• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:46
CEST 05:46
KST 12:46
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 20252Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202576RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18
Community News
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced18BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8
StarCraft 2
General
ETH RECOVERY EXPERT \\ TECHY FORCE CYBER RETRIEVAL #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 What tournaments are world championships? Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 WardiTV Mondays FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL Dewalt's Show Matches in China
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers [G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft?
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
UK Politics Mega-thread US Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 575 users

MotM April - Results - Page 5

Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All
Quotidian
Profile Joined August 2010
Norway1937 Posts
May 02 2012 22:11 GMT
#81
On May 03 2012 06:28 Diamond wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 03 2012 06:13 Quotidian wrote:
On May 03 2012 05:59 Diamond wrote:
Why are people demanding to go get pros to judge this when there is nothing on the line besides pride? I mean I get everyone wants to be the best but let's be real here, players like Tyler said they would help with major tournament map pools, not a competition that has no prize.

I <3 MotM but you guys really expect too much and bitch and whine too much. I could see being more demanding when it had the IEM sponsorship (did anything ever come out of that lol?) but right now I think it's crazy to be asking for people like Gumiho and others to judge this with no benefit. They won't get paid, the maps likely won't hit tournament circuits, and there is not actual prize afaik.



yeah, it's such a horrible thing to see potential for improvement, and to comment on these issues. Shame on us for bitching and whining.

Sigh.. fine, keep your closed off circle jerk to yourselves then


I'm all for improvement, but be realistic.



getting some lower tier pro/semi-pro to be a co-judge doesn't seem unrealistic to me
RumbleBadger
Profile Joined July 2011
322 Posts
May 02 2012 22:12 GMT
#82
On May 03 2012 06:28 Diamond wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 03 2012 06:13 Quotidian wrote:
On May 03 2012 05:59 Diamond wrote:
Why are people demanding to go get pros to judge this when there is nothing on the line besides pride? I mean I get everyone wants to be the best but let's be real here, players like Tyler said they would help with major tournament map pools, not a competition that has no prize.

I <3 MotM but you guys really expect too much and bitch and whine too much. I could see being more demanding when it had the IEM sponsorship (did anything ever come out of that lol?) but right now I think it's crazy to be asking for people like Gumiho and others to judge this with no benefit. They won't get paid, the maps likely won't hit tournament circuits, and there is not actual prize afaik.



yeah, it's such a horrible thing to see potential for improvement, and to comment on these issues. Shame on us for bitching and whining.

Sigh.. fine, keep your closed off circle jerk to yourselves then


I'm all for improvement, but be realistic.

I bet there's lots of semi-pros that would be willing to help out.

Like Barrin said, have the judges pick their favorites (probably around the top 10 maps) and then just see what some semi-pros think of them. Look through the streamers on the TL live streams page. Like the un-featured ones, too. There's some very high masters and a couple GM players that are not pros.

And if you watch their streams when new ladder maps are announced they often actually go through each map and play on them and see what they like and don't like about them. That's very similar to what we're looking for here. Not necessarily judging the map, just giving their opinions on balance and fun.

If there's not a non-douchy high masters zerg, protoss, and terran player willing to spend a couple hours each month to look at 10 reasonably good maps, call me crazy and hang me upside down as the TL Mapping Community dunce.
Games before dames.
fenX
Profile Joined February 2011
France127 Posts
May 02 2012 22:15 GMT
#83
On May 03 2012 05:59 Diamond wrote:They won't get paid, the maps likely won't hit tournament circuits, and there is not actual prize afaik.


Doesn't that apply to mapmakers too ?

I'm sure players would love to still have Steppes of war, Delta Quadrant or Jungle bassin in the ladder pool, those maps where made by respectable professionnals from Blizzard, instead of crappy amateurish maps like Ohana or Cloud Kingdom, made by some people who didn't get paid for their time.


