|
This thread is for talking about map selection for Teamliquid Legacy Cup 2015 and TLS (2016).
update Feb 26th 2016: The maps for TLS ro32 onwards have been announced:
Fighting Spirit
Neo Aztec
Neo Electric Circuit
Neo Jade
Neo Overwatch
LINK to that announcement thread
Previously...
The maps for TLS prelims were:
Game 1 on FS
Game 2 on Medusa
Game 3 on Heartbreak Ridge if needed
The voting on page 3 of this thread is now over.
The results of the polls were:
+ Show Spoiler +
Raw stats can be seen on page 4 here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/bw-tournaments/490990-tlc-teamliquid-legacy-cup-2015-map-discussion?page=4#78
The maps used in the TLC were:
-----------------------------------
TLC #1 (25th July)
Fighting Spirit
Match Point
Tau Cross
Circuit Breaker
Paranoid Android
-----------------------------------
TLC #2 (1st August)
Paranoid Android switched for Destination
Fighting Spirit
Match Point
Tau Cross
Circuit Breaker
Destination
-----------------------------------
TLC #3 (8th August)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #4 (15th August)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #5 (22nd August)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #6 (29th August)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #7 (5th September)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #8 (12th September)
All 5 maps replaced
Nostalgia
Luna
Ride of Valkyries
Gaia
Rush Hour 3
-----------------------------------
TLC #9 (19th September)
All 5 maps replaced
Neo Jade
New Bloody Ridge
Neo Moon Glaive
Polaris Rhapsody
New Sniper Ridge
-----------------------------------
TLC #10 (26th September)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #11 (3rd October)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #12 (10th October)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #13 (17th October)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #14 (24th October)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #15 (31st October)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #16 (7th November)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #17 (14th November)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #18 (21st November)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #19 (28th November)
No changes
-----------------------------------
TLC #20 (5th December)
No changes
-----------------------------------
My suggestions (8 pics)
+ Show Spoiler +Neo Overwatch ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4HNSDgI.png) The Latin Quarter ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fQmw97J.jpg) Roadkill ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/guQdPER.jpg) Toad Stone ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9ryNyXb.jpg) Eddy ![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4674.jpg) Queensbridge ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/paV62Yk.jpg) Cross Game ![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4580.jpg) Heartbeat ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Fn3ZUCM.jpg)
These are all iccup maps already.
|
Bisutopia19246 Posts
Eddy looks scary as hell. I love the suggestions though!
|
TLADT24920 Posts
Some pretty good suggestions in here. I'm sure we'll aim to change some of the maps for the next one (not sure if changing all at once is a good idea though lol).
|
Croatia9505 Posts
I'd only like to put a disclaimer at the beginning of this discussion so the people don't start posting all of their favorite maps, which will lead nowhere.
I'd like to see some tests done that can show the positional imbalances in the maps we choose or the popular maps in the scene.
|
Croatia9505 Posts
Also, I'm afraid to admit that I haven't heard of a single map you suggested :d
Granted, I never really followed the maps in tournaments closely, but I think it would be more beneficial to have a more established and familiar maps. But then again, maybe not.
|
|
|
Stick to only commonly played maps of past seasons or go with new SSL type maps.
|
presses the button "like it" under the dRaw's comment.
|
i'm with draw on this one, why not pick the new maps from SSL
|
I'd love to see a 50:50. 50% tried and tested maps, 50% new foreigner made maps, I mean it is a foreigner tournament. It would also encourage practice on these specific maps.
|
On July 26 2015 03:48 dRaW wrote:
Stick to only commonly played maps of past seasons or go with new SSL type maps.
Having at least one good foreigner map would be nice.
Also if we're using Fighting Spirit can we at least use a Fighting Spirit reskin for flavour? Like the ice Fighting spirit or the desert Fighting Spirit remake?
|
On July 26 2015 06:26 thezanursic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2015 03:48 dRaW wrote:
Stick to only commonly played maps of past seasons or go with new SSL type maps. Having at least one good foreigner map would be nice. Also if we're using Fighting Spirit can we at least use a Fighting Spirit reskin for flavour? Like the ice Fighting spirit or the desert Fighting Spirit remake?
sucks not only for casting, but gives your shit trouble if you have color issues, e.g. red/green blindness. would need to be space. there's a reason nobody uses ice tiles anymore.
|
Bisutopia19246 Posts
On July 26 2015 07:30 GeckoXp wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2015 06:26 thezanursic wrote:On July 26 2015 03:48 dRaW wrote:
Stick to only commonly played maps of past seasons or go with new SSL type maps. Having at least one good foreigner map would be nice. Also if we're using Fighting Spirit can we at least use a Fighting Spirit reskin for flavour? Like the ice Fighting spirit or the desert Fighting Spirit remake? sucks not only for casting, but gives your shit trouble if you have color issues, e.g. red/green blindness. would need to be space. there's a reason nobody uses ice tiles anymore.
That is why I wear sunglasses during the cast.
|
|
|
On July 26 2015 03:48 dRaW wrote:
Stick to only commonly played maps of past seasons or go with new SSL type maps.
|
I agree with BisuDagger. Eddy looks like hell.
Introducing a new map pool that people have rarely played will severely diminish the quality of the games. For instance, most players, including myself, are decent on Fighting Spirit, but suck on the majority of the ICCup map pool. Most of the current maps are fine, with the exception being Paranoid Android. Paranoid Android has 8 starting mineral patches for christ's sake! All new and more standard maps have 9.
|
Bisutopia19246 Posts
On July 26 2015 18:48 Favian[PaiN] wrote:
I agree with BisuDagger. Eddy looks like hell.
Introducing a new map pool that people have rarely played will severely diminish the quality of the games. For instance, most players, including myself, are decent on Fighting Spirit, but suck on the majority of the ICCup map pool. Most of the current maps are fine, with the exception being Paranoid Android. Paranoid Android has 8 starting mineral patches for christ's sake! All new and more standard maps have 9.
Would new maps even the playing field against the highest level players or make it worse? I feel there's real discussion in that question.
|
Netherlands4994 Posts
I'm all for excluding FS, CB and Tau Cross, but I feel the gross of foreigners simply can't adapt to 'new' maps, at least not quick enough. Generally they need the pros to show - or better; they FEEL they need to see pros to show - how it's done first.
Just stating my unpopular opinion.
|
We should start with one map max and give it enough time, wouldn't go over 2 new maps total. Otherwise all we'll see will be rushes and silly games, regardless of what the maps are actually like.
|
Netherlands4994 Posts
As a viewer I think 2 unfamiliar maps would be a lot of fun. Those maps being map 1 and map 5.
This would increase the chances for upsets which is entertaining, but like Favian said, it will also increase the chances of lower quality games.
To me the beauty in foreigner tournaments lies in their flawed gameplay and this will show more on new maps. A true good player will be able to play decent, (even for foreigner standards), on pretty much any map. I wouldn't like to see silly rush games though, so only 1 unfamiliar map would probably be most fair.
|
I'm not familiar with these maps, also finding practise games on these maps might be bit hard, at least among higher level players. With these maps TLS would look in my eyes like one of those random maps tournaments, which never got me interested.
With maps that everyone are familiar with, theres a chance to get higher level matches.
|
with blind eyes i can tell overwatch is a pretty cool map,we played it in the sbwi team league and showed very cool games,sadly we didnt have any more tourneys or new leagues to test new maps,something that in my opinion is the best to get a real point view in certain maps and their future or what changes are needed.I think that Paranoid Android need changes and the changes need to be tested,so overwatch could be a very nice choise for PA.
|
im an LT man, id love to see classics brought back or an island map would be humorous
Halls of valhalla w00t w00t
|
|
|
My suggestion is to take a look at several non-island maps, be it newer foreigner maps or old progamer maps that might seem to create more unusual games (read: not just FFE PvZ, 1 Rax Expand TvZ, FD TvP) and don't have super imbalanced stats, choose 10 of them and cycle them 1-by-1 through the weekly cups to assess which one you would like to use in the final tournament. Personally, aside from the positional imbalance, I liked PA as choice although I wasn't able to participate this week.
Racial imbalances would not be that much of an issue as the vast majority of players won't have played the maps at all or like 10 years ago, so those who prepare the map more, should win. If people are too lazy to use 10min to check how to wall on the map, they deserve to lose.
You might have to change some mineral/gas formation to mitigate possible positional imbalances, so it takes some time and effort to implement a good non-standard map.
|
Yeah, new maps won't create upsets... Just worse quality games as NOBODY will prepare them T_T... PA is ugly, you can play maps like eon suggested that were at least in STL/SBWI leagues.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On July 27 2015 17:56 dRaW wrote:
Yeah, new maps won't create upsets... Just worse quality games as NOBODY will prepare them T_T... PA is ugly, you can play maps like eon suggested that were at least in STL/SBWI leagues.
Why should everyone else get stuck watching FS style maps 24/7 rather than actually having an interesting map pool? The fact the players won't bother preparing for the maps shouldn't be the problem of the viewers. If anything preparing for specific maps will be beneficial in that case since the person who prepares map specific plays will probably win the tournament and rightfully so.
I'm not sure going with a full map pool from the OP would be the best choice either, but there's no reason to not put old SPL maps in like Empire of the Sun, Grand Line SE, Neo Aztec, Benzene etc. etc.
|
Croatia9505 Posts
We decided to take it slow with the changes, so people who practice don't have to practice new set of maps each week.
According to the poll here, majority seems to dislike Paranoid Android (even though it's only slightly ^^). For the next tour we replaced Paranoid Android with Destination.
|
If a (2)96x96 map (like PA, but without at least the most blatant imbalances) is what you are in demand of, I have just the thing lying around for you:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9gzoAmZ.jpg)
Only needs some final polishing (it's fully playable, but the aesthetics are not quite up to my full standard yet)...
