|
I have no idea what this thread can be classified as but it's going to sound a bit ranty. Oh well.
Here at TL, we have many individuals who work hard and make their own Starcraft 2 1on1 maps. I applaud you. To those who make UMS maps, even more applause because you do truly time-consuming and meticulous work, and your efforts really make it so that more casual players can play the game.
Eh, I just went off topic. Ugh, I feel like this is going to drag on a lot.
Ok, so here at TL, lots of people make maps and post them here. The skill level varies. For a newbie, this is like dipping his toe into the water for the first time, and getting... flamed?....
Bad analogy. Uhh, anyway, it's hard for new users to make a map of quarter-decent quality. The mapping population here on TL is a lot like the 1on1 population, except scaled down a lot. That means that there's a lot of poor mappers who have no idea what they're talking about, some half-decent people who know the basics, and very few top people who understand everything they're talking about.
Thus, comes the main point of this thread.
Far too many people come into a map thread and give comments that have no basis. Linking it to my previous metaphor, it's honestly like the strategy forums. Most of what people say is complete untested BS that comes from absolutely no experience whatsoever. Of course, since those who are the best at mapping actually do browse the map forums, unlike how the top 1on1 players never post in the strategy forums, you do get a lot of good advice too. The problem is, having to sort through all the stupid stuff and finding the cream of the crop.
Now here's the thing. Because SC2 is such a new game, balance isn't completely defined yet. Most things can't be classified as balanced yet. For example, wide open spaces in a map was considered to be Protoss favoured against Terran in Brood War. We don't know if it's true or not yet in SC2. There are however, enough similarities between BW and SC2 for a good mapper in BW to pretty easily become a good mapper in SC2. Just look at Superouman or Morrow for example. They made very good Brood War maps and they're great at making SC2 maps as well.
The reason that they've transitioned well is because a map that played well in Brood War would be almost identical to one that would play well on SC2. The problem is that these similarities aren't easy concepts to grasp. It takes a lot of mapping experience as well as a lot of decently high level playing to understand these concepts. Like how you can explain how to play starcraft to your girlfriend, but it takes a ton of time for her to actually understand how to play even at a decent level.
To summarise the above three paragraphs, most people in the mapping forum dont' know **** about what they're talking about. To be brutally honest, even the iCCup mapmakers aren't excellent mapmakers compared to what Brood War had. We get the maps to a good quality with discussion amoungst ourselves and brainstorming on what we could improve. At this point, the only people whose criticism I'd trust without being shown proof would be Nightmarjoo and Superouman. And maybe Morrow if he ever bothers posting.
This doesn't mean that you should shut out everyone's advice. Just take it with a grain of salt. Test it a bit in game, then, decide for yourself whether to trust it or not. Your skill level is important though. A general rule, the better the mapper plays, the better he maps. Also, please respect the higher level mappers opinions. They're usually right.
One last thing. Don't take criticism personally. The reason we give you criticism is because we want to see you improve. It's not because we're internet jerks who like to bash on people, even if it seems like that sometimes. The only way to improve is to make maps and take the criticsm and apply it to your designs. That's how I improved and that's how I continue improving. Best of luck.
Love from neobowman/EfHiro
P.S. GET RID OF STRAIGHT LINES IN YOUR MAPS. IT LOOKS TERRIBLE.
|
I, on the otherhand, really am an internet jerk. I don't map melee; so I will stay out of the rest of this for you pros. Cheers.
P.S. Square maps are not cool maps.
|
I absolutely love this post. It's brutally honest and terrific and what every mapmaker needs to hear.
|
very good points, i also think people need to actually play the maps out themselves and then comment unless they are just looking at the aesthetics or something.
|
Like how you can explain how to play starcraft to your girlfriend, but it takes a ton of time for her to actually understand how to play even at a decent level. So uh.... can you write a guide for this?
|
I do not understand why this warrants a thread here, unless your going on to talk about 'how to submit high quality accurate feedback'. No offense, though.
One last thing. Don't take criticism personally. The reason we give you criticism is because we want to see you improve. It's not because we're internet jerks who like to bash on people, even if it seems like that sometimes. The only way to improve is to make maps and take the criticsm and apply it to your designs. That's how I improved and that's how I continue improving. Best of luck.
This is common sense (at least to me).
This doesn't mean that you should shut out everyone's advice. Just take it with a grain of salt. Test it a bit in game, then, decide for yourself whether to trust it or not
^I like this. Everybody should go on forums with this in mind.
