Obviously, GSL and Blizzard have a unique relationship. However, for most other tournaments, Blizzard requires some process if prize pool is >$5000. Does Blizzard have any say in the map pool for tournaments like this? Obviously, KeSPA had no ties with Blizzard and could impose map rules as they pleased for BW. Could Blizzard themselves be hampering this? Anyone run a >$5k tournament want to chime in?

mister.bubbles

Canada171 Posts

November 14 2011 23:23 GMT

#82

I guess this is also indicative of how much the western esports scene will hopefully benefit when it grows to the point where a collective organization such as Kespa can develop.

Ben...

Canada3485 Posts

November 14 2011 23:25 GMT

#83

I definitely agree with the sentiments expressed. I hope we see more maps like that crazy new GSL map. There have been so many weird new strategies on it and every game so far has been quite good because every race has an equal chance fast expanding.
+ Show Spoiler +

Including Genius bossing it up with 12 carriers

I look forward to more maps like that in the future, instead of the two base all-in maps we have now. Hopefully we can figure out maps well enough that we can get our own Fighting Spirit.

BrodiaQ

United States892 Posts

November 14 2011 23:26 GMT

#84

On November 15 2011 07:08 TheKefka wrote:

Show nested quote +

I don't see how Jungle Basin is worse than steppes of war.At least you were able to win a ZvP here and there on JB.

You trolling?

How important maps are in bw is actually one of the reasons I don't play it still. I go back and load up iccup every so often and when I don't feel like playing on python every game I don't know any of the maps :[

Amlitzer

United States471 Posts

November 14 2011 23:26 GMT

#85

One important fact that everyone seems to forget when discussing maps is that just because a map is imbalanced for individual play does not mean it is necessarily imbalanced for team play. Also, a lot of these maps have poor statistics due to the era from which they were in the map pool, this especially true for the beta/launch maps (where you were lucky to even see a two base play).

ZisforZerg

United States224 Posts

November 14 2011 23:27 GMT

#86

Tal'Darim is great except for ZvZ / PvP. <3 this writeup

DIMAGA

Ukraine38 Posts

November 14 2011 23:29 GMT

#87

i agree overall about maps, but all this statistic i think is not correct cause if you about progamers then plz take a progamers statistics for example GSL or at least MLG statistics then it make more sense i belive.

DIMAGA

Ukraine38 Posts

November 14 2011 23:29 GMT

#88

i agree overall about maps, but all this statistic i think is not correct cause if you talk about progamers then plz take a progamers statistics for example GSL or at least MLG statistics then it make more sense i belive.

ShadeR

Australia7535 Posts

November 14 2011 23:30 GMT

#89

Fighting Spirit is a work of art.

Fuhrmaaj

167 Posts

November 14 2011 23:31 GMT

#90

I've been thinking about this a lot lately but I'm not sure what the solution is. I do think there needs to be some tournament which forces players to play on new maps. If MLG were willing to take a couple maps out of the recent map contest winners, that would be an ideal start. I think that mapmakers need to run monthly contests and tournaments need to try out the winners. Pros don't have time to play on these maps, but players do and we can give feedback about which maps are balanced enough for pros to try them out. If playhem were willing to put some of these random maps in their map pool, it would force at least some pros to try them out.

SpaceYeti

United States723 Posts

November 14 2011 23:32 GMT

#91

It would be cool if a nonprofit there was a nonprofit, map-making organization that all major tournament organizers turned towards to create and establish a universal map pool across tournaments. Then the organization could monitor map balance and cycle through new maps over time to keep things fresh, without each organization having different maps and creating confusion for players and spectators.

Glurkenspurk

United States1915 Posts

November 14 2011 23:33 GMT

#92

On November 15 2011 07:15 Leeoku wrote:
this should be linked to the whine about why metalop is still in the map pool. sure it is slightly favoured but compared to all the other maps and in terms of symmetry etc it is one of the best..

I don't think balance is really the main reason metal sucks. It's more that we've been playing on it for a very long time and every other blizzard map sucks in comparison. Which is sad, in a way.