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
Im just going to go ahead and make the obligatory comment
Dude, tanks are imba on that map
|
I should have shown you an earlier iteration first ;D:
![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4214.jpg)
Yes, it's genuinely horrible to play on...
|
On July 26 2015 23:58 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
with blind eyes i can tell overwatch is a pretty cool map,we played it in the sbwi team league and showed very cool games,sadly we didnt have any more tourneys or new leagues to test new maps,something that in my opinion is the best to get a real point view in certain maps and their future or what changes are needed.I think that Paranoid Android need changes and the changes need to be tested,so overwatch could be a very nice choise for PA.
Tournamen hosts, please talk to map makers more 
On July 27 2015 00:26 zsAdun wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
im an LT man, id love to see classics brought back or an island map would be humorous
Halls of valhalla w00t w00t
Terrible ideas. Just terrible, terrible ideas. All of these maps are deader than dead and should remain this way for a lot of good reasons...
Though having a new take at (modern, better balanced!) island maps is something I am actually in favour of (and have actually worked on quite a bit over the last year or so...)
On July 27 2015 00:54 Cryoc wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
My suggestion is to take a look at several non-island maps, be it newer foreigner maps or old progamer maps that might seem to create more unusual games (read: not just FFE PvZ, 1 Rax Expand TvZ, FD TvP) and don't have super imbalanced stats, choose 10 of them and cycle them 1-by-1 through the weekly cups to assess which one you would like to use in the final tournament. Personally, aside from the positional imbalance, I liked PA as choice although I wasn't able to participate this week.
Racial imbalances would not be that much of an issue as the vast majority of players won't have played the maps at all or like 10 years ago, so those who prepare the map more, should win. If people are too lazy to use 10min to check how to wall on the map, they deserve to lose.
You might have to change some mineral/gas formation to mitigate possible positional imbalances, so it takes some time and effort to implement a good non-standard map.
So basically you want more maps without an easily defended nat?
|
i like desti, if i can last long enough for it, i will enjoy playing on it
|
On July 29 2015 05:00 Freakling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2015 23:58 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
with blind eyes i can tell overwatch is a pretty cool map,we played it in the sbwi team league and showed very cool games,sadly we didnt have any more tourneys or new leagues to test new maps,something that in my opinion is the best to get a real point view in certain maps and their future or what changes are needed.I think that Paranoid Android need changes and the changes need to be tested,so overwatch could be a very nice choise for PA.
Tournamen hosts, please talk to map makers more Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 00:26 zsAdun wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
im an LT man, id love to see classics brought back or an island map would be humorous
Halls of valhalla w00t w00t
Terrible ideas. Just terrible, terrible ideas. All of these maps are deader than dead and should remain this way for a lot of good reasons... Though having a new take at (modern, better balanced!) island maps is something I am actually in favour of (and have actually worked on quite a bit over the last year or so...) Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 00:54 Cryoc wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
My suggestion is to take a look at several non-island maps, be it newer foreigner maps or old progamer maps that might seem to create more unusual games (read: not just FFE PvZ, 1 Rax Expand TvZ, FD TvP) and don't have super imbalanced stats, choose 10 of them and cycle them 1-by-1 through the weekly cups to assess which one you would like to use in the final tournament. Personally, aside from the positional imbalance, I liked PA as choice although I wasn't able to participate this week.
Racial imbalances would not be that much of an issue as the vast majority of players won't have played the maps at all or like 10 years ago, so those who prepare the map more, should win. If people are too lazy to use 10min to check how to wall on the map, they deserve to lose.
You might have to change some mineral/gas formation to mitigate possible positional imbalances, so it takes some time and effort to implement a good non-standard map.
So basically you want more maps without an easily defended nat?
That would be the most obvious possibility. I don't see a point in using yet another "clone" of Fighting Spirit. Those will just lead to the same macro games as on Fighting Spirit and make preparation unnecessary. If organizers want that it is easier to just use one of the later kespa maps as they basically cover all the possible 3rd/4th base variants.
|
|
|
The general problem with that is that it tends to exacerbate the general T>Z>P>T imbalance in almost any case.
What about these (not necessarily as the maps as a whole, but as principle concepts):
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/6_Sin%20Peaks%20of%20Baekdu.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/160_Baekmagoji.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/18_Sin%20815.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/189_Chupung-Ryeong.jpg)
|
Because it's just FS, just reversed...
Basically its much more different for players than for spectators, so probably the exact opposite of what most people would actually desire...
|
Canada11350 Posts
Though having a new take at (modern, better balanced!) island maps is something I am actually in favour of (and have actually worked on quite a bit over the last year or so...)
I am personally rather curious about that. Hearing/ seeing the old school games before I started watching in earnest, I was always fascinated by the idea of island maps. BW gave up on island maps and SC2 never tried, but it would be neat if there was a balanced way to get them working again.
|
Sure, why not. I would maybe try to avoid using small chokes like in Peaks of Baekdu where units get stuck often. On 815 that is not much of a problem, as they are not in the middle of the map.
|
On July 29 2015 14:01 Cryoc wrote:Sure, why not. I would maybe try to avoid using small chokes like in Peaks of Baekdu where units get stuck often. On 815 that is not much of a problem, as they are not in the middle of the map.
I never thought that those small chockes were a problem on peaks of baekdu or blue storm as long as the player knows they're there. You shouldn't be moving your army with one attack move across the map anyways.
Those chockes can create some very interesting strategy choises or scenes like ling backstabs vs fat ass units that has to take the longer route back to defend.
|
Netherlands4994 Posts
I'm very interested in bringing island maps back into BW as well. I'd would pretty much encourage anything but another FS clone, anything that might help BW move forward and strengthen its roots.
As a viewer I'd like to see new maps more often. Yes, FS and CB are awesome, but let's be honest; they're incredibly overplayed. Bring creativity back, it's what made Boxer so big. Pre Flash/JD era there would be way fewer games per week and it allowed players to really prepare maps well. While in Flash/JD era, macro really took the overhand because players simply didn't get as much time to prepare maps because of the busy schedule.
I'd love the idea of bringing back Island maps. Maybe even maps with 8 or 10 mineral fields at their main, or 2 gas expo's, etc. I bet few would argue one of the most entertaining/exciting games near the end of KeSPA would be Hiya vs Free on Triathlon. I don't even need to provide arguments why that was such an amazing game.
I want to see unexpected strategies, daring strategies, creativity! Not the same old rax expand, 12 hatch, FFE.
It would likely be best to have introducing new maps to the scene at (very) slow pace, to avoid silly rush games and endless of whining by our top foreigner players, they need some time to adapt.
Nearly everyone will agree BW requires no further patches, so map making is essential for the future of BW.
There is so much yet to discover!
Ultimately - I believe - on going development will spike the interest of new/younger players.
|
Japan11286 Posts
I don't watch pro streams that much because I'm incredibly bored of the maps (or rather the map, cough FS cough) they play in. I want more novel maps but people will cry imbalance and all that stuff if you use it. In short, it probably won't happen.
+ Show Spoiler +Destination is nice addition though, good job sir 2pac!
edit - also since money is involved, it will exacerbate the imbalance factor even more lol.
|
The problem is not at all about actual balance or imbalance (FS actually has quite a few imbalances, and if pro players don't know them all inside out, I can only wonder what they spend all that time on, playing but one map time and time again...)
The problem is that far too many players prefer known imbalances over unknown balance.
|
On July 27 2015 20:33 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 17:56 dRaW wrote:
Yeah, new maps won't create upsets... Just worse quality games as NOBODY will prepare them T_T... PA is ugly, you can play maps like eon suggested that were at least in STL/SBWI leagues. Why should everyone else get stuck watching FS style maps 24/7 rather than actually having an interesting map pool? The fact the players won't bother preparing for the maps shouldn't be the problem of the viewers. If anything preparing for specific maps will be beneficial in that case since the person who prepares map specific plays will probably win the tournament and rightfully so. I'm not sure going with a full map pool from the OP would be the best choice either, but there's no reason to not put old SPL maps in like Empire of the Sun, Grand Line SE, Neo Aztec, Benzene etc. etc.
Regardless, it will be a problem of the viewers, since the games will suck... It's not that players "won't bother" to prepare, it's that there are 24 hours in a day, and playing ladder games on Fish (which happen to 99% of the time be on FS) is the most efficient way to prepare. Searching all day to find a B rank iccup friend who will play a couple of games on a new map ends up being a waste of time.
The only real solution I see to this is...make all of the maps for each upcoming TLC/TLS MOTW Otherwise its not realistic to expect players to prepare for specific maps.
|
I am just curious: What would you see as minimal requirements (as a to-do list) for a player to sufficiently "figure out" any new map, assuming that they have solid general mechanics and build orders already?
|
On July 30 2015 17:28 Freakling wrote:
I am just curious: What would you see as minimal requirements (as a to-do list) for a player to sufficiently "figure out" any new map, assuming that they have solid general mechanics and build orders already?
Figure out any BO based on the map... any proxy timing/locations... any abusable locations... many things
|
locations (and building placement): that's like 5 to 10 minutes of opening the map in a map editor... (same for other basic stuff like wallins, efficient building placement in general...)
timing: mostly not map-specific (unless the map has some very weird distribution of resources in main/nat) (mostly boils down to when to best send out your scout/proxy workers) that's like maybe another 15 minutes of fiddling about in single player.
So that's maybe half an hour of preparation so far, if you generally know how to do any of this stuff, that is. Doesn't even require a practice partner so far.
I am not even saying that this is sufficient preparation to actually play a map in a tourney. Of course you'd want some actual practice games played.
But wasting those precious test games just to figure out the basic stuff seems like a highly inefficient way of wasting one's valuable and limited practice time.
|
I have a question regarding how to check walls with the map editor. Is there some easier possibility to check for ling tightness than to just look if you can place a ling inbetween the gaps? Because that is prone to errors while checking the wall ingame with a ling is unambiguous.
|
Maybe I should write a guide about this some time...