At this point, the only people whose criticism I'd trust without being shown proof would be Nightmarjoo and Superouman. And maybe Morrow if he ever bothers posting.
^I trust those who have made good maps in the past. Those guys are definitely high up there, but I'd also trust people that are not as high up there. I doubt Morrow even looks at this section of TL.
|
|
|
I try to avoid commenting on balance for maps. You really can't tell just by looking at a map. You have to play, and you have to play a lot.
|
|
|
On December 10 2010 11:34 Barrin wrote:
In fact I only give a certain kind of balance comments nowadays. I never say "this is a terran map" or "this is a zerg map" anymore. What I say is "this particular feature will tend to ____" or "if it was my map I would make this smaller/bigger/etc". It's really up to the mapmaker to consider if it really flows with their overall idea of the map.
Now that's how to give feedback.
|
That's pretty much why I prefer to do the visuals for other mappers lately... I'm not so much of a gamer to get good enough to do the actual balance stuff, but I still want to contribute, and I can still do so my way.
I'm still torn if I should comment on the visuals of other people's maps, as any helpful comments would take me a long time and maybe some examples and I don't know if that would be actually appreciated.
|
I kind of agree with the OP. I feel as if the game is still really new and that means no one is really qualified to know 100% if a map is viable or not. There are people who have good design skills and those skills definitely can transfer over in the broader sense but, the finer details are still undecided.
When I look at and analyze a map, I try to think, "How would I play this map?" I'll go and see, where would I expand, where would I rally my troops, where would I scout, where would I place spotters, which areas do I need to control? If another player comes along and looks at my map and he plays differently than I do, and he says he would expand here or rally there, that is valuable information to me. I don't think everyone plays or thinks the same way and having other people explain the way they would play the map is helpful.
Also, I found Day[9] Daily #191 very insightful: How to Analyze a Map and Adjust Your Play
|
|
|
I think that the biggest problem is that I find it hard pressed to get much feedback on my maps at all.
The view counts go up, but comments and criticisms are fairly lacking. Like my thread here about my latest map hasn't received any feedback on my latest version.
I feel that we could all benefit from creating a group of people that are willing to playtest maps at a relatively high level but there's just no such thing right now.
|
|
|
On December 10 2010 13:26 Barrin wrote:Yeah LunarC I've looked at that multiple times tbh. Every time I did I felt like what I would do to it would turn it into a completely different map, not something I like to do personally so I just said nothing. What I was thinking about saying (but I didn't because I didn't want to insult you, but now that you mention it here it goes) I think you should start from the bottom. You are trying to do things that are pretty complicated and, to be blunt, rather unorthodox, but I'm not sure you really understand how to do them properly (not that anyone really does but there are certain degrees). Just take it slow really... more open middle, pay a lot of attention to how to take and defend a third and how it relates to the overall balance of the map. Have you read this thread? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=174059 BTW Don't take this as an insult at all... Even though certain features were pretty unorthodox they were also pretty clever. It's hard to comment on balance in a map like that to be honest.
Yeah, I realize I tried to pack a lot of "stuff" into a single map. I suppose I should try to keep everything standard with just one or two really unorthodox features.
Oh and don't worry about suggesting something like starting over. I'm not very experienced when it comes to mapping so I'm really open to any criticism no matter how harsh it may be.
|
On December 10 2010 07:44 neobowman wrote:
Most of what people say is complete untested BS that comes from absolutely no experience whatsoever.
This is very true. I got a lot of flak over my latest map, Tarnosis Isle, having a back door into the main. Well.... I consider it a Side door entrance.
People would take a look at that and say " Shitty Blistering Sands backdoor rocks, your maps gay n'stuff." without even trying it. I think I may have made something good, and I would love to see other mappers catch on to the idea of a side door into a Main base. See what others can do with the thought.
|
On December 10 2010 12:47 LunarC wrote:I think that the biggest problem is that I find it hard pressed to get much feedback on my maps at all. The view counts go up, but comments and criticisms are fairly lacking. Like my thread here about my latest map hasn't received any feedback on my latest version. I feel that we could all benefit from creating a group of people that are willing to playtest maps at a relatively high level but there's just no such thing right now.