That being said I'd like to know what were the other 4 maps in the selected top 9.
My map thread : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195518
EatThePath
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States3943 Posts
May 02 2012 23:56 GMT
#84
On May 03 2012 07:11 monitor wrote:
The thing is, the whining is really frustrating to read as a judge because its not like MotM is some superpower, its just 2 guys (lefix mostly, and I) trying to help the community. If you guys want to get involved, actually do something instead of just whining about what we should do. Trust me, we want to get players involved, we want to get tournaments involved, we want to make everybody happy- its just really difficult. Go ahead and contact players and tournaments or us personally if you want to help ^^


This times a thousand. You get you what you put in.
Comprehensive strategic intention: DNE
fenX
Profile Joined February 2011
France127 Posts
May 07 2012 18:12 GMT
#85
Still no write-ups ? And no MotM for may ?
My map thread : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=195518
lefix
Profile Joined February 2011
Germany1082 Posts
May 07 2012 18:41 GMT
#86
Still trying to fill the last judge spot for may, thread coming up very soon

About the writeups, it is unfortunate that none of the judges wanted to do writeups, but it is always a very time consuming process. I can't really demand it from anyone, it has always been kind of voluntary extra work.
Map of the Month | The Planetary Workshop | SC2Melee.net
IronManSC
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States2119 Posts
May 07 2012 18:58 GMT
#87
Where are the write-ups? I want to know why the maps won and what the thoughts were on ESV Spring.
SC2 Mapmaker || twitter: @ironmansc || Ohana & Mech Depot || 3x TLMC finalist || www.twitch.tv/sc2mapstream
Nightmarjoo
Profile Blog Joined October 2006
United States3360 Posts
May 08 2012 23:15 GMT
#88
I was a judge in this competition, and here's what I think about the maps. Note that what I say doesn't reflect or contradict the opinions of the other judges or of the competition as a whole. Regardless of what I say about the maps I am content with the final rankings.

My top four favourite maps In descending order were: Afterglow, Waste Land, Hatross, and Tanzanite. In alphabetical order the remainder of my top ten are: Burning Refinery, Crystarium, Dodongo, Genesis, Spring, and Zigzag Canyon.

Genesis and Crystarium are the same to me conceptually, with the latter having imo the better layout. Either way both are fairly boring and standard. Their execution is what makes me consider them at all.

Dodongo: I would hate to actually have to play on this map, but it's at least different and not too poorly made. I hope that the map can inspire other mappers to try out different layouts, even if its execution isn't particularly good.

Burning Refinery: I'd be inclined to like it more if the main/nat weren't retarded, but even with those improvements the map wouldn't be particularly interesting. Thus what this map brings to the table relative to the others submitted for the competition is that I think it's fairly comfortable to play on.

Spring: Too many bases, too side oriented, but playable.

Zigzag Canyon: I think it needs all rocks removed. The mains look small. The pathing is interesting, but doesn't really fit the expo layout very well. There are too many bases and the expo density is too high.

Tanzanite: This map is interesting, but needs work imo. I think the map is well-executed for the most part, and is one of the best maps submitted as far as current playability is concerned. I would like to see some changes in it though: Even paths are terrible; a central path through the middle should be added (and the middle expos moved/reoriented to allow this). I think the defender is too strong atm and that the middle should be made double highground. The towers should be removed. The paths currently blocked by rocks should be enlarged. The reason I think this is because concaves are so important in sc2. Right now the defender has highground advantage over the middle and the greater potential for making a concave or flank. Giving the middle the highground advantage would help balance this out. Enlarging those paths and creating an odd path through the middle will further increase the map's mobility and thus flank potential. I think this would make the map more dynamic and thus less turtleish.

Hatross: This map is fairly boring, but I think sc2 needs more 3 player maps. Additionally the map is well-made. The problem lies in how easy the money is to get. I think the 6m1g concept would work really well with this layout.

Waste Land: I hate backdoor expos, but besides that I really like the map. I think it has an interesting expo layout, good potential for actual fighting (neutral expos), and good pathing. The backdoor ramp should probably be widened though, it feels too drop-unsafe atm. Towers should be removed. Dunno what's with the main choke, but I doubt it hurts anything. Mostly I like that the map is different but still playable (imo).

Afterglow: This is the best executed map submitted imo. I like the layout: the dynamic between top and bottom half of the map, and between the highground and lowground. The proximity of the two top expos is the worst part of the map, but I think that problem is offset by the multitude of paths throughout the map. I like the element of ambiguity in the expo layout. Though there's no neutrality in expo placement I feel there is no obviously superior expo direction players are forced to take.


Here's what I think about the two maps in the top5 that I didn't vote for:

Peaks of Alamur: I don't like this map. It's not bad by any means, but I simply view it as a failed construct. It has all of the problems of Crossfire with the only difference that it has even more money to get stuck in a stalemate with. There are a couple new paths opened up in the back corners of the map, but these don't help the map at all because the bottleneck in the middle remains. There is thus no functional change improvement or change in the map's pathing.