Knowing which kinds of walls are generally tight against what helps of course (gives you a good starting point at least).
The best, and most failsafe method is to use SCMDraft and do the following (after opening the map, of course):
- check debug/enable debug
- check debug/show unit collision sizes (this will display the collision boxes of all units as red rectangles)
- select your buildings from the units selection menu on the left side and place the wall you want to examine
- select the zergling from the same menu. The terrain will be automatically displayed with pathing overlay and your mouse cursor will have a zergling sprite and its collision box attached to it. Now just look whether you can fit it anywhere in a gap without overlapping any unpathable terrain or building collision boxes. If you can, your wall's not ling-tight
additional tips:
* same method can be used with any other unit, of course
* you can zoom in to up to 400% with ctrl-mouse-scroll or the zoom dialogue on the top to get a better look at the details.
* you can also uncheck options/units/place units anywhere for easier terrain collision detection
* should also make sure that options/units/buildings snap to tile is checked and options/units/units snap to grid is unchecked (which they should normally already be by default, though)
* Another option that you may want to check is options/units/allow stack, for otherwise you will not be able to actually place down units right next to a building's collision box if you wish to do so.
* options/grid offers you a whole plethora of customizable grid settings to overlay the map with. The normal and ultra fine settings are probably the most helpful standard options, displaying a tile or sub-tile grid respectively. You may want to change the grid colour (via the custom option) to something more visible (depending on tileset/terrain type than the standard setting, though.
* you don't need to do all of these steps every time, as all your latest settings, except for the debug options, will be automatically saved by SCMDraft between sessions.
This is what it should look like when properly set up:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lciL4gy.jpg)
|
To really get comfortable with a new map takes time; repeat play to gain familiarity. However, map makers can speed up the whole process.
Walling and building placement in general is a part of it.
-We can make the entrance to naturals have consistent tight edges all the way along rather than just in one magic spot.
-We can make the mains shaped in such a way that you can easily place 9 factories or gateways. (We can make Horang2 happy basically)
-We can make the nats feel spacious for building placement in general and for things like turret placement to be quick and easy, multiple viable options rather than have to get pixel perfect spot.
-We can put building markers to make walling easy.
-We can shape terrain to subtly aid placement.
-We can make it so creep spreads properly even if a hatchery is misplaced due to haste (allowing sunkens to still be built in good spots).
-We can make it so marines pop out on the inside of walls in the main even when they wouldn’t normally.
-We can make it so larvae pop out on the inside of walls even when they wouldn’t normally.
-We can playtest for hours to make sure it all works.
Those are some of the things that can help to get players feeling comfortable quickly with their own builds.
But there are other things too. Things that concern a player feeling comfortable in terms of gameplay and balance;
-how easily do strategies from previous maps transfer over, what adaptations are needed etc
-how easy it is to defend certain attacks,
-how easy it is to progress to the next stage of the game,
-how easy it is to recover if things don’t go perfectly.
These all work both ways. We want certain things to not be too easy either ofcourse.
The 7 maps I suggested are a good mix of familiar mixed with progressive. Overall they are conservative enough to be able to get to grips with them comfortably and quickly, but they also push things forward too.
-------------------------EDIT added alternative wall test method-------------------------
If you look at Freaklings picture you can see that he is able to hover a zergling inside the depot border without it turning red. I am not able to do this and others too, so incase you arent either here is another way to test walling in SCM Draft editor.
Each tile is 32x32 pixels. Every tile is divided into subtiles, and each of these is 8x8. Subtiles can be walkable or not as can see here:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/B3ADDqx.jpg)
Open the map you want to test and turn on the grid (alt+g)
Click Units, click a race, then Ground Units, and click a unit. This will give you the walkable overlay. It makes unwalkable subtiles blacked out, like in the pic above.
Look at the location you want to place the building. You want to place the building tight to a cliff. Is this cliff tile fully unwalkable? Or are there subtiles that are not blacked out?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fRHtxdD.png)
In this picture you can see the barracks on the right hand side is touching fully unwalkable cliff tiles so it has a gap of zero. The bottom edge of a barracks has a gap of 15 pixels. You can get this info from here: :
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/List_of_Unit_and_Building_Sizes
Now add the two gaps to see how big the total gap is. A zergling is 16x16 pixels.
0 + 15 < 16 so it IS zergling tight
However the barracks on the left hand side is touching cliff tiles that are not fully unwalkable. Infact the whole row of subtiles on the top edge of the cliff tiles are Walkable. So this means that there is a gap of 8 pixels.
Again, add this to the gap of the barracks bottom edge.
8 + 15 > 16 so it is NOT zergling tight
|
On August 02 2015 05:06 CardinalAllin wrote:
If you look at Freaklings picture you can see that he is able to hover a zergling inside the depot border without it turning red. I am not able to do this and others too, so incase you arent either here is another way to test walling in SCM Draft editor.
That's just your options/units/allow stack option not being set...
It's not a particularly helpful options for this matter, though. I'd personally enable it so you can place units freely...
And why would you not use collision boxes?
The bigger issue for most people would probably be map protection, though...
|
Oh you had just turned allow stack on. Well like you say its not a helpful option for testing walling. Your method is still useful though, but only if you can zoom in, and cryoc is crashing when he zooms. So there we have it, 2 methods, I use both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a poll to compare the current tlc map pack with the foreign iccup maps.
Vote 1 if you really DO NOT want the map in the map pack.
Vote 4 if you don’t mind either way.
Vote 7 if you really DO want the map in the map pack.
Neo Jade
New Bloody Ridge
Neo Moon Glaive
Polaris Rhapsody
New Sniper Ridge
Vote 1 if you really DO NOT want the map in the map pack.
Vote 4 if you don’t mind either way.
Vote 7 if you really DO want the map in the map pack.
Neo Overwatch
The Latin Quarter
Roadkill
Toad Stone
Eddy
Queensbridge
Cross Game
Heartbeat
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mkQkfn7.jpg)
|
Remember guys that the TLS Championship is yet to come with its $2000 prize pool on January 9th 2016. So its still definitely worth voting on map selection.
|
We need at least 1, 2 foreign maps, we got only 2 preparation tourneys left, so my advice is to change that outdated map pool since from 9th edition and add some of these.
But hey, actually who listens us? Nobody. KK.
|
imo just add overwatch from foreigner maps,rest should me actually good maps from the progamer days like groundzero outlier longinus ^^ also add f*cking fighting spirit ,is the map all of us train on fish server and the one we can actually show our best games -.-
|
outscar I dont agree with your comment. The word 'need' is a bit strong for my liking. There are ofcourse excellent korean maps and you can have a great tour with just them if you pick the right ones. However, it is a foreign tour and I think it would be nice to use foreign maps if there are maps that are good enough.
Personally I believe that some of the foreign maps are better than korean maps and lead to more exciting and more balanced gameplay. Some people will agree with that. Others may simply want to see foreign maps used just for diversity or the enjoyment of something new to them. I hope the polls will let the community have its say.
Next you say the map pool is outdated as it has been used since tlc #9. Well thats only 2 months, and I dont consider that old. The second point is that old isnt necessarily a problem by itself.
Lastly, you say nobody is listening. Well I think the tour organisers are listening closely. Hopefully these polls will yield useful stats. I encourage everyone reading to participate in the polls so that the results are fruitful.
|
Netherlands4994 Posts
Why not a simple yes or no, 1-3 or 1-5 rating? Btw, I can't seem to vote on any of your polls.
Personally I already lost interest in discussing this and with how things have been going, I pretty much lost interest in following TLC as a whole. I don't like how it's being handled, but it's outside my power anyway.
I'm hoping the TLS will be diverse and will manage to attract and please a broad audience. To me, as a viewer, the mappool will be an important factor. For now I'll be patiently awaiting TLS. Good luck to all the organizers!
|
The major problem with the poll is, I guess, that its totally opaque who voted there and for which reasons.
I'd like to reiterate my argument for using (3)Demian.
Yeah, it's kind of standardish - but: if you are going for standard anyway (like the plain bland Tau/CB/FS/Destination map pool from the first few TLCs) and if you insist on a three player map (which is to be encouraged, three player maps have some great dynamic by default!) then you are spot on, especially considering the alternatives.
On November 17 2015 01:25 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
imo just add overwatch from foreigner maps,rest should me actually good maps from the progamer days like groundzero outlier longinus ^^ also add f*cking fighting spirit ,is the map all of us train on fish server and the one we can actually show our best games -.-
Probably too late to throw in something completely new... Overwatch seems alright.
Rest of the suggestions are a bit meh...
Longinus is just ancient. I guess it's mostly still popular(ish) because of the overall lack of three player maps.
Outlier: I really like this one - as a mapper.
Seeing the stats and having seen the games on it though, it is clear that this is an absolute TvZ graveyard.
Side note: I basically consider Moon Glaive to be one of the worse balance fiascos out there, as well...
Ground Zero: I guess it's okay, if you want something that is just really <i>really</i> standard. As a mapper I detest it for being basically the most unispired 30 minute job of a map ever to see the light of professional play...
I guess the argument for FS is a sound one, but please mix it up with some new or more non-standard maps (ideally one of each)...
I mean, originally the TLC staff picked PA of all maps, so they are definitely not adamantly against non-standard and even kind of wacko maps. It just seems like that the complaints about that map (which were basically about its being badly made and terribly balanced, not about its being non-standard!) kind of discouraged them though.
|
tlc isnt over yet? well. would be easier to keep track if there were write ups.
|
On November 18 2015 02:43 GeckoXp wrote:
tlc isnt over yet? well. would be easier to keep track if there were write ups.
You should probably start writing then.
|
|
|
On November 18 2015 04:15 GeckoXp wrote:
if you pay me, sure.
You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it?
|
On November 18 2015 04:52 Eywa- wrote:You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it?
well, normally the Tour staff does the writeup and im sure they are gonna have one, once the final TLC has been played. Roughy 20 TLC's were announced, so we can expect 3 to 8 more i guess.
|
On November 18 2015 04:52 Eywa- wrote:You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it?