Dude, i will test out anyones map pretty much whenever im online... Volta.296 (1800 random player) but i agree, a group of people would be so sick.
|
Honestly, the reason I don't comment on people's maps myself that much is because there's going to be so much debate from lower level players over what I say that it's just stupid to try and argue. It's not worth the effort if people who don't know how to play try and shove their opinion over yours.
|
I agree of this thread.
On December 10 2010 22:22 neobowman wrote:
Honestly, the reason I don't comment on people's maps myself that much is because there's going to be so much debate from lower level players over what I say that it's just stupid to try and argue. It's not worth the effort if people who don't know how to play try and shove their opinion over yours.
& I agree of this post.
It's the same what happened to my first published map which I showed on TL.net.
You pointed me to some flaws that you think the map was having. Some other random dude, who in my opinion, is the shittiest mapper on the forums here and still posts a lot, thinking that putting x500 size doodads in your map makes it a good map, then followed by making a comment about a feature of the map which I explained in the OP to be something I really wanted in this map, and yada yada yada...
Stuff just went from "wow, neobowman replied to my thread." to "wtf, why do I even bother."
|
|
|
If there is one thing that would astronomically improve the quality of maps being created it would be to include replays of games on the maps when offering critism.
When looking at the maps you've made in the past there are two ways you can respond:
1. "I can't believe I made that."
2. "I can't believe I made that."
Nunber 1 is a "Wow that map I made was really great for my skill level back then." while Number 2 is a "what was i thinking?" kind of thing.
The Map Makers on TL are maturing to the point of actually being critical of themselves. This is good news, although it also indicates that the community is far from being very highly skilled.
Anyone who has ever pursued an artistic skill knows the learning curve is far from linear (much like actually playing Starcraft). In some rare cases you can see map makers get worse over time. But overall the trend is always up.
I think the next step for improvement requires the separation of the visuals from the equation when determining if a map is fun to play on or not. Too many people right now are judging maps solely on how good they look. While the final step would be to include replays with your post.
Tournaments such as the IMS and MotM competition that draw attention to the maps and allow for some high level feedback from players also help immensely.
|
|
|
On December 11 2010 05:22 Barrin wrote:
I spend so much time making my maps look cool that by the time I'm finished with them I'm not satisfied with the layout anymore. Every single time. And each time I finish I am really only interested in incorporating what I learned in my next maps. I felt like this even when I was making UMS maps in BW. That's why I always leave a design for a day until I begin decorating, it lets me come back to it and see it in a fresh sort of way. Most of the times I end up just abandoning it because it doesn't really seem to work. I'd say for every map I release (1 so far) I make about 5 different designs. It's just that one layout that you just happen to stumble upon that really stands out as exceptional. By the time I finish a map I'm really burnt out and sometimes after I finish a map it just doesn't play very well and gets put on the shelf. But every time a map fails it's just another lesson learned.
|
Another thing I touched on in the OP, once you're good enough, you can tell if something's bad or good without testing. That's why I unconditionally listen to Nightmarjoo's advice. However, for most people, things like that need testing.
|
On December 11 2010 05:22 Barrin wrote:
I spend so much time making my maps look cool that by the time I'm finished with them I'm not satisfied with the layout anymore. Every single time. And each time I finish I am really only interested in incorporating what I learned in my next maps. I felt like this even when I was making UMS maps in BW.
I have yet to run into this problem with this game, but this used to happen to me back when I did level design for Unreal Tournament 2004 and Unreal Tournament 3.
With Starcraft 2 however, I build the layout first. Basic of the basic. Just make sure different textures are used for different levels of Terrain.
Then I playtest the shit out of it with friends, family, and bots. Watch the replays, learn from them and how the people/bots played. Also take advice from people in the community, those who sound like they know what their talking about.
Make the appropriate changes, then decorate.
That's what I've done on my two maps. My first one, I didn't get feedback from a good community (talking about the SC2 official forums and Mapster. No good feedback from those places for anything but NEXUS WARS LAWLS111!!!!111!), and now that I go back and replay it, I notice tons of mistakes. My second (and latest) map was tested from people here on TL.net, and they really helped me a ton.