Firestorm: I didn't like this when it was submitted for the TLMC, and I don't like it now. It hasn't been changed once since then even. I actually consider it to be an outright bad map. The gameplay is imo attrocious. The problems lie in the middle. It's too small, too tight, too constricted, and too congested. All pathing runs through the middle, into this one single, small area. That means that whoever controls the middle controls the game. This is a problem because it seems too difficult for the other player to contest that control. Thus whoever has the advantage such that they can secure the middle automatically gains a greater advantage. I think that at all times a concept which favours the player who already has the advantage is a bad one. Interesting gameplay comes from players fighting and making comebacks. In this map there can be little fighting and no comebacks assuming evenly matched players. The problems of the middle are exacerbated by the shitty expo layout. The 4th base can be shut down from the middle. So whoever gains the advantage and thus gains the positional advantage of controlling the middle gains a further advantage in controlling the other player's income. The disadvantaged player can't regain control over the middle not only because of the positional strengths of the middle, but because the player controlling the middle can take a 4th base and the disadvantaged player can't. Thus the advantaged player has a positional and economical advantage over the other. Positional imbalances further arise in how easy/hard it is to take or harass the opponent's 4th as result of the rotational symmetry. I however am not recommending any (4)map use a different form of symmetry though. So given these problems the disadvantaged player's only chance to win the game are with desperate air or drop based harass attempts or attacks. There are two additional problems here: if this is their only option then the opponent can easily prepare for it in anticipation. The second problem is that such preparation need not weaken their hold over the middle given the tightness of the middle and the lack of air room in the map in general. Ultimately the map's problems lie in its poor pathing, but beyond that all the different "features" of the map accentuate that problem resulting in horrible gameplay. I'm not even talking about racial balance here, though there are certainly potential problems there as well.


Excluding Firestorm, I think every map I've mentioned is better than every map submitted that I didn't mention. I don't particularly want to go into specifics on why, but generally speaking the other maps had faults in their execution and/or concept such that the end result was imo poor. So for comparison, Afterglow's concept may not be particularly strong or interesting, but the map's execution is so good that it makes up for it. Even then though, Afterglow's concept is more interesting than that of many of the submitted maps. The easiest way to make a bad map is to make a x and y symmetrical (4)map. Second easiest way is to make a map with an even number of paths. Third easiest way is to make some generic x/y symmetrical (2)map with either too many bases or a complete lack of a concept. Fourth easiest way is to make a map focused around some single feature or really "neat" concept without maintaining proper distances, shapes, sizes, pathing, etc.
aka Lyra; My favourites: July, Stork, Draco, MistrZZZ, TheStc, LastShadow - www.broodwarmaps.net - for all your mapping needs; check my stream: high masters mech terran: twitch.tv/lyrathegreat
RumbleBadger
Profile Joined July 2011
322 Posts
May 09 2012 02:31 GMT
#89
Nightmarjoo, without being too specific about what I disagree or agree with as I don't like making enemies, I want to say that I like you and your post. Blunt, but very helpful, even though I'm not any of the authors of those maps. And blunt advice is the best advice. Too many times people are wishy-washy about maps.
Games before dames.
DeadHunter
Profile Joined April 2012
United Kingdom2 Posts
May 09 2012 07:05 GMT
#90
On May 09 2012 11:31 RumbleBadger wrote:
Nightmarjoo, without being too specific about what I disagree or agree with as I don't like making enemies, I want to say that I like you and your post. Blunt, but very helpful, even though I'm not any of the authors of those maps. And blunt advice is the best advice. Too many times people are wishy-washy about maps.