Ucs

264 Posts

November 14 2011 23:34 GMT

#93

I thought we werent allowed to talk about balance or do race whining on TeamLiquid forums. The OP only posted some light trivia about maps and some stats and unconciously encourages us to start trolling each other based on race. While terrans will ask for smaller maps, zerg will ask for larger ones and protoss will say larger ones but with alot of chokes. After that everyone will just troll each other while screaming that collosus is imba in chokes, terran is imba in small maps, zerg is imba in open large maps.

In my opinion this thread is counterproductive. Stats just say it all. The stats talk better than anything else and offer the best arguments for any point anyone wants to make so I don't understand what this thread wants me/us to talk about. The maps that are out now? Why are they imba or not imba? New maps that are not yet known? Race balance? Overall i guess OP just wanted to tell us maps matter in e-sports. The biggest problem related to maps is directly linked to the infrastructure blizzard gives us, so we can't do anything about that.

Im not trying to say anything negative on purpose about anyone/anything but I just don't understand this thread. Maybe I'm just stupid. I apologise.

Eatme

Switzerland3919 Posts

November 14 2011 23:34 GMT

#94

Really nice writeup. Maps have a really interesting effect on balance were you get the maps balancing the game or the metagame blancing the maps as far as possible. When BW was only played on LT and Hunters it was not thaaaat imbalanced, atleast wery few complained about balance. Well the maps were "fixed" in an infinity number of versions but the still had the same layout.
I think that maps might have an even bigger effect on balance in sc2 for reasons such as balls ect. Wide open spaces vs narrow alleys make alot of difference. Most maps today are pretty narrow and a change of that would be interesting, if it works is another questions.

Falling

Canada11607 Posts

November 14 2011 23:39 GMT

#95

On November 15 2011 08:34 Ucs wrote:
I thought we werent allowed to talk about balance or do race whining on TeamLiquid forums. The OP only posted some light trivia about maps and some stats and unconciously encourages us to start trolling each other based on race. While terrans will ask for smaller maps, zerg will ask for larger ones and protoss will say larger ones but with alot of chokes. After that everyone will just troll each other while screaming that collosus is imba in chokes, terran is imba in small maps, zerg is imba in open large maps.

In my opinion this thread is counterproductive. Stats just say it all. The stats talk better than anything else and offer the best arguments for any point anyone wants to make so I don't understand what this thread wants me/us to talk about. The maps that are out now? Why are they imba or not imba? New maps that are not yet known? Race balance? Overall i guess OP just wanted to tell us maps matter in e-sports. The biggest problem related to maps is directly linked to the infrastructure blizzard gives us, so we can't do anything about that.

Im not trying to say anything negative on purpose about anyone/anything but I just don't understand this thread. Maybe I'm just stupid. I apologise.

It's not race whining though. This sort of map analysis has a fairly long tradition in BW as it is often thought that better maps was the last piece that balanced BW. The difference is how well certain races did was often dependent on whether the maps themselves were balanced. Some really terrible ones got put in and were pulled after one season to be never seen again. Of course, what was even more epic was when a top player would dominate on a map not favouring their race.

Al Bundy

7257 Posts

November 14 2011 23:40 GMT

#96

Couldn't have said it better, excellent article.

striderxxx

Canada443 Posts

November 14 2011 23:42 GMT

#97

i on the side that says new maps should be introduced at random at tourneys. they way you get to see truly who is the best and making on the fly decisions and not on who has the best predetermined plan for a specific map. boxer would kick ass this way!!

pPingu

Switzerland2892 Posts

November 14 2011 23:44 GMT

#98

You must do the difference between whine and balance talk

enigamI

Canada385 Posts

November 14 2011 23:48 GMT

#99

Very interesting read, thanks a lot. I was unaware and somewhat incorrect in the percentages of some of the maps.

khanofmongols

542 Posts

November 14 2011 23:48 GMT

#100

I like the idea that maps could balence the game but I don't quite know how a map could improve both ZvT and PvT win rates. If the map is too open then toss gets destroyed and if it is too narrow zerg can't deal with tanks and ZvP also gets imbalenced in tosses favor. Any ideas?