| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
SoKHo
Korea (South)1081 Posts
On September 28 2011 15:23 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Ah this sounds great. Perhaps Blizzard will recognize this and even adapt it into the ladder ^0^ Lol someone didnt read the whole OP before posting ^_^ | ||
|
eTcetRa
Australia822 Posts
On September 28 2011 20:03 Archvil3 wrote: The prizes are nice and all but the real prize is getting your map in the ladder pool. That is what matters to the map makers. No map maker will complain about the rewards, I can asure you that!  I make maps for fun, not money. Getting in the map-pool is just prestige | ||
|
eTcetRa
Australia822 Posts
On September 28 2011 20:46 Destructicon wrote: ...are we allowed to modify the size of certain doodads for more aesthetic purposes?. Take a look at Blizzard's maps one-day, lots of up-scaling (i seen doodads ~350% larger in the middle of maps). So yeah I'd imagine that is allowed. Edit: Plexa replied long before me, my bad! | ||
|
EffectS
Belgium795 Posts
I'm curious if its' considered stealing, if someone could explain me how to work with the PlayXP forums a little bit I could probably ask the person who originally made the map for his permission. | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
| ||
|
Macpo
453 Posts
EDIT : thanks for the quick answer | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On September 28 2011 21:36 EffectS wrote: Some time ago I saw a beautiful map on PlayXP. However it's totally gimmicky and would not fit in the current set of maps, so would it be ok for me to take that map as a starting point and try to make it somewhat more of map that could be used competitively? I'm curious if its' considered stealing, if someone could explain me how to work with the PlayXP forums a little bit I could probably ask the person who originally made the map for his permission. The point of that is because I don't want people to be claiming, say some work by funcmode (  ), as their own when it isn't theirs  you can use that as a starting point, sure.On September 28 2011 21:37 neobowman wrote: I dislike the concept of forcing set amounts of minerals and gas for every base. Interferes with balance for pretty much no reason at all. Conversely, Blizzard are trying to maintain some level of control over the maps on the ladder so they can balance the game. If we are creating maps which provide a more reasonable balance for the game with specific map designs then Blizzard can't balance the game properly as that map would skew win rates - hence the standardisation. On September 28 2011 21:39 Macpo wrote: how can the crowd see the maps before the contest? Can we admire them somewhere? You will definitely see the final 10 or so maps, any entries before then will have to be posted here by the authors. I might post some of the entrants at the half way point though. | ||
|
NullCurrent
Sweden245 Posts
On September 28 2011 21:39 Macpo wrote: how can the crowd see the maps before the contest? Can we admire them somewhere? We from TPW will most probably post our submissions in this thread or something similar when we get close to being done with our maps. Currently we haven't even decided upon which maps we should enter and we also need to fix or improve most of them, especially the maps which are old or incomplete. | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
I have to be honest and say that I am a bit annoyed by the standard bases restriction. I feel like Blizz should really accept that 6min+1gas bases are a standard in the future. Many concepts for maps work way better (or only) with these half bases. I was also a bit worried that with these restrictions in place everyone would play it even more safe than usual and not use any interesting features or innovative layouts at all, fearing that that would be negative for the map but this: On September 28 2011 20:57 Plexa wrote: @Bobster I also think having three entries means entrants are more willing to try some more unorthodox concepts which means we might see some real creativity in the maps. If the entries were restricted to one then I suspect people would play it safe. is just very good thinking and seems you are open towards creativity. I love it! gl hf for all the mapmakers! p.s.: Please ask Morrow if he wants to be a judge. Only progamer who has been mapping in the past (and was really innovative with his maps) and he also plays 2 races :O Sounds like a perfect judge^^ edit:+ Show Spoiler + On September 28 2011 21:39 Plexa wrote: Conversely, Blizzard are trying to maintain some level of control over the maps on the ladder so they can balance the game. If we are creating maps which provide a more reasonable balance for the game with specific map designs then Blizzard can't balance the game properly as that map would skew win rates - hence the standardisation. I don't want to start a discussion here but I'm sure it's easy to make a map that "skews winrates" without changing any mineral/gas counts whatsoever. I think that for now we shouldn't change the main ressources and maybe having 5, 6,7 or 8 mins at bases is a bit confusing. But surely Blizz could establish 6min+1gas bases as a standard without a problem. Most of the GSL maps have one gas bases without breaking balance or anything. My point and probably neobowman's as well is that many concepts for maps don't work (as well) if you can only have full bases. | ||
|
funcmode
Australia720 Posts
I think many of the posts regarding innovation vs solid, proven concepts in the MotM#9 thread are very relevant here, I guess the general summary being creativity is only a good thing when it improves the core concept of the map, rather than just being different for the sake of being different. | ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
| ||
|
VirgilSC2
United States6151 Posts
| ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
Sina92
Sweden1303 Posts
Anyhow, this is pretty nice. | ||
|
Tosho
Australia498 Posts
| ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
| ||
|
Mysticesper
United States1183 Posts
On September 28 2011 22:58 Sina92 wrote: "4. Map sizes should be sensible, use the current map pool as a guide." ..... I think the community wishes for larger maps. Anyhow, this is pretty nice. I'm pretty sure its just a "use your best judgement" for map sizes. You don't need to max out the map size to make it good. Most will probably be slightly larger, but within reason. | ||
|
qiza
Germany37 Posts
| ||
|
xiaominm
United States3 Posts
| ||
|
monitor
United States2408 Posts
On September 28 2011 23:16 Mysticesper wrote: I'm pretty sure its just a "use your best judgement" for map sizes. You don't need to max out the map size to make it good. Most will probably be slightly larger, but within reason. Also, the ladder maps are all plenty big. TalDarim is the biggest map to date. So its not bigger maps "we" want- its more macro oriented maps if anything. This competition is incredible! Very motivating to be considered for the ladder. | ||
| ||
|
|
WardiTV 2025
StarCraft2.fi
PiGosaur Monday
StarCraft2.fi
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
WardiTV 2025
StarCraft2.fi
WardiTV 2025
StarCraft2.fi
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