Just got to sort the bad suggestions from the good suggestions.
|
posted this idea on bnet forums...make common terrain objects (like a "regulation size" starting cliff, a decent sized xpansion cliff, middle variations, gold islands etc) make a script or triggers that calls these objects into a "blank" world (get fancy enough with the code (i'm not a coder)) and you will have unlimited maps with all the same perfect proportions acceptable for league type play
2nd way, make the terrain objects, import them into a mod, then noobs/novice mapmakers will be able to make decent maps with cookie cutter cliffs/and then add the custom middle or whatever
this idea came up to me because i make my cliffs really small so the computer ai usually only has enough room to build 1 rack/gate even though there is plenty of space they don't like to cramp up and use rack/gate for walls, other smart compact tactics (they are not very smart)
so also new AI would be in order..
also i started out putting my gas in the middle so object groups(?) like 8 minerals and 2 gas which you could rotate would be a good addition for people that are not too savy on "league regulations" and optimal format of the mineral/gas nodes
now all you have to do is texture and add/seed doodads
distribute in MOD, wait for marketplace i guess (depending on how this works out)
|
I feel bad because I've only made two maps that I consider close to balanced. Every one of my maps so far has been used to test concepts - and few have worked out so far!
I'm just relying on my BW experience lol
|
|
|
On December 10 2010 07:44 neobowman wrote:
people in the mapping forum dont' know **** about what they're talking about.
thesis
I think this is all that needed to be said, and if you are serious about mapping it should be self evident. If you are not serious about mapping, it doesn't really matter what responses you get.
discursion
Perhaps other private parties have reached another level, but this is how I see the state of understanding: everyone looks at what seems to work and what doesn't on the ladder maps. What do people complain about? Then people make maps that attempt progress. For a long time there was a big movement for larger maps. Now some people are trying to cram things. This is just one thing that might matter in a map. A lot of players who are into mapping discuss the results. The only maps that really see anything approaching competitive play are the iccup maps. The iccup maps generally take the approach of "don't include anything too experimental", so the pros playing them wouldn't really have much to say either way, since they are solid standard layouts. Ultimately, no one has a deep conceptual level understanding. It's all based on a rough empirical feeling. Being a competent player helps you evaluate, and BW experience translates in a lot of ways. But there is no one with unimpeachable sensibilities, simply because something crazy may turn out to be reasonable in the future. Unlikely, but right now we can't know which.
I'm unsatisfied with how I expressed the above, but it serves. That is my view of the state of the art. About this thread.
The OP admits to ranting. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem constructive to me. If you are trying to warn newbies to heed feedback with caution, I think you could go about it more directly, as in a guide about how to post a map and what to expect of it. If you wanted to debate map theory, you could do that outright.
Stupid comments won't ever have a deleterious effect on high level mapping. They will be ignored by competent people, except perhaps to be used as a teaching point for those of us disposed to pedantry or abundant patience. In any case, whenever the competitive starcraft world begins incorporating 3rd party creations, the cream will be used, and chaff will be invisible.
In the pursuit of raising the level of discussion, I think the most productive thing is posting good sense, especially where it's needed most.
The most productive thing for improving the community's power to make good maps would be a testing circle of high level players. A thread about this came up and was forgotten. It would take a lot of dedication. I'd love to be a part of something like that.
|
|
|
The thing with a mapping guide that it doesn't help much imo. You have to understand how mapmaking works and that takes experience. Map theory is not really possible to debate unless you know something about it and not many people on the forums do.
Main point is for the people who don't know **** about what they're talking about ot stop giving critcism on threads. Or at least to help the newbies figure out who to listen to and who not to listen to. But I added on a lot of my personal feelings in the post.
|
On December 10 2010 09:51 G_Wen wrote:Show nested quote +Like how you can explain how to play starcraft to your girlfriend, but it takes a ton of time for her to actually understand how to play even at a decent level. So uh.... can you write a guide for this?
now... that's funny
|
I think guides could be useful to teach visuals, not so much the other stuff, although I think it would be helpful if an experienced map maker would describe the whole process and write down the most important thoughts that go into placing certain features.
