| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
NHY
1013 Posts
At this point, I think it would be actually better to use the exact same map pool as GSL than to having tournament organizers guessing for the right answer, unless they put as much time and effort in choosing the maps as Gom. Something like this would be a sign that the unified map pool has a chance of implementation. Until then, we'll see more of Xel'Naga Caverns and Metalopolis. | ||
|
Baseic
Netherlands310 Posts
It would need a very dedicated and knowledgeable team to maintain the pool, swiftly adding in new maps, removing old maps. I would not support the idea if blizzard would be supposed to maintain the pool, they are just too slow, even when it's about a non-professional map pool. | ||
|
Andreas
Norway214 Posts
1) Battle.net implements built-in tournaments (like in WC3) which use a different map pool than ladder 2) Master/grandmaster map pool is different from the other leagues Then, this map pool changes each season, maybe decided through some kind of survey among grandmaster players (like, pick 3 maps from the current pool that you'd like to see removed, and pick 3 from this list of new ones you'd like to see included). I don't see this happening, though. Until then I think tournament organizers just need to grow some balls and replace more ladder maps with GSL and community maps. | ||
|
FlopTurnReaver
Switzerland1980 Posts
But yeah, as anyone has probably figured out by now, it's a pretty hard project to actually execute. It needs the support of many different organisations, especially tournament organisators. Anyway, as long as big tournaments don't realize how much they're hurting e-sports by just doing it their own way, nothing's gonna change. I really hope we'll see a carination(?) like this eventually. | ||
|
Bane_
United Kingdom494 Posts
| ||
|
aznboi918
United States70 Posts
On November 29 2011 03:36 Zombo Joe wrote: So they can have complete control over everything? no lol i said "like". At least KeSPA makes the universal map pool and tests it properly... you can't deny that a lot of things they do is useful right? lol | ||
|
jabberwockzerg
United States294 Posts
On November 29 2011 01:22 Sea_Food wrote: What good has blizzard ever done? I say they should be left out of this compleatly. They made the game... | ||
|
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
but it'd would be nice for viewers to see a new map being introduced on a regular basis and players knowing they're not wasting their time practicing on these maps | ||
|
XenoX101
Australia729 Posts
On December 04 2011 01:07 Barrin wrote: Basically got this from Plexa, thought it is worth noting: Whatever the UMP is, it's not like the tournaments have to use ONLY maps from the UMP. They could use like 50-70% UMP and the rest whatever they want and that would probably be great. Would defeat the purpose because then tournaments can continue using their own version for certain maps and completely ignore new maps that were added to the pool, it would no longer be a Universal Map Pool but simply a "Universal Set of Maps that you can add to your pool if you want". | ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
On December 04 2011 20:03 XenoX101 wrote: Would defeat the purpose because then tournaments can continue using their own version for certain maps and completely ignore new maps that were added to the pool, it would no longer be a Universal Map Pool but simply a "Universal Set of Maps that you can add to your pool if you want". Indeed. If tournaments would want certain maps to be played they should approach the judges of the UMP and suggest these maps. The whole point of the UMP would be to have a certain, limited amount of maps that pros have to train and a way to introduce new maps. So if tournaments just used 70% UMP maps that would be counterproductive. To ensure that every tournament has different map pools the UMP would have 10 or more maps. All of this is in a perfect world of course... | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
and tournaments wouldn't even want to commit to it in the first place. especially not the gsl, etc. it should not be mandatory. we just need to get to the point where everyone understands that those will are frequently played and save to pick. | ||
|
fenX
France127 Posts
As a player I don't like to have too many new maps, a few changes from time to time is good but more than 3 maps at once in the ladder is already a lot of time needed to learn the map, analyze it and train. That's why Map of the Month, as good as it was for mapmakers, is not a good tournament format for players. I don't like new gimmicky maps with unusual features, since it's easier to accomodate with standard maps. As a mapmaker I love to see tons of new maps, first because competition between mapmakers leads us to make better maps, second because it's a good source of inspiration ("stealing" some maps features can be a good thing, map features are tools and having a large variety of tools can't be bad if used properly), and finally because having more maps in the scene gave more chances to my own maps to get a spot. I love to see beautifull maps and I'm more interested in aesthetics than in gameplay or balance. As a viewer I like to see a shift on the mappool on a regular basis, I'm getting bored seeing the same gameplan on a map that's been around forever (ZvT on Xel'naga caverns, at some point every game looked the same no matter who the players were). I like to see maps that allow a variety of different strategies and can focus on different player's strenghts (some micro feats, macro capability, and some clever tricks like boxer's drops on Tal'darim altar OL spots or inovative simcities). My point is it's hard to