|
On July 19 2012 00:02 Sea_Food wrote:
Back to Back made it???
Lool.
I tought it was impossible, as the map already failed in like, what, 5 previous MotMs?
In the words of the greatest Bro there ever was and/or will be. Challenge Accepted!
Well, guess this means I don't have to wait to get my computer fixed completely or to start edits. Good stuff. Excited to see the results here. Rooting for NewSunshine and Rkynick!
|
On July 18 2012 22:46 Aunvilgod wrote:
The tournament was pretty stacked. Most of the Pros wanted to do a lot of stuff themselves. Only the 3 Pros I just mentioned really picked some of the highest caliber maps. And judging from the overview of NewSunshines map he even didn´t put too much time into the map.
I don't know where you get this from, but whatever.
Anyway, I'm excited that my entry was chosen! Mr. Grok and I have already started working on some changes, it's looking good so far.
As for those who didn't get picked, don't jump to conclusions. Any of the maps submitted would have been fair game for the pros, really, but being picked or not doesn't mean the map was too good or too bad. I gather it was a tough decision for each of them, so maybe we'll have more events like this in the future.
|
I like mech because I cannot have more than 150 APM on my best days... More than 50% of these maps are an auto loss because there is no way to secure a third base before 15 minutes TvZ. But since about 50% of my ladder matches are vs , I guess I can't reasonably expect less than 50% of cartographers to be Zerg.
You are all just BEGGING me to veto these maps if they ever make it to ladder or just straight up cheese. ) How is THAT for an "interesting and dynamic map," huh?
|
On July 19 2012 01:01 SigmaFiE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 00:02 Sea_Food wrote:
Back to Back made it???
Lool.
I tought it was impossible, as the map already failed in like, what, 5 previous MotMs? In the words of the greatest Bro there ever was and/or will be. Challenge Accepted! Well, guess this means I don't have to wait to get my computer fixed completely or to start edits. Good stuff. Excited to see the results here. Rooting for NewSunshine and Rkynick!
Don't forget Scorp 
You are all just BEGGING me to veto these maps if they ever make it to ladder or just straight up cheese. ) How is THAT for an "interesting and dynamic map," huh?
That kinda is the point. The competition is supposed to make them better.
|
On July 19 2012 02:54 U_G_L_Y wrote:
I like mech because I cannot have more than 150 APM on my best days... More than 50% of these maps are an auto loss because there is no way to secure a third base before 15 minutes TvZ. But since about 50% of my ladder matches are vs , I guess I can't reasonably expect less than 50% of cartographers to be Zerg.
You are all just BEGGING me to veto these maps if they ever make it to ladder or just straight up cheese. ) How is THAT for an "interesting and dynamic map," huh?
Mech is more APM intensive than bio. :/
On top of everything you need to do in Bio, you need depots almost twice as often, more production, and have to constantly siege/unsiege.
|
Well then, to the authors and to those assisting with improvement, if you want your map to be successful, answer the following:
Can a third base be taken safely with tanks or sentries by 12 minutes against builds that are not all in?
|
Sometimes, mappers want to force certain styles. They can intentionally design a map that is better for Bio than mech.
|
I'm sad that I didn't make it. Oh well, at least now I can work on my maps again. Still, it would have been nice to be able to get more noticed. That said, the maps that were chosen are great and I wish good luck to the participants!
|
Get Aurora Frost picked !
|
On July 19 2012 02:54 U_G_L_Y wrote:
I like mech because I cannot have more than 150 APM on my best days... More than 50% of these maps are an auto loss because there is no way to secure a third base before 15 minutes TvZ. But since about 50% of my ladder matches are vs , I guess I can't reasonably expect less than 50% of cartographers to be Zerg.
You are all just BEGGING me to veto these maps if they ever make it to ladder or just straight up cheese. ) How is THAT for an "interesting and dynamic map," huh?
TL mapping community loves them hard thirds.
|
On July 19 2012 04:14 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 02:54 U_G_L_Y wrote:
I like mech because I cannot have more than 150 APM on my best days... More than 50% of these maps are an auto loss because there is no way to secure a third base before 15 minutes TvZ. But since about 50% of my ladder matches are vs , I guess I can't reasonably expect less than 50% of cartographers to be Zerg.
You are all just BEGGING me to veto these maps if they ever make it to ladder or just straight up cheese. ) How is THAT for an "interesting and dynamic map," huh? TL mapping community loves them hard thirds.
Quick, call in the expert!
Use the FlashFTW-signal!
|
On July 19 2012 04:14 Sea_Food wrote:
TL mapping community loves them hard thirds.
I hardly think so.
|
On July 19 2012 04:26 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 04:14 Sea_Food wrote:
TL mapping community loves them hard thirds. I hardly think so.
There aren't many options for making easy thirds without going outside the box ^^. And going outside the box means most people don't want to play the map! Its a catch 22.
|
i personally found too easily gotten 3rd = zerg boomed to easily xD, gota force em to make units to defend somemoar then just to defend.
|
Generally, I'd say Zerg's difficulty to take a third is more about distance, as in how long it takes to get creep connected. For Protoss, it's more about choke points and ease of force fields, for Terran more about wall offs and tank positions.
Because of this variance, you can adjust the ease of taking a third base for different races and unit compositions and matchups, so there's a lot a mapper can do to fine tune the balance.
|
On July 18 2012 21:23 Plexa wrote:
@kim;we had a 3p and 4p map chosen, and 8 2p maps, its just that 2p maps are significantly easier to create and do interesting things with. Whereas 4p maps have a number of difficulties which restrict innovation.
I don't see any three player map listed in the OP.
|
It's possible the 3p map was chosen by someone and then another map by the same mapper was chosen by someone higher up on the list.
|
GL everybody 
If anyone wants to collaborate on a map I'd be down. I'm yearning for good critical conversation about maps I can edit.
|
lol im like painful to watch apprentley, clicking everything etc lolz, hows everyone else getting on? i got del all the doodad's :D
|
On July 19 2012 03:28 Syphon8 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 02:54 U_G_L_Y wrote:
I like mech because I cannot have more than 150 APM on my best days... More than 50% of these maps are an auto loss because there is no way to secure a third base before 15 minutes TvZ. But since about 50% of my ladder matches are vs , I guess I can't reasonably expect less than 50% of cartographers to be Zerg.
You are all just BEGGING me to veto these maps if they ever make it to ladder or just straight up cheese. ) How is THAT for an "interesting and dynamic map," huh? Mech is more APM intensive than bio. :/ On top of everything you need to do in Bio, you need depots almost twice as often, more production, and have to constantly siege/unsiege.
LOL
*Producing 10 marines vs 1 Thor for 500 resources
*Splitting those marines vs spreading your vikings a little
*Goody vs MMA
*Oh noes! I hafta make 3 supply depots instead of 2!!!!
On July 19 2012 03:38 iGrok wrote:
Sometimes, mappers want to force certain styles. They can intentionally design a map that is better for Bio than mech.
Who would do that besides a Zerg-biased mapper? It hurts Protoss a ton as well. You can play bio on a mech map but not the other way around. If the map forces certain builds, then it is a shitty map and has no business being in competitive play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