|
blatant bump
+ Show Spoiler +Neobowman (op): + Show Spoiler +thank you for stirrin' it up Quick recap/highlights --------------------------- Neobowman: forum dont' know **** about what they're talking about many people come into a map thread and give comments that have no basis you do get a lot of good advice too balance isn't completely defined yet respect the higher level mappers opinions. They're usually right. It's not because we're internet jerks who like to bash on people, even if it seems like that sometimes Best of luck --------------------------- Vanished131 will stay out of the rest of this --------------------------- ProdiG love this post --------------------------- WniO people need to actually play the maps out themselves and then comment --------------------------- G_Wen can you write a guide for this? + Show Spoiler + “Like how you can explain how to play starcraft to your girlfriend, but it takes a ton of time for her to actually understand how to play even at a decent level.” --------------------------- Antares777 'how to submit high quality accurate feedback' --------------------------- Barrin goddamn #$*%ing shitload of concepts involved in this game and the maps themselves, and almost all of them interact in some way with every single other concept I just sort-of roll with it for the most part if you're not it's just because you're setting the bar too low and you're probably not actually sure what you're after next two expansions are just going to compound all of this --------------------------- TedJustice You really can't tell just by looking at a map. You have to play, and you have to play a lot --------------------------- BoomStevo "How would I play this map?" I don't think everyone plays or thinks the same way and having other people explain the way they would play the map is helpful. --------------------------- LunarC I think that the biggest problem is that I find it hard pressed to get much feedback we could all benefit from creating a group of people that are willing to playtest maps --------------------------- LoLIsh See what others can do with the thought. --------------------------- WniO i will test out anyones map pretty much whenever im online --------------------------- Barrin I think the average knowledge of this forum has gone up drastically in the past few months --------------------------- G_Wen "I can't believe I made that." --------------------------- EatThePath It's all based on a rough empirical feeling something crazy may turn out to be reasonable in the future the cream will be used, testing circle of high level players --------------------------- Barrin map testing threadi thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread, it spawned many another thread, check regularly + Show Spoiler +i'm still on the fence as to my adding any more to the discussion
|
|
|
On December 12 2010 06:34 Koagel wrote:
I think guides could be useful to teach visuals, not so much the other stuff, although I think it would be helpful if an experienced map maker would describe the whole process and write down the most important thoughts that go into placing certain features.
I tried making some sort of guidelines for new mappers but I haven't seen much reponse on the thread. Probably I'm doing it completely wrong?
Then again, even though I wrote that, I'm not slightly an experienced mapper such as iCCup'ers who've been in the mapping scene since beta if not since SC1.
In the last few weeks running up to MotM #1 I've seen some mappers stepping it up and really trying hard to make a balanced map, while some still remain and 'sketches' of balanced maps in their minds. I can relate to those people though, I've made several bad maps in my past, and I will make several bad maps to come. (referring to City of the Sun, which is loaded with flaws & Shakuras Marshes, where close positions are super bad). But unlike some I'm learning from every mistake I make and trying to create a top notch map the next time.
This is also the reason I refrain myself from replying to alot of mapthreads, I neither have the proper experience to do so, and I don't wanna say stuff that could hurt people and discourage them from creating better maps.
|
dezi
Germany1536 Posts
You need pictures that show what you explain there. It's way easier to understand it with pictures (for a newbie).
|
@effects about his thread:
+1"You need pictures that show what you explain there.."
edit: cool, eye candy forthcoming
@everyone:
since i can't hold up, and it can go unnoticed i'll rant on this post about: mapmaker's skill
+ Show Spoiler +the first thing to come to mind is that "mapmaking and skill level gives you too many ins and outs to consider the second is that who you are when "applying a skill level to a mapmaker" counts for different people differently...(ie: anyone, a player, a pro, a mapmaker, and "old" mapmaker, a pig headed mapmaker....) my take + Show Spoiler + in fact is very simple and only philosophically oriented: first and foremost: surf and make maps "seriously" second share third enjoy + Show Spoiler +a skill level applied to any other "variable" seems irrelevant and boring to me
not that this thread is (quite the contrary), as shown when i bumped it, and would do it again next week until all "serious" mapmaker dipped their foot in... or Barrin does it.
|
ya, i know ^_^. But can't access my gaming/mapping pc right now :o. But had alot of time to write, so I started it.
|
If there's valued posters in the strategy section, why not also have some in the maps section?
It can be a really tiring affair to gather advice, and then sort the good from the bad.
Pretty please?
|
On February 25 2011 01:51 Blurb wrote:
If there's valued posters in the strategy section, why not also have some in the maps section?
It can be a really tiring affair to gather advice, and then sort the good from the bad.
Pretty please?
I talked to Chill about it, I don't think the mods want it... though I'm not sure why. Probably because mapping is so up in the air right now in balance terms; For example, big maps right now seem to favor Protoss in PvT and PvZ, and Zerg in ZvT, but that could really change as races figure out new strategies (double orbital?) or army compositions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