Because I'm one of their visitors, because they have "writers" and "casters" running around. It's a little like for your leagues - people see them, they see someone as "organizer" so they expect "organization". Guess what, in both cases you should have thought otherwise. Then again, it's a lot more disappointing in the case of TL, because they usually have standards, unlike you homunculus.
User was warned for this post
|
On November 18 2015 05:19 GeckoXp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2015 04:52 Eywa- wrote:On November 18 2015 04:15 GeckoXp wrote:
if you pay me, sure. You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it? Because I'm one of their visitors, because they have "writers" and "casters" running around. It's a little like for your leagues - people see them, they see someone as "organizer" so they expect "organization". Guess what, in both cases you should have thought otherwise. Then again, it's a lot more disappointing in the case of TL, because they usually have standards, unlike you homunculus.
I'm not sure you understand my point - everyone who writes for this is doing so voluntarily... Thus, in principle... Anyone can do it. You should probably try doing something for once rather than bitching about what everyone else does and why it's not to your liking.
I'm just saying, this is good life advice in general.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
cmon guys, play nice! 
On November 18 2015 05:19 GeckoXp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2015 04:52 Eywa- wrote:On November 18 2015 04:15 GeckoXp wrote:
if you pay me, sure. You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it? Because I'm one of their visitors, because they have "writers" and "casters" running around. It's a little like for your leagues - people see them, they see someone as "organizer" so they expect "organization". Guess what, in both cases you should have thought otherwise. Then again, it's a lot more disappointing in the case of TL, because they usually have standards, unlike you homunculus. User was warned for this post
We don't have a ton of staff atm and everyone is busy with real life and covering VANT. We'll likely aim for a writeup after the 20th TLC is finished. Also, as Eywa said, this is all volunteer work. Everyone writes articles and helps with coverage because we love the game and want to contribute to TL but real life priorities and such always have to take center stage so if everyone is really busy, we're out of luck.
|
On November 18 2015 09:41 Eywa- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2015 05:19 GeckoXp wrote:On November 18 2015 04:52 Eywa- wrote:On November 18 2015 04:15 GeckoXp wrote:
if you pay me, sure. You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it? Because I'm one of their visitors, because they have "writers" and "casters" running around. It's a little like for your leagues - people see them, they see someone as "organizer" so they expect "organization". Guess what, in both cases you should have thought otherwise. Then again, it's a lot more disappointing in the case of TL, because they usually have standards, unlike you homunculus. I'm not sure you understand my point - everyone who writes for this is doing so voluntarily... Thus, in principle... Anyone can do it. You should probably try doing something for once rather than bitching about what everyone else does and why it's not to your liking. I'm just saying, this is good life advice in general.
Come back if you have done nearly as much as I did and we can talk. And I mean doing, not having others do the weird things that popped up in your "brain".
|
On November 18 2015 16:02 GeckoXp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2015 09:41 Eywa- wrote:On November 18 2015 05:19 GeckoXp wrote:On November 18 2015 04:52 Eywa- wrote:On November 18 2015 04:15 GeckoXp wrote:
if you pay me, sure. You're the one requesting a write up... Who were you planning to pay? If you're not interested in doing it, then why are you assuming someone else should be responsible for doing it? Because I'm one of their visitors, because they have "writers" and "casters" running around. It's a little like for your leagues - people see them, they see someone as "organizer" so they expect "organization". Guess what, in both cases you should have thought otherwise. Then again, it's a lot more disappointing in the case of TL, because they usually have standards, unlike you homunculus. I'm not sure you understand my point - everyone who writes for this is doing so voluntarily... Thus, in principle... Anyone can do it. You should probably try doing something for once rather than bitching about what everyone else does and why it's not to your liking. I'm just saying, this is good life advice in general. Come back if you have done nearly as much as I did and we can talk. And I mean doing, not having others do the weird things that popped up in your "brain".
You ignore the fact that I was providing a valid answer to your original query as confirmed by BigFan. This tells me you're just looking to pick a fight to which I say, sorry... I'm not interested.
|
I would encourage changing the map list for tlc, in my oppinion it brings freshnes to the tournament, as it felt previous times the maps were changed. Since we dont have many new players coming for the tournaments new maps will be a good step in the way of diversity and will bring different builds and more interest by the viewer, especially now after NW finished and players can focus well enough on preparing for these new maps.
|
It brings freshnes but it will not be more interesting i would say even less since this is not a golden era of BW, people play it less competitive than years ago and they will not prepare on new maps(most of them) Also when players dont know the map they usually play much worse, because they start to think more about the map, less automatics. To sum up i dont mind about some fresh balanced maps, but it will not raise entertainment level of the game.
|
On November 21 2015 00:04 trutaCz wrote:
It brings freshnes but it will not be more interesting i would say even less since this is not a golden era of BW, people play it less competitive than years ago and they will not prepare on new maps(most of them) Also when players dont know the map they usually play much worse, because they start to think more about the map, less automatics. To sum up i dont mind about some fresh balanced maps, but it will not raise entertainment level of the game.
As your words might have relevance i doubt most of the viewers are at your level of understanding to see any significant difference in the level of play, also this should make players practice more and improve and surely will lead to a different kind of games.
In the case of the Nationwars that worked well with maps completelly different every week, i dont see why it cant happen here with some new maps.
|
|
|
eonzerg, glad to hear you want Overwatch in. You say you like Ground Zero. Out of curiosity, what did you vote for Toad Stone?
Pics of both
+ Show Spoiler +
You also say you like Outlier. I dont think its balanced enough for competitions, quite surprised you mentioned that one.
------------------------------------------------
Peeano, I chose 1-7 because reliable sources (boffins in lab coats) told me its considered to be a good general purpose scale (no really). It allows a good amount of nuance but still quite focused.
The polls are working for others, not sure why not for you.
------------------------------------------------
To everyone else, thanks for all replies, I carefully consider them.
------------------------------------------------
I will leave the polls running until Monday so that they will have been open for 1 full week. Then I will post the results so the lurkers can see them.
|
Here are the results of the polls:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4rqM3Zu.png)
Raw stats:
+ Show Spoiler +
Neo Jade
1 6
2 1
3 2
4 5
5 1
6 2
7 6 23
New Bloody Ridge
1 6
2 4
3 0
4 7
5 2
6 0
7 4 23
Neo Moon Glaive
1 12
2 0
3 2
4 4
5 1
6 1
7 3 23
Polaris Rhapsody
1 7
2 4
3 1
4 3
5 3
6 0
7 5 23
New Sniper Ridge
1 6
2 2
3 4
4 4
5 1
6 1
7 5 23
Neo Overwatch
1 2
2 0
3 0
4 3
5 2
6 4
7 11 22
The Latin Quarter
1 1
2 2
3 1
4 3
5 6
6 1
7 8 22
Roadkill
1 2
2 4
3 0
4 3
5 4
6 4
7 5 22
Toad Stone
1 4
2 0
3 2
4 6
5 3
6 1
7 5 21
Eddy
1 2
2 1
3 0
4 3
5 5
6 4
7 6 21
Queensbridge
1 4
2 2
3 0
4 7
5 2
6 2
7 4 21
Cross Game
1 4
2 1
3 0
4 4
5 5
6 1
7 6 21
Heartbeat
1 2
2 0
3 3
4 2
5 3
6 5
7 5 20
|
I was looking at the stats of games played during iccup season 37 and thought there was some cool figures supporting foreign maps over the current map pool.
Number of 1v1 ladder games played:
New Bloody Ridge 386
Polaris Rhapsody 149
Neo Moon Glaive 0 (not a ladder map)
Cross Game 370
Queensbridge 192
Latin Quarter 121
Neo Overwatch 112
The others were less than 100.
Considering Bloody Ridge and Polaris are already in the tlc map pool, you would think they are being practiced on a bit more than usual too.
And yet Cross Game was played quite a lot more than Polaris was. Queensbridge was played more than Polaris too. Latin and Overwatch were close to Polaris.
Cross Game is even close to Bloody Ridge.
And when you consider that these are the foreign maps with no Korean pro games played on them, its very encouraging.
But heres the really amazing thing..
Heartbeat after only 3 days of being in the map pack for season 38 had already been played
426 times! That’s incredible. It overtook even Bloody Ridge in such a short time.
This isn’t even including 2v2 stats of games played which can only boost the foreign maps. (Latin and Heartbeat vs Bloody Ridge, Polaris, Moon Glaive).
So from these stats, you could swap
Bloody Ridge (386) with Cross Game (370)
Polaris (149) with Queensbridge (192), Latin Quarter (121) or Neo Overwatch (112)
(Any of the 8 maps Ive proposed could replace Moon Glaive)
Heartbeat could replace Sniper Ridge or Jade based on the popularity expressed so far.
Ofcourse Heartbeat is a new map and some people are probably just trying it out. But no new map, even Korean maps, have had this kind of reception in the last few map packs.
In season 37, Neo Jade was played 1132 times and New Sniper Ridge 1152.
As of writing, Heartbeat has been in the map pack for 5 days now. Its been played 578 times. That means 2 of the most popular Korean maps with all their exposure have only been played less than twice as much as Heartbeat after a whole season, which Heartbeat achieved in 5 days.
|
what do you expect, its the only motw map..
|
trutaCz, I expected this result. Tell me, do you deem this a success or not? I deem it a great success.
Its now been only 6 days and Heartbeat has been played 693 times. It is the 13th most played map on iccup when compared against the number of games played over the entire previous season plus the 6 days.
That’s more than Tau Cross, La Mancha, Longinus, Matchpoint, Andromeda and many more ofcourse.
I wonder, would it be fair to say that by 'forcing' people to play a new map has resulted in more map diversity in the long run?
Perhaps motw should always be just one map every week. But Im getting off topic.