have a representative sample of people who'd choose maps that would please each one of those different points of view. Also it's not good to have a universal mappool set in stone (viewers would get bored) and difficult to have too many new good maps at once and also bad for players level of skill (too many new maps = less time to train = lower skill). I think we'd need a mapmaker's league, I'm thinking about something like this : + Show Spoiler + ** Mapmaker's league ** (<- imagine shining title intro and cool music) 16 maps in the map pool Every month (or 2 months, or 2 weeks, whatever) a 32 players tournament is held (invitationnal or at least grandmasters only with at least 10 players for each race), the tournament is BO5 and finals BO7 (because it's new maps with possible imbalances it's more accurate to play more games for a match). For the first round every map is played once in the first match and players seeded randomly, then it's looser's pick. Each player downvote one map that can't be picked by the looser. For the next rounds maps used in the lower bracket will be used in the upper bracket and the other way around until the finals where the 2 leftover maps will be used in the first 2 games (wich means in the finals game 2 is not looser's pick and overall it garantee every map to be played at least twice). Each time a map get chosen it gets a +1, each time it get downvoted it gets a -2, at the end of the tournament the map with the lowest score gets out of the map pool, map with the highest score could get a prize if possible. After the tournaments viewers will also vote for another map to get out of the pool and for their favorite map to get a prize. Another possibility would be to take out the most imbalanced map but the results would probably not be relevant after so few games. So the brackets would look like something like this : ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Shzqn.jpg) Color squares represent set maps, as you can see each map is played twice + the looser's choices. Races are seeded randomly only for the example, there are 10 zergs 11 terrans 11 protoss. To replace the 2 outgoing maps a mapmaking contest is held, one map is chosen by the mapmakers (they vote for 1 map but cannot vote for themself) and the other one is chosen by viewers on the league's website. So what's the point of such a system ? First everyone involved in the community will influence the mapppool : players, mapmakers and viewers all decide at some point wich map enter and wich one gets out. Second point it's a way to establish a map ranking that is based on high level players experience and not on mapmakers judgement and standards. Where a few mapmakers would judge a map based on standard balance players judgement would allow balance trough opposite imbalances and more original features in maps as long as there're other features balancing it for the other races. Players will either downvote maps they don't like or learn to use them, so in the end the most downvoted maps will hopefully be the less balanced (if a map favors one race too obviously it will quickly be sent out by the 2 other races). Finally it's a system, not some random people choices. Imbalances are bound to occur, no current map is perfectly balanced, the game itself is not perfectly balanced and are often decided by the metagame, imbalance is a part of the game and I don't think anyone (player, mapmaker or viewer) can decide what is balanced enough or not, so it's a system that allows to share that decision between all parts of the community. Possible issues : - 16 maps in the pool is a lot, it will stabilize after a while and regular players will get used to them, but it will be harsh for the early editions of the tournament. - It's possible that an imbalanced map stays in the mappool because the race it favors will stay longer in the tournament (so this map will be chosen more often and less downvoted) - You'll need a referee to obs every match and keep track of map choices and downvotes (also make sure that players play the right map). In the end it's quite a random idea and probably needs some refinements but i'd love to see something like that work. | ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
| ||
|
Sumadin
Denmark588 Posts
If anything it must be in corperation with Blizzard. The map pool could archieve balance but it would only last a second. Lets take an example: Zerg is having a downtime because maps in general are too closed. The UMP makes up for by introducing maps that are more open. Blizzard ladder maps don't follow suit through and hence there is still imbalance there, They then make a patch that buff zerg(like increasing the damage of the zergling). Balance is then archieved on ladder and all is happy. Except that the balance on the UMP is now blown to dust and we are back to square one. This wouldn't happen(as often) if the UMP and Blizzard talked together. Or rather the Balance patch would come at the same time with a new UMP that took account for that. Just my 2 cents. | ||
|
FoxyMayhem
624 Posts
It's only one map, and it's only one league, but it's foot-in-the-door psychology. If they adopt this excellent map (which would need to be somewhat safe innovation wise, but FUN), then it lends weight to all our future endeavors. If it goes over swimmingly, if we hear iNcontroL and Tyler praising it's inclusion on SotG, then we've put our foot in the door, and proven we can deliver. If the UMP is the end-goal, this, I think, is the starting point. What do you guys think? If so, what map is this map? 1) It needs to be safe, not require players to rethink their play too much, 2) it needs to be beautiful, but not distractingly so for the players, 3) it needs some bit of innovation that makes it more fun to play or more fun to watch. Personally, I think Haven's Lagoon is a good example of the right kind of gimmick: the ascending high-ground is something that players can just get when they look at it. It's distinct, and if the reports are true, fun. Haven's Lagoon has a ways to go in other elements, but a polished map using this terrain dynamic could be exactly what we need. I don't know anything about Cloud Kingdom, but it looks like it could be what we need as well. I haven't kept up with all the most recent team maps, so forgive me if I didn't mention a map that would be a great candidate. So what other maps might work? | ||