I concur. I wish there were better judges and more feedback like yours, Nightmarjoo.
I'm a ninja in DnD
eTcetRa
Profile Joined November 2010
Australia822 Posts
May 09 2012 07:29 GMT
#91
Nice write-up Nightmarejoo, happy to see you in the next MOTM judge line-up!
Retired Mapmaker™
Amlitzer
Profile Joined August 2010
United States471 Posts
May 09 2012 08:16 GMT
#92
Giving scores for maps just seems like a really dumb idea to me. It just seems like you are throwing arbitrary numbers around, and what exactly classifies as a zero or a ten? I highly doubt sc2 has even seen a map that qualify for a perfect ten, or even a nine so far. What does it mean when a map makes a 0.2 score higher than another? I'd recommend to just skip giving the maps numerical scores.
"Not even justice, I want to get truth!"
lefix
Profile Joined February 2011
Germany1082 Posts
May 09 2012 08:49 GMT
#93
Well, it is basically a tool to determine how much a judge actually likes a map. before the scoring, we took some popular maps (mlg map pool) and rated those for reference. then we scored the motm maps in relation to those maps' scores.
without numbers, you will always have the problem that the most vocal person will have a larger influence than others.
Map of the Month | The Planetary Workshop | SC2Melee.net
Nightmarjoo
Profile Blog Joined October 2006
United States3360 Posts
May 09 2012 21:44 GMT
#94
On May 09 2012 17:16 Amlitzer wrote:
Giving scores for maps just seems like a really dumb idea to me. It just seems like you are throwing arbitrary numbers around, and what exactly classifies as a zero or a ten? I highly doubt sc2 has even seen a map that qualify for a perfect ten, or even a nine so far. What does it mean when a map makes a 0.2 score higher than another? I'd recommend to just skip giving the maps numerical scores.

With time I think the numerical values can mean more as previous competitions will set precedent for what's good and what isn't. The numbers here were generated by the average of all the judge's scores to help eliminate any bias or difference in ranking procedure.

My average rating was the lowest of all judges, but some judges' scores were more extreme than mine. Thus I think the rating system does work after averaging the scores. Should the numbers be taken as a completely literal absolute ranking system? Probably not, at least currently; but as a relative way to rank the winning maps relative to eachother and then also relative to the rest of the submitted maps I think it is successful. If the winners are the top5, then you can assume the 6th best map and everything below it would receive worse average ratings.


I came up with the following rating system and then used it to rate the maps. No other judge used this exact system. The differences in numbers here are not a linear progression of map quality, but rather they represent large jumps which attempt to rate maps absolutely (instead of relatively). I only used these integer values in my ratings, but other judges used decimal differentiation as well. I would probably use half-values for a map that I had a really hard time matching up to a rating here. Notice I don't address balance at all, but general map execution and gameplay (the latter being a product of the layout/concept). Thus I would probably rate Cloud Kingdom for example as an 8 despite its poor balance statistics and one specific general annoyance in gameplay (the difficulty in defending the 3rd due to its tightness). Entombed Valley I can easily rate as being a 2 for its poor symmetry (which results in poor distances), poor shapes/sizes, and weak concept.

1 complete mess; made by complete beginner, no mapping experience
2 resembles a map but has huge problems
3 proper symmetry, ok layout, positional balance
4 good symmetry, competent layout, positional balance, neat concept, fatal flaws
5 map is executed well but has big conceptual, pathing, expo layout problems
6 good execution, but either poor concept or poor layout
7 good execution, good layout, concept weak or some contradictory elements
8 excellent execution and layout; good, well supported concept; only little errors
9 one of the absolute best contemporary maps
10 the best map ever made; doesn't exist

afterglow 7, tanzanite 6, peaks of alamar 5, crystarium 5, firestorm 3, dodongo 4, helios 2, hatross 6, spring 4
aka Lyra; My favourites: July, Stork, Draco, MistrZZZ, TheStc, LastShadow - www.broodwarmaps.net - for all your mapping needs; check my stream: high masters mech terran: twitch.tv/lyrathegreat
NewSunshine
Profile Joined July 2011
United States5938 Posts
May 09 2012 22:06 GMT
#95
On May 10 2012 06:44 Nightmarjoo wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
With time I think the numerical values can mean more as previous competitions will set precedent for what's good and what isn't. The numbers here were generated by the average of all the judge's scores to help eliminate any bias or difference in ranking procedure.

My average rating was the lowest of all judges, but some judges' scores were more extreme than mine. Thus I think the rating system does work after averaging the scores. Should the numbers be taken as a completely literal absolute ranking system? Probably not, at least currently; but as a relative way to rank the winning maps relative to eachother and then also relative to the rest of the submitted maps I think it is successful. If the winners are the top5, then you can assume the 6th best map and everything below it would receive worse average ratings.