I think if Heartbeat was not liked then people would have stopped using it as motw and instead gone back to just playing their favourite maps.
When iccup introduced 4 new maps including Avalon and Demian, the 4 maps were also motw for the first week. Avalon was played 70 times in the whole season, Demian 97, and if you add the number of games played on all 4 of those new maps together, its 304 games over the whole season.
So Heartbeat has been played more than twice that in 6 days. Ofcourse its more focused having just 1 map than 4 maps at once. But still an impressive reception.
|
Your statistics would have some matter if you compare them to the fair process. There is a huge difference between one map in motw and 4-5 of maps or more in motw. If there is one, people will have no possibility to choose and these who wants more points will just pick motw map no matter what. If you put 4-5 maps in motw and then X(new) map will have better number/same amount of/not much less games - then it's a success.
PS. In my opinion putting one map in MOTW is really stupid.
|
lol, statistics and manipulation :D
|
i think cardinal is right when saying that heartbeat was a success so far. Ofc we don't know how much the map would have been played with more MOTW maps, but we will see that soon, when the MOTW rotates.
|
On December 08 2015 00:37 Cele wrote:
i think cardinal is right when saying that heartbeat was a success so far. Ofc we don't know how much the map would have been played with more MOTW maps, but we will see that soon, when the MOTW rotates.
is the only motw map,and so far atleast 2 3 tournaments only with this map
my thoughts of this map is:that close air expansion is terrible.if you want to expand taking a close third also feels weird.if people are having fun with the map its ok im for it,but is not a map i will like to play to be honest.
|
It's an average-to-bad map. There were by far better maps mentioned here. Simply because it's a boring map choosen mostly by low level players for camping. It's like destination, why attack when you can just sit and wait on 3 bases for 20+ minutes, with 4th quite close too. It's bad design this way, the island is too close and it's only for tanks advantage - yay, good we aren't biased towards a specific race.
I use it only for points.
|
Netherlands4994 Posts
Even though it is manipulating to have it as the only motw. It does prove is that it isn't a terribad map or otherwise people would have played FS/CB instead.
I don't understand why is it not in the current motw? Why make it first the only motw and then not include it again to see how it fairs with other maps in the motw?
On topic:
If most of the players in TLC practice on Fish rather than on iCCup, then putting Heartbeart in the motw still not going to do much for TLC/TLS.
I think that's a big problem with introducing new maps to the foreigner scene: even if a map is good, if it is not being played on Fish, it will probably not be popular in tourneys.
|
eonzerg, julia: Ah great, some feedback about how Heartbeat plays. Thankyou for this.
Cele: ofcourse the map will probably drop to being played zero times for the rest of the season now. But in my opinion it is already a success and cant go back from that. Over 750 games played on it in 7 days, and again thats more than Tau Cross, La Mancha, Longinus, Matchpoint, Andromeda were played last season. So I would imagine it will probably stay in the map pack for a few seasons now. If however it proves to be very imbalanced then I expect it will be removed. I hope people have enjoyed playing around with it so far. Even if you play it and decide its not your cup of tea, there is still entertainment that can be derived from that. It can be fun to try slightly non standard maps from time to time. They can give you new ideas, they can remind you why you do things a certain way already etc.
On December 08 2015 01:12 13Julia wrote:
There were by far better maps mentioned here.
Which ones? If people publicly say which maps they specifically want to be used in tournaments then that is surely helpful.
|
People usually say what benefits them, so if they can get a second Destination, they will say what they need.
I've tried like, all the maps you made and played at least a few games on every one of them, mostly they are quite fun maps well designed.
What I don't like about Heartbeat is the island so cose to natural - it only benefits the terran, which in my opinion is so-so idea.
Really liked Crossgame, it's a beauty map, don't know if it's balanced - I just like it. Small, fun map, nicely done.
All other maps are quite awesome too, maybe overwatch's 3rd is a bit too easy to defend, I'd think about it being a low-ground exp better or no-gas. They're good maps to ladder, definitely more fun to play than the ridiculously imbalanced Desti or Longinus. Still if I had to play a tournament match vs terran, I'd not choose Heartbeat.
|
how about rebalancing LT, for oldies like me, so it can become relevant again? lots of good/wrong with that map for discussion
|
On December 09 2015 01:45 zs-Adun wrote:
how about rebalancing LT, for oldies like me, so it can become relevant again? lots of good/wrong with that map for discussion
Only if Scan is banned from playing on it, otherwise it would be unfair.
|
On December 09 2015 01:45 zs-Adun wrote:
how about rebalancing LT, for oldies like me, so it can become relevant again? lots of good/wrong with that map for discussion
rebalancing LT? its called python
|
I dont care what maps they gonna use in any TL fucking S or C (I'm really sorry Cardinal but you see that nobody gave a fuck) but I'm not going to give away my LT without a war. Vote for return of LT here:
http://iccup.com/starcraft/community/thread/820359/
I don't care about protoss criers and balance whiners. Read all comments and you will know what we're talking about. We got 80% vote at start but don't know how we get to 60%, I think there was a manipulation but I don't care. This is not how you welcome new foreigner maps by removing most 3rd played map by not giving a shit about players opinions.
LT proves that BW is alive. All foreign maps are great but no one can replace our memories...
|
i like u outscar, id play on normal LT but alot of FSers hate it
|
every week should be newest maps, maps that people can prepare for 1 week only.
Exclude common maps, whole map pack should be used only in final, after a loss.
|
r maps even fresh anymore? with what the player ratio picks? lt python fs right?
|
Gotta be honest, only people who can't play or viewers who don't understand the game, push these new maps. Agree with Trutacz 100%, they will not make the matches more entertaining and the majority of the viewers want good mechanically played games over quirky maps that will not cater to map specific play. (example: people who don't practice as much will not have a map-specific build, they will try to play FS standard on an unconventional map) I don't know why this topic is still even argued.
Answer? Keep picking the same generic tour maps.
|
The maps for TLS prelims have been announced:
Game 1 on FS
Game 2 on Medusa
Game 3 on Heartbreak Ridge if needed
Would a tournament organiser care to make a post explaining a bit about the map selection so far? Are foreign maps being considered? Are foreign maps a possibility for the elimination stage?
Could someone tell me why the maps in this thread aren’t being used? I genuinely don’t understand.
To Draw
+ Show Spoiler +Gotta be honest, only people who can't play or viewers who don't understand the game, push these new maps. I assume your sentence ends with something like “and therefore should be ignored”. If so I disagree because the opinion of low level players and low knowledge viewers does matter to a degree. Ofcourse the statement is also untrue. Agree with Trutacz 100%, they will not make the matches more entertaining. That’s an opinion, some disagree. For example, simply watching games being played on new maps will be more entertaining for some people. That’s a personal thing, separate from the level of skill on display. The majority of the viewers want good mechanically played games over quirky maps. This might be true, there is no data. But its irrelevant because: The maps Ive suggested are not quirky. We could have ‘good mechanically played games’ on the maps Ive suggested. Also, Medusa has been played 193 times. That’s less than Queensbridge (198), Latin Quarter (225), Cross Game (370), and Heartbeat (1002). By your own argument, Medusa should be dropped for something that is practiced on more often. Lastly, Medusa is very quirky: 3 player, backdoor expo, backdoor path, flat main/nat, cliffed main minerals. I don't know why this topic is still even argued. Some people might say that the maps are fun, balanced, polished, easy to transition to, suitable for modern play, as good as/perhaps better than the competition. Some people might argue that a foreign tournament is a great opportunity to use foreign maps. Answer? Keep picking the same generic tour maps. That doesn’t sound like a very clever long term plan (or short term plan) to me. Actually, Im going to expand on this part because I think it is such a ridiculous idea. Lost Temple should be used only. New maps should never be used. Fighting Spirit would never have been made because everyone is still playing Lost Temple. Kespa pushed for new maps because they had long term vision. Draw, I think me and you would agree on something though. I believe the integrity of the competition comes first, and therefore balance is the most important thing, above ‘what the viewers want’. So I ask you, do you think that the current map pool (fs, medusa, heartbreak ridge) is the best it can be? This thread is for map discussion. Its not foreign maps vs Korean maps. Its about getting the best possible map pack for the best possible tournament.
Some additional passing thoughts:
+ Show Spoiler +I get a feeling of being stuck in 2009 with these 3 maps. Seven years have passed!
Sadly back to using FS after finally dropping it too. But this isn’t a battle I will fight much. A number of the players will support having FS in the pack. Note that a number of the players don’t want to play on fighting spirit though. They would be happy to play newer maps instead (Korean or foreign). And a quite large number of viewers don’t want fighting spirit in the TLS map pack. In my opinion TLC was successful in not using FS. Overall I would say there were only a few grumbles, while there was also quite a bit of support.
Both Medusa and Heartbreak Ridge are flat main/nat. Well you could have chosen Heartbeat instead as that is also flat main/nat.
In the foreign scene, terran is a bit weaker if anything, yet you have chosen 2 slightly harder terran maps which is surprising. Could have chosen a balanced map instead, or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
Where's Avalon?
grrrrrrrrrrr
|
On December 07 2015 07:35 CardinalAllin wrote:
trutaCz, I expected this result. Tell me, do you deem this a success or not? I deem it a great success.
Its now been only 6 days and Heartbeat has been played 693 times. It is the 13th most played map on iccup when compared against the number of games played over the entire previous season plus the 6 days.
That’s more than Tau Cross, La Mancha, Longinus, Matchpoint, Andromeda and many more ofcourse.
I wonder, would it be fair to say that by 'forcing' people to play a new map has resulted in more map diversity in the long run?
Perhaps motw should always be just one map every week. But Im getting off topic.
I think if Heartbeat was not liked then people would have stopped using it as motw and instead gone back to just playing their favourite maps.
When iccup introduced 4 new maps including Avalon and Demian, the 4 maps were also motw for the first week. Avalon was played 70 times in the whole season, Demian 97, and if you add the number of games played on all 4 of those new maps together, its 304 games over the whole season.
