Maps for TSL2 (and the foreigner map-making scene) - Page 15

On August 16 2008 00:08 LazarusSpeaks wrote:
The argument is only going in a circle because you're responding to new, unanswered points with the same ones they were made in response to, IMO.

i.e., Do you disagree that the ideal maps for foreigners will be different than the ideal maps for pro koreans? Why or why not?

Do you believe foreign map makers lack the competence to execute any plans requested of them? IMO they could make any map we can possibly describe.

Do you think it's too hard to tell them what kind of map we need to make TSL unique and specially tailored to foreign gamers? IMO the same effort spent selecting maps could be spent giving them more instructions.

It seems to me like they can make just about anything and the only thing they lack is information from advanced gamers or whoever is deciding their maps aren't up to par. You already must have this information in order to reject their maps, so why not share it with them? Is it the time it takes to type it out that is stopping all this?

So I agree this is going in circles; I've said just about all this several times. But I must be missing something because the only response I see does not address these basic points.

On August 17 2008 00:06 LazarusSpeaks wrote:
Nightmarjoo what is the difference between balancing a map and "force certain imbalances/trends etc."? I feel like when you "balance" a map you are always "force certain imbalances/trends etc." in a way that is tailored to your opinion of the player pool, their abilities with the races at the current time, etc.

If you find out a map is 70%/30% in a matchup you try to adjust this. Obviously player pool is a big effect on whether this happens or not. For instance in a USA only league the balance between Z and other races is going to be different, and if you insist on using maps that pro gamers use, blindly, you will simply have bad games and lack of zerg.

Do you think it's too hard to tell them what kind of map we need to make TSL unique and specially tailored to foreign gamers? IMO the same effort spent selecting maps could be spent giving them more instructions.
Yes, it is up to the artist to create art for the art lover to enjoy - not for the art lover to direct the artist while he is creating his masterpiece. Obviously deciding the medium for the given art work can be predetermined (sculture/oil painting etc) just as general directions can be given (island, macro etc).

It seems to me like they can make just about anything and the only thing they lack is information from advanced gamers or whoever is deciding their maps aren't up to par. You already must have this information in order to reject their maps, so why not share it with them? Is it the time it takes to type it out that is stopping all this?
I dont quite understand the question. I think you're asking about the fact that the only limitation is that foreign maps dont get testing? We only tested faoi as including any other foreign map would lead to distasted - atleast faoi was in the iccup map map. We didn't decide against Faoi for purely balance reasons, it encompassed a number of factors including the release of new korean maps (thus voiding the 'fresh concept' argument). I am not going to repeat the discussion here as it is not meant for the public.

Balance changes across a season - a fact you are ignoring. Maps do undergo a number of revisions across time - but they CANNOT change within a league. Once that version is out - that's it. So when the balance reports start turning up negative for one particular matchup there's nothing you can do despite all the balance testing you've done beforehand. Sure you can fix that after the season - thats why we have up to 3 versions for many maps fixing balance issues.

Yes, it is up to the artist to create art for the art lover to enjoy - not for the art lover to direct the artist while he is creating his masterpiece. Obviously deciding the medium for the given art work can be predetermined (sculture/oil painting etc) just as general directions can be given (island, macro etc).

I dont quite understand the question. I think you're asking about the fact that the only limitation is that foreign maps dont get testing? We only tested faoi as including any other foreign map would lead to distasted - atleast faoi was in the iccup map map. We didn't decide against Faoi for purely balance reasons, it encompassed a number of factors including the release of new korean maps (thus voiding the 'fresh concept' argument). I am not going to repeat the discussion here as it is not meant for the public.

On August 18 2008 07:21 LazarusSpeaks wrote:

I concede that balance changes; it can change at any point, because the players will have new strategies and new expectations. However when I refer to 70%/30% I am referring to stats that are gained across enough games to be fairly certain there is something strongly, unacceptably biased going on--not star league stats like 5-3 or 2-1 or even 25-15. The margin of error in such data pools is simply too large.

Obviously an assessment of balance on a map is an estimate. My only point is that when you decide a map is "fair" it is relative to the players involved. You agreed with this--some maps may be good for pro gamers, and not good for foreigners. Therefore, we have an obligation to tailor the map pool to the foreign gamers (as you have been doing). We have an opportunity, therefore, for foreign map makers to make maps that we have not seen for pro gamers--they have more options, in theory, because they can ignore certain things that would only matter for pro koreans. They do not have to worry about balancing strategies that foreigners can't do. They can tailor the map to make a maximally interesting map for foreigners, because different things are excluded for them, than are for pro maps. It follows that there must be maps better for foreigners than any that currently exist in the pro korean pool. If none of the existent foreigner maps are up to par, the missing step is that we aren't telling them what they need to fix.

This is false. A map is not a painting. It's a place where games are played. If there are flaws in it that make it unsuitable, they need to be fixed. This is not merely one way to look at it. It's how the map makers themselves look at it, as you can see on their site. They are pointed out weaknesses in terms of balance, in terms of specific places that are flawed, specific problems matchups may have. You do this yourself when you describe why one map is fine for pro koreans but imba for foreigners. You say yourself that foreign gamers find foreign maps unacceptable--the balance isn't advanced enough. Well then, if we tell them what they need to work on, they will do it. You can't say we shouldn't, because "they are artists" or whatever. That is bogus. They work in teams. They remake eachothers maps, and other peoples. They take instruction from anyone who gives it. That is their art. Not solo blindfolded map making and hoping it emerges from the womb fluent in nine languages. Just no. This is where we aren't agreeing.