|
halfies
United Kingdom327 Posts
z33k run enough tournaments that if you could get them involved, you would have a massive test subject. there are also a few very good players who compete in the dailys, admittedly not many and not the very top ones, but still, its enough to get the idea out there. if you just talked to everyone who runs a small prize pool tournament, you might be able to get them interested, and i think the hardest bit of this plan would be getting the first steps done. once it was established that this could work, i think that bigger tournaments would start adopting it. but i might be wrong and you might need the legitimacy that big names provide | ||
|
XenoX101
Australia729 Posts
As for the existing maps that have been modified such as MLG/GSL/IPL Dual Sight, since these are already balanced the only way I can think of to standardize these is to have a committee with representatives for each tournament, so that they can collectively agree on one particular version of these maps. Then if changes need to be made to any of the maps they have to bring it up with the rest of the committee instead of just making them themselves willy nilly like it is now. | ||
|
Sumadin
Denmark588 Posts
As for the existing maps that have been modified such as MLG/GSL/IPL Dual Sight, since these are already balanced the only way I can think of to standardize these is to have a committee with representatives for each tournament, so that they can collectively agree on one particular version of these maps. This part highlights already a problem. The problem is that people assumes that tournement maps are balanced and that tournements always strive to get perfect balance. This is not always the case really. Take the current GSL mappool. The goal with the current mappool wasn't to create balance for all 3 races(because "perfect" balance would mean the ratio between the races would stay unchanged at the end). The goal was to flush out as many terran as possible(it didn't prevent a terran winner but from what i have seen the ratios should have greatly improved next season). Every single posible removeable advantage that terrans had got removed.That is fine in the case of GSL because they did have a problem with too many terrans. But if say MLG were to pick up same model with it's already much better ratio terrans would suddenly find themself getting crushed. Different tournements have different interests with regards to maps. | ||
|
XenoX101
Australia729 Posts
On December 05 2011 08:46 Sumadin wrote: This part highlights already a problem. The problem is that people assumes that tournement maps are balanced and that tournements always strive to get perfect balance. This is not always the case really. Take the current GSL mappool. The goal with the current mappool wasn't to create balance for all 3 races(because "perfect" balance would mean the ratio between the races would stay unchanged at the end). The goal was to flush out as many terran as possible(it didn't prevent a terran winner but from what i have seen the ratios should have greatly improved next season). Every single posible removeable advantage that terrans had got removed.That is fine in the case of GSL because they did have a problem with too many terrans. But if say MLG were to pick up same model with it's already much better ratio terrans would suddenly find themself getting crushed. Different tournements have different interests with regards to maps. That's true but the rule of balance is that it should always be done with the highest level of play. If MLG picked up GSL's map pool and the terrans would "suddenly find themselves crushed" then it is purely a fault of their ability as a player and shouldn't be a factor in balancing the map pool. Altering the map pool for weaker players ruins the integrity of the tournament and cheapens the win considering it was done on a map thats imbalanced at the top. Many maps are balanced at all levels though such as Tal'Darim Altar and Daybreak, so it shouldn't affect foreign players too much to have a standardized map pool. Oh and considering Koreans are now playing much more in foreign tournaments, it's going to be next to impossible to cater the map pool to a specific level of play, so it makes even more sense to use the same map pool from GSL to MLG to IPL since you can't predict who will be playing in your tournament. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Mini Dota 2 673ZerO  457Snow 453hero 149Barracks  72Rock 36ToSsGirL 36Aegong 35SilentControl 12IntoTheRainbow 9[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games hiko979 DeMusliM622 Fuzer  379crisheroes326 Hui .308 Beastyqt249 Liquid`VortiX195 QueenE190 ArmadaUGS86 JuggernautJason61 KnowMe30 ZerO(Twitch)30 Trikslyr8 |
|
SOOP
SKillous vs Spirit
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
PiG Sty Festival
Serral vs TriGGeR
Cure vs SHIN
The PondCast
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
Clem vs Bunny
Solar vs Zoun
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs Rogue
ByuN vs SKillous
SC Evo Complete
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