So Heartbeat has been played more than twice that in 6 days. Ofcourse its more focused having just 1 map than 4 maps at once. But still an impressive reception.
You have to force people to play new maps, or they will not.
I value the part of StarCraft that is maps - how they make you figure out solutions to new problems, how they bring out different aspects of players and of races.
Therefore, you have to force players to walk the path that is best for the game. If you leave them to their own wills, they will rot in the pool of Fighting Spirit forever.
Use maps of the week and small weekly tournaments to make people learn new maps, then use those new maps in bigger, yearly tournaments.
|
On January 06 2016 02:24 vOdToasT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2015 07:35 CardinalAllin wrote:
trutaCz, I expected this result. Tell me, do you deem this a success or not? I deem it a great success.
Its now been only 6 days and Heartbeat has been played 693 times. It is the 13th most played map on iccup when compared against the number of games played over the entire previous season plus the 6 days.
That’s more than Tau Cross, La Mancha, Longinus, Matchpoint, Andromeda and many more ofcourse.
I wonder, would it be fair to say that by 'forcing' people to play a new map has resulted in more map diversity in the long run?
Perhaps motw should always be just one map every week. But Im getting off topic.
I think if Heartbeat was not liked then people would have stopped using it as motw and instead gone back to just playing their favourite maps.
When iccup introduced 4 new maps including Avalon and Demian, the 4 maps were also motw for the first week. Avalon was played 70 times in the whole season, Demian 97, and if you add the number of games played on all 4 of those new maps together, its 304 games over the whole season.
So Heartbeat has been played more than twice that in 6 days. Ofcourse its more focused having just 1 map than 4 maps at once. But still an impressive reception.
You have to force people to play new maps, or they will not. I value the part of StarCraft that is maps - how they make you figure out solutions to new problems, how they bring out different aspects of players and of races. Therefore, you have to force players to walk the path that is best for the game. If you leave them to their own wills, they will rot in the pool of Fighting Spirit forever. Use maps of the week and small weekly tournaments to make people learn new maps, then use those new maps in bigger, yearly tournaments.
The ICCup /motw maps and the Tours have a good variety of maps going. But unfortunately it doesn't mean people play those maps more (;
|
A week ago in my last post I asked several questions, was hoping for a reply from the tour organisers specifically about:
+ Show Spoiler +Would a tournament organiser care to make a post explaining a bit about the map selection so far? Are foreign maps being considered? Are foreign maps a possibility for the elimination stage?
Could someone tell me why the maps in this thread aren’t being used? I genuinely don’t understand.
btw when I said "or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting."
that was me attempting to be empathetic and to see things from (perhaps) your perspective.
@Draw, I answered your post quite thoroughly and asked a few questions, Id be interested in your reply.
To add something to the thread I will post this:
Currently the map pack is Fighting Spirit, Medusa, Heartbreak Ridge.
What if it was Fighting Spirit, Latin Quarter, Heartbreak Ridge.
Changed 1 map, Medusa for Latin Quarter. Is that better or worse? Its a totally honest question. I want to know if you think that would be better or worse, and Im asking anyone who is reading this thread.
Here are some other combinations that would work nicely in my opinion.
Eddy, Toad Stone, Cross Game.
Latin Quarter, Fighting Spirit, Overwatch.
How about Roadkill, Dantes Peak, Toad Stone.
How about any 1 of the foreign maps plus Dantes Peak game 2 and New Sniper Ridge game 3.
Foreign maps have been used/are being used in all of these foreign tournaments recently/currently:
D Ranks Teamleague
C Ranks Teamleague
Vietnam Starcraft Tournament
Swedish Brood War Initiative Summer Tournament
SBWI Team League
bw.de Hearthstone BetaKey tour
Jade Tour
Nation Wars
Crimson Starleague
German KOTH
And they are all in the iccup map pack.
And yet they arent being used in the biggest foreign tournament, the TLS.
Take 5 minutes and just have another quick look at the pictures of the maps. There must be atleast 1 map that you look at and go, yeah that would be pretty cool to have in the TLS map pack. Lets do it!
+ Show Spoiler +Neo Overwatch The Latin Quarter Roadkill Toad Stone Eddy Queensbridge Cross Game Heartbeat
|
well its pretty clear foreigns maps arent taking in consideration isnt it ? medusa and heartbreak might be no the best choice,but is also pretty clear they dont give a f*ck about players opinions,so why waste time complaining ?(i also dont care what maps we play),but from others players (protoss and terran guys)telling me how hard it is yeah..i kinda feel sorry for them.
|
@eonzerg. Am I correct that a good map pack according to you would be
Overwatch, Neo Ground Zero, Fighting Spirit.
Earlier in the thread I asked you something, You say you like Ground Zero. Out of curiosity, what did you vote for Toad Stone?
The reason I asked is because they have similar expo layout. I wonder if you would be happy to switch Toad Stone for Neo Ground Zero?
---------------------------
I want to add that I think the organisers do care about player opinion.
eonzerg:...pretty clear they dont {care} about players opinions
My point to the section below in the spoiler isnt primarily about map selection. Im just saying be fair, be truthful.
+ Show Spoiler +I think they do care about player opinion as that is probably why FS got put in. Infact you eonzerg were one of the main people who said you wanted FS in the map pack. As I mentioned before though; In my opinion TLC was successful in not using FS. Overall I would say there were only a few grumbles, while there was also quite a bit of support. eonzerg you were probably the most vocal person who wanted FS put in. It has been put in now. Heres the funny thing though, is this evidence of listening to the players/community or not? I dont claim to know the answer to that but funnily enough my feeling is actually that more people want FS out of the map pack. Also, that 2 old safeish classic korean maps were chosen (medusa+hbr) is probably an attempt to be 'kind' towards the players more than any other group. (though I dont personally think they are the best choice out of the korean maps from a players point of view). But again this fact shows to me that they do care about player opinion. So be fair.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50123 Posts
of all these maps, cross game seems like a lot of fun, not a big fan of LoS blockers but I wonder what everyone thinks of the map, does it have a thread on TL?
actually anyone got reps of the map, I know it was used for one week in nation wars and caught a couple of games through that.
|
On January 13 2016 00:00 CardinalAllin wrote:@eonzerg. Am I correct that a good map pack according to you would be Overwatch, Neo Ground Zero, Fighting Spirit. Earlier in the thread I asked you something, Show nested quote +You say you like Ground Zero. Out of curiosity, what did you vote for Toad Stone? The reason I asked is because they have similar expo layout. I wonder if you would be happy to switch Toad Stone for Neo Ground Zero? --------------------------- I want to add that I think the organisers do care about player opinion. My point to the section below in the spoiler isnt primarily about map selection. Im just saying be fair, be truthful. + Show Spoiler +I think they do care about player opinion as that is probably why FS got put in. Infact you eonzerg were one of the main people who said you wanted FS in the map pack. As I mentioned before though; In my opinion TLC was successful in not using FS. Overall I would say there were only a few grumbles, while there was also quite a bit of support. eonzerg you were probably the most vocal person who wanted FS put in. It has been put in now. Heres the funny thing though, is this evidence of listening to the players/community or not? I dont claim to know the answer to that but funnily enough my feeling is actually that more people want FS out of the map pack. Also, that 2 old safeish classic korean maps were chosen (medusa+hbr) is probably an attempt to be 'kind' towards the players more than any other group. (though I dont personally think they are the best choice out of the korean maps from a players point of view). But again this fact shows to me that they do care about player opinion. So be fair.
the best way i can answer your question is with another question.do u play broodwar ? you play your maps ? play 3 games in groundzero and play 3 in toadstone and tell me what do u feel. btw i will asume u dont since you are asking this question what leave me with the simple conclusion that u have no idea of what you are talking about.btw in most of foreigners maps i find mineral lines very frustrating,they usually dont work well,drones ignore minerals patch and u need to do it manual all the time.
|
well its pretty clear foreigns maps arent taking in consideration isnt it ? medusa and heartbreak might be no the best choice,but is also pretty clear they dont give a f*ck about players opinions,so why waste time complaining ?(i also dont care what maps we play),but from others players (protoss and terran guys)telling me how hard it is yeah..i kinda feel sorry for them.
After I read this post I got the impression we are on the same side. The only thing is I thought the post was unnecessarily aggressive towards the tour organisers and I said so.
the best way i can answer your question is with another question.do u play broodwar ? you play your maps ? play 3 games in groundzero and play 3 in toadstone and tell me what do u feel. btw i will asume u dont since you are asking this question what leave me with the simple conclusion that u have no idea of what you are talking about.btw in most of foreigners maps i find mineral lines very frustrating,they usually dont work well,drones ignore minerals patch and u need to do it manual all the time.
I don’t understand your choice of tone. You respond by getting aggressive with me now aswell. Simple conclusions are for simple minds. You aren’t stupid so please don’t act it.
But anyway, you are saying there is a pathing problem on Toad Stone. Great, that is some really useful feedback. And you say there are mining problems on some foreign maps. More details about both of these would be welcome. Which areas specifically? What units? A picture or replay would be really helpful for the pathing. (perhaps in the relevant maps own thread).
Doesn’t change the fact that these maps are tournament ready. Toad Stone has been play tested for months by many high level players. That said, if we can improve the maps then we will. We take every feedback seriously and do our best to improve the maps. It’s a collaborative process. Mapmakers need players to expose bugs that can then be ironed out. Maps need to be used in tournaments to get rigorously tested.
Together we have caught and squashed many bugs already through play testing so thankyou again to all the players that have helped me with that.
+ Show Spoiler +Its also fair to say that some people are putting Korean maps on a pedestal unfairly. Neo Ground Zero is a map that I quite like. That should be apparent from my first 1v1 map Checkpoint: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/brood-war/381044-map-2-checkpoint-1v1However, its clear that Ground Zero was a bit of a rush job when you take into account the calibre of the authors previous maps. Also, Jade was played for a long time and tested by many players. Then Neo Jade came out and yet it still had a big problem. The mining at one of the mains was bad enough that Freakling actually did a hotfix for the iccup map pack.
