On October 28 2014 23:50 IntoTheheart wrote: [quote] I am unimpressed greatly.
I know! The creator of foxtrot labs got 3rd place in that competition with a different map that was nearly as good. Foxtrot labs was second (or maybe I mixed up 2nd and 3rd) and some 5 player map that was as bad as deadening got first. Deadwing got 5th I think
Didn't that map with the 5 different tile sets win? It was a pretty map for sure but maybe not teh best to play on
Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all*. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
* well, some people will say that once you've seen CK you've seen all 2p maps ^^
On October 28 2014 23:52 The_Templar wrote: [quote] I know! The creator of foxtrot labs got 3rd place in that competition with a different map that was nearly as good. Foxtrot labs was second (or maybe I mixed up 2nd and 3rd) and some 5 player map that was as bad as deadening got first. Deadwing got 5th I think
Didn't that map with the 5 different tile sets win? It was a pretty map for sure but maybe not teh best to play on
Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
On October 28 2014 23:52 The_Templar wrote: [quote] I know! The creator of foxtrot labs got 3rd place in that competition with a different map that was nearly as good. Foxtrot labs was second (or maybe I mixed up 2nd and 3rd) and some 5 player map that was as bad as deadening got first. Deadwing got 5th I think
Didn't that map with the 5 different tile sets win? It was a pretty map for sure but maybe not teh best to play on
Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
The problem with 3p/5p maps is that you kinda have to make the map fit into a circle, and once you place the mains+naturals on it, you often end up doing a map where the only place where players will battle out is in the center of the map. As much as I hate it, MGR prevents that pretty well with the high-ground bases in the middle. Colosseum is a fun 3p map too
On October 28 2014 23:53 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: [quote]
Didn't that map with the 5 different tile sets win? It was a pretty map for sure but maybe not teh best to play on
Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
On October 28 2014 23:55 The_Templar wrote: [quote] Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
Remember it was made in a time when the editor didn't have a symmetry tool edit : or did it? I'm not sure about when it was introduced
On October 28 2014 23:55 The_Templar wrote: [quote] Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
Xel'naga fortress was made by JackyPrime (made a lot of other high-level maps in 2011ish) and was used in GSTL
On October 28 2014 23:55 The_Templar wrote: [quote] Yeah, it was (5) Biome by some unknown (on TL) mapmaker
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
On October 29 2014 00:00 [PkF] Wire wrote: [quote]
To be honest it wasn't a very good iteration of the TLMC. Probably the no 1v1 thing limited the amount of good maps, but except Foxtrot Labs (and Kamala Park which we didn't see on ladder) the top 5 was rather uninspiring.
The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
On October 29 2014 00:01 The_Templar wrote: [quote] The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
On October 29 2014 00:01 The_Templar wrote: [quote] The restriction was no 4 player maps.
I submitted a fairly decent team map, a horrible 4p, and this + Show Spoiler +
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
Oh, okay. That makes a bit more sense; I remember seeing that map in some variation of SC2 pro-level play, so I was reasonably confident that the map-maker was competent.
On October 29 2014 00:15 [PkF] Wire wrote: Yeah Jacky was an excellent and very skilled mapmaker. I think he was the man behind Crevasse or Crossfire for instance.
On October 29 2014 00:03 [PkF] Wire wrote: [quote]
You meant no 2 players maps right ? Because Deadwing was 4p. And to be honest, 2 players maps are the best if you ask me.
Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
Well I'm terrible at the editor at least, and I've seen a lot of people say it's bad so I assumed everyone struggles with it as much as I do. I've tried to make maps before but I can't even get the scroll to work right in that piece of crap
On October 29 2014 00:04 The_Templar wrote: [quote] Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
Well I'm terrible at the editor at least, and I've seen a lot of people say it's bad so I assumed everyone struggles with it as much as I do. I've tried to make maps before but I can't even get the scroll to work right in that piece of crap
Well, this thread contains a lot of useful information if you want to make maps.
On October 29 2014 00:04 The_Templar wrote: [quote] Yes, I meant no 2p. It was because all of the good maps recently had been 2p (and with good reason)
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
Well I'm terrible at the editor at least, and I've seen a lot of people say it's bad so I assumed everyone struggles with it as much as I do. I've tried to make maps before but I can't even get the scroll to work right in that piece of crap
Yeah the editor could be easier to handle, but once you know how to use it it's pretty good.
On October 29 2014 00:06 [PkF] Wire wrote: [quote]
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
Well I'm terrible at the editor at least, and I've seen a lot of people say it's bad so I assumed everyone struggles with it as much as I do. I've tried to make maps before but I can't even get the scroll to work right in that piece of crap
Well, this thread contains a lot of useful information if you want to make maps.
I'll take a look at it, but I really don't have the creativity to make a decent one anyway so nothing will come of it probably
On October 29 2014 00:06 The_Templar wrote: [quote] I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
Well I'm terrible at the editor at least, and I've seen a lot of people say it's bad so I assumed everyone struggles with it as much as I do. I've tried to make maps before but I can't even get the scroll to work right in that piece of crap
Well, this thread contains a lot of useful information if you want to make maps.
I'll take a look at it, but I really don't have the creativity to make a decent one anyway so nothing will come of it probably
I would probably just make Killing Fields and Python 1.3 ^_^
On October 29 2014 00:06 [PkF] Wire wrote: [quote]
Yeah, I hope that kind of limitation isn't reconducted. 2p maps are best suited for 1v1 games, for obvious reasons. I'm not saying all 1v1 maps should be 2p (for me 2 in 1 maps are 2p) but 3/4p maps should be like 2-3 of the WCS map pool, not 4 like this map pool.
I like 3p maps. It's just that they are too restricted right now.
I have no big problem with them, but it really feels like once you've seen MGR (which is actually a pretty fine map) you've seen them all. Rotational symmetry is kinda forced and it limits a lot creativity for those maps.
Xel'naga fortress was a bit different, but even it was practically the same
I know it's hard to do 3 player maps, but that map has some terrible symmetry. But the mapmaker is terrible so it's forgivable
In what capacity was the mapmaker terrible? Are you talking about the editor, or the person who made the map?
Totally meant the editor, sorry. I'm sure the map maker person is pretty good at what they do.
The editor is not terrible. It does support 3p symmetry now (although it's still weak at that)
Well I'm terrible at the editor at least, and I've seen a lot of people say it's bad so I assumed everyone struggles with it as much as I do. I've tried to make maps before but I can't even get the scroll to work right in that piece of crap
Yeah the editor could be easier to handle, but once you know how to use it it's pretty good.
Easier to handle? the scroll function, just going in and out, doesn't work... more like could use a complete overhaul
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/d/da/Xel'Naga_Fortress.jpg/400px-Xel'Naga_Fortress.jpg)
1107
446
226
206
114
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vV5Pg8B.jpg)