Not testing. Detailed feedback. People look at maps and say "that map's not ready. we won't play that map." In the heads of those people are reasons why, unless they are simply making uninformed judgments in which case their opinion means nothing. All I'm saying is, if those reasons are shared--if some of those people who are rejecting the maps will speak up a little more clearly (and I beg that anyone who can increase the chance of this happenning do their best, up to and including Plexa himself), I am confident (and you are too, according to your post) that the foreign map makers will, as much as possible, meet all demands. The result will be better maps than we have ever seen.

So my question is, why isn't this happening? The maps are being rejected and the map makers don't really know what they need to change. They have to aggressively hunt and stalk people to find out what they need to fix, and then the map is still rejected. This has to change if you want TSL to be as good as possible. TSL can get to the point where koreans watch it to find out which maps will be stolen from it for their leagues. If only you want it to.

On August 19 2008 09:05 Plexa wrote:
While this may seem like a short answer, why do you think we removed troy from the map pool? The map fares decently at pro level but is a complete protoss map outside of korea - hence we axed it. We are aware of the differences but with that being said the extreme balances changes between pro and foreign level only happen on a select few maps whereas the majority (read; python clones) play very similarly. Thus the map pool does end up balancing the foreign level aptly. That being said, i can't see how the foreign map making community will do anything exceptional when it comes to balancing it purely for foreigners - at least in the concept development stage. The discrepancies are not as big as you are trying to make out and hence the maps produced will look very similar to the maps that are balanced for both atm (ie most maps). Obviously, in balance testing maps will be altered dramatically - this happens everywhere i mean, does anyone remember longinus 0.9?

I think you misunderstand the point of the metaphor the metaphor refers to the conceptualization and creation of the initial map. As that appeared to be what you were asking about. But it looks like instead you were talking about ongoing refinement of the map? Then the metaphor obviously doesn't apply. Most foreigners don't beleive there is a problem with balance (indeed it is expected of all maps, korean and foreign alike) rather obscurity of the map and the fact they can't practice with koreans on it. Indeed this point is the largest reason why foreigners don't want foreign maps. If we are considering a map we will (and have) give feedback to better the map.

If those reasons existed we would communicate them, as i've stated before, only the most ignorant argue balance as why they choose not to play, its a practice issue. When conceptualizing the tournament we had to consider whether or not players will practice the maps or not. On the ladder - are players going to have the time/take the time to learn and practice the map? Obviously intensive practicing with other TSL participants its out of the question because your trying to hide your style on the map etc. It's a difficult thing to juggle around - some of the staff argued that if a player was serious about the tournament that they would learn the maps to get the cash, but we also wanted to make the tournament as player friendly and easy to play in as possible. If we have major/minor qualms about makes we will give constructive feedback.

btw i can read your edit Nothing is happening yet because we are still in the planning phase of TSL - we're not thinking about maps yet.

On August 19 2008 11:09 LazarusSpeaks wrote:
Plexa! Once again I am indebted to you greatly for your excellent comments. I feel like you have made further mutual understanding possible where it seemed hopeless, simply by these last two gifts you have delivered here.


Yes it seems again we are in agreement but there were some misunderstandings, for the most part. Your own actions, as you mention, prove that different maps will be acceptable and unacceptable, and therefore also, ideal and less than ideal, for a foreigner tournament as opposed to a pro tournament. Perhaps now that we have narrowed the area of dispute down so specifically--to a concept development stage, now I can perhaps offer my final opinions on the subject--my final plea.

I think you misunderstand the point of the metaphor the metaphor refers to the conceptualization and creation of the initial map. As that appeared to be what you were asking about. But it looks like instead you were talking about ongoing refinement of the map? Then the metaphor obviously doesn't apply. Most foreigners don't beleive there is a problem with balance (indeed it is expected of all maps, korean and foreign alike) rather obscurity of the map and the fact they can't practice with koreans on it. Indeed this point is the largest reason why foreigners don't want foreign maps. If we are considering a map we will (and have) give feedback to better the map.

If those reasons existed we would communicate them, as i've stated before, only the most ignorant argue balance as why they choose not to play, its a practice issue. When conceptualizing the tournament we had to consider whether or not players will practice the maps or not. On the ladder - are players going to have the time/take the time to learn and practice the map? Obviously intensive practicing with other TSL participants its out of the question because your trying to hide your style on the map etc. It's a difficult thing to juggle around - some of the staff argued that if a player was serious about the tournament that they would learn the maps to get the cash, but we also wanted to make the tournament as player friendly and easy to play in as possible. If we have major/minor qualms about makes we will give constructive feedback.

btw i can read your edit Nothing is happening yet because we are still in the planning phase of TSL - we're not thinking about maps yet.

Second, regarding the balance phase--I don't recall you asking anyone to make any changes to any of the maps in TSL1. Is this something you only do with foreign maps? It seems like if these exact maps came out anew from a foreigner you would find faults with them and ask them to make changes. You are missing a chance by not treating all the maps equally in this respect. People will revise any map you want for TSL, just ask them.

In this thread you have made it sound like it's completely up to them to deliver a map to you, and then you can thumbs up or thumbs down it. Or like you're waiting for good maps to appear. I hope I have convinced you that there is more you can do.

But if the main issue is something other than map quality, then let's have a completely separate discussion about those issues, because here I think we have enough just to try to make sure the best possible foreign maps for TSL come into existence, whether TSL finds it appropriate ultimately to use them or not.

On August 21 2008 14:34 anotak wrote:
if it were up the players back in 2001 in korea i think we'd still be playing LT

On August 21 2008 13:38 Nightmarjoo wrote:
~