@eonzerg. Am I correct that a good map pack according to you would be
Overwatch, Neo Ground Zero, Fighting Spirit.
A simple conclusion: We are committed to giving you guys zero reasons not to use these maps.
|
it wasnt my intention to be agresive or anything,but it was a serious question,so i wanted you to take it seriously,
and i have mad respect for organizers ,specially for 2pac that is a fantastic guy,but yeah he has bad taste with the maps :D
|
I understand that you have your agenda as a mapmaker to make and push new maps for people to play in, but is there really a need for you to push your maps so aggressively for others?
BW is a old game played with many old players. Many of these old players simply just want login into iccup/fish/VS/whatever, play with the maps they are familiar with, have fun. A lot of them don't have the luxury of much time to sit down and test all sorts of funky new maps.
Do you think they want to waste time playing a new map, winning/losing because of some perceived map imbalance then going onto the usual forums to whine/cry about it? when they can just start up FS/python/hunters and play for fun, they are familiar with these maps, knowing that these maps have already been proven to be statistically "balanced" and "endorsed" by amateurs and top players alike. (whether thats actually true or not doesn't matter, in their eyes its balanced and that makes them comfortable when playing)
Yes new maps are needed for the longevity and continued evolution of the game, but its not like theres much long term prospects for BW anyway. BW is not as big as it once was and korean tourneys are reluctant to introduce new maps, they don't want some random new map with potentially perceived imbalances to ruin games when they can just opt for the "safe" old options that will guarantee decent games and viewership (despite the fact that those old maps have their own flaws too, but familarity/nostalgia). KSL2 discontinuing usage of new maps is an example of that.
Not to mention in a scene with quite a bit of history like BW, theres probably politics/favoritism involved, where OGN/kongdoo/whoever would rather trust old veteran mapmakers like rose of dream and their maps rather than some up and comer mapmaker, even if that up and comer has some exceptionally made maps.
funny how you mention you create maps for terran to do well in during tournaments, despite the fact that terran is probably the race that have to spend the most amount of preparatory time and effort for new maps in tournaments. unless the map is terran biased you will just make it harder for any terran to win by adding more new maps, especially when foreign terrans (obv not Scan) struggle enough as it is with the usual old maps. but who cares about terran in foreign scene amirite, only zergs ftw
|
The map selection for the prelims makes a lot of sense to me, meaning it wouldn't really make sense to use a foreign map in the prelims. Many players are just trying to get back into shape in the week before and throughout the prelims, mainly using mass games solely on FS on Fish, some on iccup but still using FS only. They shouldn't be expected to learn a new map(s) on top of getting back into shape just for the prelims.
I also think it would make sense to introduce maybe 1 foreign map per round starting in the round of 32. It could even be the same foreign map from ro32 all the way to finals so that players don't have to learn a new map each week they advance. Or 1 map for ro32 to ro16, then a new map for ro8 onwards, you get the idea. Once players get to the ro32, they will be close enough to their top form from the 7 weeks of prelims and thus don't have to focus on getting their mechanics back. They can focus on preparing for specific maps and specific opponents instead, so 1 map per week that they were previously unfamiliar with would be reasonable at that stage of the tournament.
|
Eonzerg: it wasnt my intention to be agresive or anything,but it was a serious question,so i wanted you to take it seriously,
and i have mad respect for organizers ,specially for 2pac that is a fantastic guy,but yeah he has bad taste with the maps :D
Ah ok then. Ofcourse I take you seriously.
Fearthequeen: The map selection for the prelims makes a lot of sense to me, meaning it wouldn't really make sense to use a foreign map in the prelims. Many players are just trying to get back into shape in the week before and throughout the prelims, mainly using mass games solely on FS on Fish, some on iccup but still using FS only. They shouldn't be expected to learn a new map(s) on top of getting back into shape just for the prelims.
Well that is what the TLC’s were for. And the TLC’s were already using a more eclectic map pool than just FS so I disagree with this argument. The TLS has gone backwards and become more conservative. I don’t know why.
Fearthequeen: I also think it would make sense to introduce maybe 1 foreign map per round starting in the round of 32. It could even be the same foreign map from ro32 all the way to finals so that players don't have to learn a new map each week they advance. Or 1 map for ro32 to ro16, then a new map for ro8 onwards, you get the idea. Once players get to the ro32, they will be close enough to their top form from the 7 weeks of prelims and thus don't have to focus on getting their mechanics back. They can focus on preparing for specific maps and specific opponents instead, so 1 map per week that they were previously unfamiliar with would be reasonable at that stage of the tournament.
Excellent. Introduce 1 foreign map is your suggestion. Thanks for saying it, it makes me feel less militant and less solitary when a sentiment is continued to be shared.
Now a bigger reply to Probemicro
Probemicro: I understand that you have your agenda as a mapmaker to make and push new maps for people to play in, but is there really a need for you to push your maps so aggressively for others?
I consider myself a brood war fan primarily, a brood war expert second, and I also have made some maps so I am a mapmaker but that doesn’t mean I have a predetermined scheme. I have suggested 8 maps, some of which are mine but that’s incidental. My goal is to improve brood war. I much prefer wording it like this. Mappers are part of the community and therefore the maps that we generate are extensions of the community. Many elements make up the beast that is ‘foreign broodwar’. This thread in one such element and they all get tossed together into the machine which eventually spits out a result. So far, the result is zero foreign maps in TLS and radio silence for the last few weeks concerning maps from the tour admins. So perhaps the role that I have slowly adopted over the course of this thread, the message I represent is not needed and not wanted. I carefully selected some maps that I honestly think will ultimately lead to the maximum amount of fun for all involved parties. (yay party).
Lol in an amusing turn of events, now its me who is accused of being aggressive hehe. However I think you mean in the sense of being vocal rather than in the sense of being angry. If so then Id agree I have got ‘louder’ as this thread has progressed and after my parody thread got deleted. But I feel I have consistently been making valid points (and generally they haven’t been refuted, just ignored). I haven’t been saying the same things over and over either. Instead I have been adding arguments as events have transpired.
But yeah I seem to have elected myself for this role and the reason is because I am passionate about it. I want brood war to be the best it can be, and I think these maps can help achieve that.
BW is a old game played with many old players. Many of these old players simply just want login into iccup/fish/VS/whatever, play with the maps they are familiar with, have fun. A lot of them don't have the luxury of much time to sit down and test all sorts of funky new maps.
This is absolutely a valid counter argument. I disagree that any of these maps can be described as ‘funky’ though. And there aren’t ‘all sorts’ either. Ive put forward 8 and while they are different, they aren’t wildly divergent from each other. Also, currently the map pool is 3. That’s not a particularly high number. You also imply that they can only have fun on familiar maps but I think they can have fun on new maps too, potentially more.
There are arguments that can oppose your line too. Some of these have been made already by me and others. I will add this; perhaps ‘many’ of the players would like to log in and play new maps where they can be more creative. (Creative is a word that people use here, I don’t necessarily agree with it).
You mention old players. Did you know that Airforce Ace would get most of their wins at the start of the season when the maps were new? These are the players who are the oldest. They have the most experience. They have the least amount of practice time. They are also the weakest in terms of speed and precision.
Interesting food for thought there do you agree?
Also, you suggest that players who don’t have the luxury of time will lead to them losing more games. Is that necessarily a bad thing? Perhaps a player who has practiced something more should be rewarded, I don’t know the answer but Im just putting the idea forward. I understand what you are getting at though. You are saying the games will be less precise, more scrappy, and therefore less exciting if they end quickly. I agree with that. But at the same time, you can argue that ‘natural talent’ and ‘fundamental strategical knowledge (aka experience)’ has a greater chance of shining through on new maps rather than ‘mechanical robot skill’. Im simplifying down to these basic trope terms out of time constraint, apologies.
Do you think they want to waste time playing a new map, winning/losing because of some perceived map imbalance then going onto the usual forums to whine/cry about it? when they can just start up FS/python/hunters and play for fun, they are familiar with these maps, knowing that these maps have already been proven to be statistically "balanced" and "endorsed" by amateurs and top players alike. (whether thats actually true or not doesn't matter, in their eyes its balanced and that makes them comfortable when playing)
Actually I think veteran players have more class and would willingly accept if they lost a game, and would say its due to their own condition more than map imba.
Don’t know why you brought up hunters when the topic is map balance (and python for that matter).
The opening line of this paragraph includes ‘waste time playing a new map’. You can be sure I dispute that. Even if a map were to be used for 1 tournament, you can learn and re-affirm things from that and therefore it was worth it in my opinion. But ofcourse I think these maps could be used for more than 1 tournament. Indeed they already have been, see the list in an earlier post.
Yes new maps are needed for the longevity and continued evolution of the game, but its not like theres much long term prospects for BW anyway.
Wow. In this last month alone we have had countless announcements of growth for brood war. Heck, in the last 24 hours we have two returning pro players, Hyvaa and M18M streaming bw. We have tasteless and artosis casting vnsl, we have Sun, I could go on.
However, I think its irrelevant whether there are long term prospects anyway (if by that you mean growth in player numbers). We can still choose to play new maps if we want to. What you are saying is, being frozen in time is ok and eventually everyone will stop playing broodwar and then that’s it. Well ok, I probably wont be able to convince you otherwise but it’s a position I am nowhere near ready to adopt.
BW is not as big as it once was and korean tourneys are reluctant to introduce new maps,…
I agree with both of those facts, but don’t see how they apply. This is a foreign tournament. We can choose what maps are used.
…they don't want some random new map with potentially perceived imbalances to ruin games when they can just opt for the "safe" old options that will guarantee decent games and viewership (despite the fact that those old maps have their own flaws too, but familarity/nostalgia). KSL2 discontinuing usage of new maps is an example of that.