I came up with the following rating system and then used it to rate the maps. No other judge used this exact system. The differences in numbers here are not a linear progression of map quality, but rather they represent large jumps which attempt to rate maps absolutely (instead of relatively). I only used these integer values in my ratings, but other judges used decimal differentiation as well. I would probably use half-values for a map that I had a really hard time matching up to a rating here. Notice I don't address balance at all, but general map execution and gameplay (the latter being a product of the layout/concept). Thus I would probably rate Cloud Kingdom for example as an 8 despite its poor balance statistics and one specific general annoyance in gameplay (the difficulty in defending the 3rd due to its tightness). Entombed Valley I can easily rate as being a 2 for its poor symmetry (which results in poor distances), poor shapes/sizes, and weak concept.

1 complete mess; made by complete beginner, no mapping experience
2 resembles a map but has huge problems
3 proper symmetry, ok layout, positional balance
4 good symmetry, competent layout, positional balance, neat concept, fatal flaws
5 map is executed well but has big conceptual, pathing, expo layout problems
6 good execution, but either poor concept or poor layout
7 good execution, good layout, concept weak or some contradictory elements
8 excellent execution and layout; good, well supported concept; only little errors
9 one of the absolute best contemporary maps
10 the best map ever made; doesn't exist

afterglow 7, tanzanite 6, peaks of alamar 5, crystarium 5, firestorm 3, dodongo 4, helios 2, hatross 6, spring 4


I find this to be a valuable post. Of course, insight into a judge's thoughts on the submissions is nice and all, but I do think the number rating could hold some merit, given that it is adhered to over the competitions.

Also nice rubric, very harsh and realistic. I could get used to it.
"If you find yourself feeling lost, take pride in the accuracy of your feelings." - Night Vale
RumbleBadger
Profile Joined July 2011
322 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-05-09 22:52:39
May 09 2012 22:52 GMT
#96
On May 10 2012 06:44 Nightmarjoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 09 2012 17:16 Amlitzer wrote:
Giving scores for maps just seems like a really dumb idea to me. It just seems like you are throwing arbitrary numbers around, and what exactly classifies as a zero or a ten? I highly doubt sc2 has even seen a map that qualify for a perfect ten, or even a nine so far. What does it mean when a map makes a 0.2 score higher than another? I'd recommend to just skip giving the maps numerical scores.

+ Show Spoiler +
With time I think the numerical values can mean more as previous competitions will set precedent for what's good and what isn't. The numbers here were generated by the average of all the judge's scores to help eliminate any bias or difference in ranking procedure.

My average rating was the lowest of all judges, but some judges' scores were more extreme than mine. Thus I think the rating system does work after averaging the scores. Should the numbers be taken as a completely literal absolute ranking system? Probably not, at least currently; but as a relative way to rank the winning maps relative to eachother and then also relative to the rest of the submitted maps I think it is successful. If the winners are the top5, then you can assume the 6th best map and everything below it would receive worse average ratings.


I came up with the following rating system and then used it to rate the maps. No other judge used this exact system. The differences in numbers here are not a linear progression of map quality, but rather they represent large jumps which attempt to rate maps absolutely (instead of relatively). I only used these integer values in my ratings, but other judges used decimal differentiation as well. I would probably use half-values for a map that I had a really hard time matching up to a rating here. Notice I don't address balance at all, but general map execution and gameplay (the latter being a product of the layout/concept). Thus I would probably rate Cloud Kingdom for example as an 8 despite its poor balance statistics and one specific general annoyance in gameplay (the difficulty in defending the 3rd due to its tightness). Entombed Valley I can easily rate as being a 2 for its poor symmetry (which results in poor distances), poor shapes/sizes, and weak concept.

1 complete mess; made by complete beginner, no mapping experience
2 resembles a map but has huge problems
3 proper symmetry, ok layout, positional balance
4 good symmetry, competent layout, positional balance, neat concept, fatal flaws
5 map is executed well but has big conceptual, pathing, expo layout problems
6 good execution, but either poor concept or poor layout
7 good execution, good layout, concept weak or some contradictory elements
8 excellent execution and layout; good, well supported concept; only little errors
9 one of the absolute best contemporary maps
10 the best map ever made; doesn't exist

afterglow 7, tanzanite 6, peaks of alamar 5, crystarium 5, firestorm 3, dodongo 4, helios 2, hatross 6, spring 4

