 games of ZvT, same map, same build order every time, 3h muta vs 1rax FE into 3rax good times | ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands1266 Posts
On January 24 2026 19:02 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: The reason give to use match point is that there was already 2 3 players map. And that Match point is one of the most balanced 2 players map. Is that real ? Dark origin has been the most balanced map i have seen by stats. But MP is actually zvt hell lol. They are throwing some minor fixes in. They got until February 9 to make suggestions for minor changes to the maps. Neo Dark Origin was the most balanced 2 player map based on winrates. Apocalypse the most balanced 3 player map, and radeon most balanced 4 player map. | ||
|
Kraekkling
728 Posts
there's a lot of positional variance because of that + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://liquipedia.net/commons/images/8/8b/MatchPoint.jpg) I also really like that Match Point has only 10 expansions. For several matchups, when both players are about to max out at 200/200, most of the map is taken and it feels like we are heading towards a climax. Its like the very last stage of the game, where resources are scarce and often one of the players is on a clock. This is in contrast to 16 expansion maps, where it takes like 10 more minutes to reach that stage of the game after both players approach max supply. feels kinda awkward | ||
|
Freakling
Germany1534 Posts
On January 24 2026 20:54 Kraekkling wrote:I also really like that Match Point has only 10 expansions. For several matchups, when both players are about to max out at 200/200, most of the map is taken and it feels like we are heading towards a climax. Its like the very last stage of the game, where resources are scarce and often one of the players is on a clock. This is in contrast to 16 expansion maps, where it takes like 10 more minutes to reach that stage of the game after both players approach max supply. feels kinda awkward But a low expansion count combined with a general layout that is rather trivially split in half means that non-mirror match-ups will quickly devolve into a state where no more growth is possible and the race that needs more bases is at a disadvantage. As Eon said, it's basically a nightmare ZvT. You may not even be able to take the low ground bases, certainly not the one next to the T's main. I even remember games where Nukes were used to deny those. | ||
|
Kraekkling
728 Posts
- it's only about 20% of TvZ games that are long enough for these split map scenarios to matter - ZvT balance mostly depends on rush distance and on how much Z can achieve with muta. The cliff layout between main and nat is rly good for muta I'd expect Z to do better on Match Point than on e.g. Pole Star, Poly or Vermeer. edit: this is more of a personal preference, but I don't think it's actually that bad if the TvZ matchup gets another turnaround late in the game, at least on some maps. As in, usually Z is supposed to dominate once they get swarm and enough gas bases, but if they fail to turn this window around 16-20 minutes into a win, Terrans get to come back and win via split map and resource exhaustion. I wouldn't mind at all if the win condition for Terran is "split map and deny expansions with nukes" | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10514 Posts
| ||
|
A.Alm
Sweden557 Posts
| ||
|
oxKnu
1261 Posts
The guy that picks the maps is a MASSIVE Terran fanboy. Almost Artosis' level, without the drama. Any chance he has in selecting, trimming off and correcting the map-pool he will go back to to insanely unbalanced maps in favor of Terran. Matchpoint is another example. After that last ASL where Protoss looked probably at its worst we get AGAIN a map that demolishes both P and Z in the most important match-ups. | ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands1266 Posts
On January 25 2026 21:03 oxKnu wrote: Told you guys this multiple times. And will repeat it again: The guy that picks the maps is a MASSIVE Terran fanboy. Almost Artosis' level, without the drama. Any chance he has in selecting, trimming off and correcting the map-pool he will go back to to insanely unbalanced maps in favor of Terran. Matchpoint is another example. After that last ASL where Protoss looked probably at its worst we get AGAIN a map that demolishes both P and Z in the most important match-ups. The guy who picks the maps retired after asl 20 if I recall correctly. someone else does it now. | ||
|
oxKnu
1261 Posts
| ||
|
TMNT
3233 Posts
But either way, it's hard to avoid Terran maps because most standard maps are intrinsically Terran favored in both matchups anyway. It would require the Koreans to completely change their mindset to achieve real map balance. I also feel like the balance between how hard a map is for a race to play and the outcome of the matchup for that race is not struck properly. And that's how we ended up with this template for standard maps. Take Eclipse for example. We know it's a nightmare for Terran to get a 3rd on this map in TvP. TvP on Eclipse is hard, yes. But at the same time, the win rate is still about 50% for them. So, maybe, in order to achieve balance from an outcome point of view, it is supposed to be hard for Terran here in TvP. But the Terran players, they don't feel comfortable playing this map, so it's considered unbalanced from an effort point of view. So they want map designs that give them an easier 3rd, a more comfortable time to play (Vermeer, Polestar....). So, balance in effort is restored. But this also boosts the outcome for Terran too much, giving them +55% win rate against Protoss, and win rate balance is no longer achieved. | ||
|
Kraekkling
728 Posts
On January 24 2026 16:10 GTR wrote: wish they'd just take classic maps and remaster them for the modern day you mean like having Sylphid and Match Point in the map pool? Or like having Knock Out which is a circuit breaker remake? Or Attitude which is budget poly | ||
|
seRapH
United States9808 Posts
 | ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands1266 Posts
The maps most balanced are: Apocalypse, Eclipse, Neo Dark Origins, Litmus, Tempest, Invader, Radeon, Dominator. This is according to just winrates 2 player maps most balanced? Even Butter had kind of a small variance in winrates. | ||
|
ScoutWBF
Germany641 Posts
On January 26 2026 09:09 seRapH wrote: all 4p maps are remasters of lost temple I miss my high ground cliff naturals as a Terran.  Regarding 2 player map balance: Wouldn't be surprised if it's a matter of scouting luck being removed. If you scout someone last on a 4 player map, you're at a disadvantage. And you guys know how much Protoss complains about scouting in PvZ for example. Also on 2 player maps your build orders and building placement can always be the same. So less variance needed. | ||
|
FlaShFTW
United States10514 Posts
On January 26 2026 11:38 RJBTVYOUTUBE wrote: Bring back Apocalypse, the one map that achieved true balance! The maps most balanced are: Apocalypse, Eclipse, Neo Dark Origins, Litmus, Tempest, Invader, Radeon, Dominator. This is according to just winrates 2 player maps most balanced? Even Butter had kind of a small variance in winrates. I've been saying this for a while now, good 2p and good 3p maps are the most balanced. It's hard to get 4p maps to be truly balanced. Radeon achieved the near impossible by keeping the WR 50%+/-3%. This is why I advocate for 2 2p, 2 3p, and 2 4p map pool, with Radeon being a default inclusion until we get another version/improvement on Radeon. | ||
|
seRapH
United States9808 Posts
| ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands1266 Posts
On January 27 2026 13:40 seRapH wrote: The "experimental" maps tend to be 2p or 3p maps, don't they? Wonder if them being easier to balance is why that is or if its just that 4p maps are just too locked into the same frameworks. Experimental 2 player maps tend to have the worst winrate distributions. Less experimental 2p maps tend to be most balanced because "guessing what your opp is doing because your scout was too late" does not apply, like it does on 4p maps. on 4p you will way more often see games played with a lack of information. | ||
| ||