You prepend the word ‘random’ to ‘new map’. I get that you are using emotive language (that’s not an insult) and it can be useful as it helps to make a point of view clearer. But Im still going to be a pedant and take issue with it. Ive very carefully hand picked these 8 maps out of, well yeah literally thousands. They are unconditionally not random.
You also bring up games that are ‘ruined’ by new maps. So yeah, I understand the concept, there will be some games that are cut short due to unfamiliarity. The question is do the positives outweigh that? (for you its probably a no, for some its yes). But I want to also say that while playing a game of bw, the whole process of figuring out just how far you can push the limit to progress to the next stage of the game is actually a large part of what makes starcraft exactly what it is. A player may lose a game, but through it they have learnt something new about the map that they take into their next game. The whole development is actually fundamental to starcraft. For a map to ruin a game, that takes something like a person not walling properly. Again, I guess I have to just agree. It is a valid point, but I repeat do the positives outweigh that?
For me a game that is ruined is a PvT on circuit breaker left vs right spawn. I often recall Pure vs Leta when they played and it was an hour long game that ended in a draw (cross spawn). It was amazing. But then in the rematch it was left vs right spawn, and it wasn’t amazing to say the least. That’s an example of a map ruining a good game.
We have minimised the difficulty of transition period on these maps by using building markers and other stuff that I detailed already in the thread, specifically in this post:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/bw-tournaments/490990-tlc-teamliquid-legacy-cup-2015-map-discussion?page=3#50
You mention old safe maps that ‘guarantee decent games and viewership’. That is something I dont necessarily agree with. There might be a point when it becomes detrimental, and people are so bored of watching games on the same maps that they don’t tune in. For some of us, that point has been reached already, for you perhaps not. That’s fine, we have to try and work out when the tipping point is about to be reached. If I were a long term strategist Id think it would be wise to pre-emptively introduce new maps before viewership takes a hit rather than reactively. Clearly, I believe that time is now. I think this is the perfect moment to boost brood war in all aspects to really capitalise on the huge amount of momentum that is bubbling in the cauldron right now.
Not to mention in a scene with quite a bit of history like BW, theres probably politics/favoritism involved, where OGN/kongdoo/whoever would rather trust old veteran mapmakers like rose of dream and their maps rather than some up and comer mapmaker, even if that up and comer has some exceptionally made maps.
Look, we are talking about TLS. Its organised by foreigners. We don’t have to copy the Koreans. I dont understand this point at all. Foreigners are in control of the map selection for this tournament. Now it turns out they also don’t happen to trust old veteran map makers such as Freakling either. But they should, just as much as Korean tour organisers should trust the 'up and comer' (just echoing your words here) Korean mapper LatiAs and use his maps (and the foreign maps!).
You say they would rather trust an old veteran map maker rather than an up and comer who has some exceptionally made maps. Well it is totally easy to call them out as being wrong then. The things that should be judged are the maps.
Here is the nice bonus. A map is just bits and bytes. Other people can freely edit them. A map can be improved. It doesn’t matter where it comes from. Once its out, its in the hands of the community. You can take an up and comer map and have veterans approve it. Map makers are fans of brood war, they want the best for it, they collaborate. They seek feedback.
funny how you mention you create maps for terran to do well in during tournaments, despite the fact that terran is probably the race that have to spend the most amount of preparatory time and effort for new maps in tournaments. unless the map is terran biased you will just make it harder for any terran to win by adding more new maps, especially when foreign terrans (obv not Scan) struggle enough as it is with the usual old maps. but who cares about terran in foreign scene amirite, only zergs ftw
Woah now. I never ever said I create maps for terran to do well in.
I quote myself (it was addressed to the tour organisers)
In the foreign scene, terran is a bit weaker if anything, yet you have chosen 2 slightly harder terran maps which is surprising. Could have chosen a balanced map instead, or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting.
And in my following post I clarified with this
btw when I said "or if you wish, a new map with unknown balance. That would be really exciting."
that was me attempting to be empathetic and to see things from (perhaps) your perspective.
If they were using maps that were bad for zergs, I would still say it would be better to use balanced maps instead. And if zergs were beating terrans on balanced maps, then fine by me. I wouldnt advocate introducing terran favoured maps.
I agree that new maps are tricky for terran. And so I understand your point that new maps would also hurt terrans. It’s a good argument.
Overall, (taking everything into account) I think its far better to use a map that has unknown balance and is new, than an old map that is confirmed to be imbalanced.
I think if I were a terran player Id be pretty happy on a new map that I think I have a chance on, than going into a game where I know the map well, but feel I have a large disadvantage from the start. It would be a fun and interesting challenge. Whereas playing on a map where its considered imbalanced at top level would be an immediate downer for me, and I might get frustrated if I started losing the game etc. Ofcourse some players will be different in that regard.
I think its fair to say that new maps are tricky for P and Z too. So this makes things fairer sort of. Whereas if you play a map that is more ‘figured out’ then you already can anticipate I dunno, a 2 base terran all in etc. Therefore its easy to hold for P/Z.
But if its on a new map where either race can do a powerful 2 base all in, this makes it fairer because the P or Z doesn’t know perfectly how to hold off that attack either, unlike if they were on hbr. This paragraph is a very undeveloped rushed explanation Im afraid due to time, sorry.
However, as you know I think the 8 maps in the op have good balance already (top/high/mid level take your pick). Certainly good enough for some good games right at this moment.
I said I haven’t been repeating myself in this thread but you sort of ask me too a bit now. So Im just going to quickly say 2 things in 2 paragraphs.
These maps are pretty darn easy to quickly get comfortable on. Its as good as it possibly can be while still being strategically different enough to be interesting and worth changing from in the first place. Terrans (all races) should be able to go out on these maps having only looked at the picture even, and still feel like they have an idea of whats going on. You are able to take you favourite opening that you use on your favourite standard map and apply it immediately to any of these maps and you will be able to get stuck in to the game with a solid chance of winning.
If you lose the game, you almost certainly wont think afterwards, gosh this map is completely ridiculous for my race and I am so angry. No, you will hopefully think something more like, that was pretty fun actually, and Ive got a few ideas of what I might try next time.
And the second thing which is a repetition is the whole short term vs long term. Your point was new maps are hard for terran so don’t introduce new maps. The counter being; (if we accept the premise) in the short term it will be a bit tricky but in the long term the benefits are worth it. Its certainly better than just playing proven imbalanced maps for ever more. I cant think how anyone would prefer that scenario.
So in conclusion to Probemicro: Thankyou very much for taking the time to do a detailed reply to me specifically. You make many excellent arguments that summarise the other side of the coin. Many valid points indeed. Ive tried to show how I think the counters outweigh them.
Reading between the lines, Probemicro you are getting bored of my posts in this thread. I just want to quickly say I originally made this thread because the scan ban topic was diluting the map related comments to such a degree it was very inconvenient to follow the conversation in other threads.
So to everyone; please remember this thread is for map discussion, whether Korean or foreign. Its not just whether you like my suggestions in the op or not. I would love to see some opinions about the current map pool. Do you like the 3 maps? Would you change any of them?
also this new quote system is so ugly and uninformative compared to the old system, maybe Im doing it wrong. I only favour new changes that make things better!
|
"Card: In other words, I said that Medusa and Heartbreak Ridge are notoriously hard for terran."
What? I'm curious what this is based on. I'd say only 1 out of 4 of the matchups, being TvP on HBR, is particularly hard on Terran.
I read most of your response to probemicro. I'd say there's no point discussing changing the 3 maps for the preliminaries at this point. You need continuity with the maps of the prelims to make it fair across all 7 weeks. For example, if Eonzerg plays Flisk on the current 3 maps, then we have 3 new maps in week 4 and he plays Cryoc on those, the results become skewed by the maps (you can argue to what degree). The prelims are essentially one big round robin for seeding and the maps should be held constant to give the most accurate seeding.
I'd say focus on potential map rotations for the ro32 onward.
I saw after I posted that example map pool that 2Pac already said the round of 32 onwards will consist of 5 maps and none of the 3 maps from the preliminaries will be used. So my example map pool wasn't completely relevant. If its going to be 5 maps, then I'd say probably 1 foreign map made out of the 5 is a good ratio.
Personally I'd like to see something like this combination of maps could be used throughout the elimination stage:
Eddy (I pick this ahead of other foreigner maps mostly because of its uniqueness.
Circuit Breaker
Outsider
Mist
Wind and Cloud
|
whoops, delete this please
|
btw I know that Cross Game needs a fix to its pylon wall at the 3 o clock. That can be fixed easily if you want to use the map for TLS. For full disclosure, Im toying with the idea of making the 3rd min only slightly easier to take by making the chokes slightly smaller. That would be in the future though.
@BLinD-RawR Im not sure if there is a thread for Cross Game at the moment. I might make one in a few days or something. I think I said in pm that I dont have reps, possibly others could help with that better.
@fearthequeen, I changed that line now. It was a superfluous paragraph. I was trying to put my original sentence into new words because it seemed they were misunderstood. But the original was good so lets just leave it at that:
Card: you have chosen 2 slightly harder terran maps which is surprising
Next:
fearthequeen: I'd say there's no point discussing changing the 3 maps for the preliminaries at this point. You need continuity with the maps of the prelims to make it fair across all 7 weeks.
Yep ok. I havent looked deeply into the format myself right at this moment, but I take your word for it.
After that, you post a big list of suggestions. Thats pretty cool detail, thanks for being thorough. I believe people being really specific like this is the most helpful feedback.
|
|
|
we need more protoss favoured maps like fastest maps
|
I can say one thing about maps. If you are a good/top player you will understand how certain maps are broken for other races. And how certain races feel playing them. It's just a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.panschk.de/mappage/pics/4706.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/546_Neo%20Ground%20Zero.jpg)