When you say good symmetry, do you mean that the map flows well from one side to the other? As in the map was designed to flow back and forth well? Otherwise, like the poster above me, this is very insightful and very good to hear. Thanks again!
Games before dames.
Nightmarjoo
Profile Blog Joined October 2006
United States3360 Posts
May 10 2012 00:56 GMT
#97
Basic x and y symmetry can work if done well (e.g. Troy from bw), but typically results in a horrible map. Symmetry isn't usually a big deal in sc2 since even the worst mappers can make a completely symmetrical map with the editor's copy/rotate/paste tools. Still, some mappers try x + y symmetry without accounting for the problems it causes and it just instantly makes the map bad by creating too-short or too-long distances between expos or between players, etc. So good symmetry usually means rotational symmetry in a 3+ player map or x/y symmetry in 2 player maps.
aka Lyra; My favourites: July, Stork, Draco, MistrZZZ, TheStc, LastShadow - www.broodwarmaps.net - for all your mapping needs; check my stream: high masters mech terran: twitch.tv/lyrathegreat
erazerr
Profile Joined March 2011
Australia86 Posts
May 10 2012 01:18 GMT
#98
Was my map (urban skyline) sent to Motm at all ? I posted it on the forum for april submissions and also e-mailed the file because there is no writeup for my map
RumbleBadger
Profile Joined July 2011
322 Posts
May 10 2012 02:20 GMT
#99
On May 10 2012 10:18 erazerr wrote:
Was my map (urban skyline) sent to Motm at all ? I posted it on the forum for april submissions and also e-mailed the file because there is no writeup for my map

I think he just commented on the top 5 and his own top 5-10 or so.
Games before dames.
Nightmarjoo
Profile Blog Joined October 2006
United States3360 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-05-10 02:48:27
May 10 2012 02:28 GMT
#100
Yes it was among the submitted maps that we looked over. One comment by another judge on it was "Super open thirds, massive circle syndrome. Terrible choke sizing"

Personally I think the area just outside the nat is wasted space; and I don't like the expo layout. The two expos near the 3rd are almost strategically identical and easy to get and hold. The money is just a little too easy imo. Additionally I'm a firm believer that (2)maps need 5gas base and no more (yours has 6). I like highground/lowground dynamics, and like the shape of your highground middle, and I like the pathing around the corner expo, but I just think that these features are offset by a poor expo layout in general. I like aspects of your concept and some features of the map but overall I think these could have been executed better. It's not that the map is bad, it's just boring and brings nothing new to mapping. Also I think the tower should be removed. Towers should never be around height differences (on lowground or highground). A tower on the highground like in your map makes the highground control too strong. A tower in the lowground like on Cloud Kingdom negates the highground advantage pointlessly and often leads to a highground disadvantage caused by the lowground having vision and a better concave; not that that's relevant in your map.


edit: Yes the guy above me is correct. There were 38 total submissions for this MOTM competition. I already stated in my first post that I only felt particularly strong about my top4, so I have no intent to describe what I personally liked or disliked about every single submitted map.

edit2: So ultimately there were a bunch of pretty basic, standard, acceptably executed maps submitted which were overlooked for lacking in anything that separates them from other maps. So while Afterglow is pretty basic, its layout isn't super standard, and it's exceptionally well-executed. Thus it shines out among other maps (and I'm not describing the map's visuals). So a map like Dodongo performed better than maps that may have been executed slightly better because unlike them it's interesting. Its flaws prevent it from getting a higher position in the rankings, but that it isn't exactly the same as every other map while maintaining a degree of playability and comfort allows it to be worth showing off.
aka Lyra; My favourites: July, Stork, Draco, MistrZZZ, TheStc, LastShadow - www.broodwarmaps.net - for all your mapping needs; check my stream: high masters mech terran: twitch.tv/lyrathegreat
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 5h 14m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft511
Nina 235
RuFF_SC2 172
StarCraft: Brood War
Sea 4877
Stork 137
NaDa 101
sSak 65
Sexy 60
Sharp 60
Larva 53
Dota 2
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 794
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor157
Other Games
summit1g13198
tarik_tv10271
ViBE232
kaitlyn8
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1469
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 53
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Lourlo944
Upcoming Events
FEL
5h 14m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
10h 14m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
14h 14m
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Online Event
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL 20 Team Wars
FEL Cracov 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.