Hi guys, made one more for tlmc and now i cant decide hehe. This is a remake from the Broodwar Map Pathfinder. It looks a bit akward at some spots but i tried to get it as close as possible to the original and get a equal lenght between all naturals.
Love the map. Can't wait to see how it does in the TLMC! 168x172 is pretty huge... it could have been a bit smaller (the outer paths) but I think there are a lot of advantages for it being big. The outer paths are open enough to attack. The middle is nice and open. The rush distance is comfortable.
the 3rd's are fine, I like the way they're arranged (not that you did that :p), but the nat-nat distance is a bit short, so rushes will be pretty strong. not to mention how thin the walls are around the natural.
also, can a siege tank hit any of the main mineral lines at any point? it looks iffy in places.
I mostly like it. Though, with air soo good in HOTS idk about a map that makes the air distances so short. Say PvT, I could see void rays coming in to ravage the main while gateway units are knocking at the nat choke being pretty hard for T to hold. Such an attack is quite viable on most maps, but here it will hit much sooner.
Would rather this in the finals of TLMC than the vast majority of stuff (although I can't help but think this map would have actually been better in WOL. Maybe the meta could adjust for the map, though).
On May 03 2013 10:22 NewSunshine wrote: the 3rd's are fine, I like the way they're arranged (not that you did that :p), but the nat-nat distance is a bit short, so rushes will be pretty strong. not to mention how thin the walls are around the natural.
also, can a siege tank hit any of the main mineral lines at any point? it looks iffy in places.
I don't like how the mains are at all. Air play is already really strong in Hots right now, and main designs like this make it even stronger. I find it nearly impossible to be able to stop drops before they land, because they can come from almost every angle. This really hinders the use of things like feedback, fungal growth, static defense, and properly positioned units to take down drops before they land. Now, drops are certainly guaranteed damage, and I think that's really stupid.
Mutas also seem like hell on this map, especially if you have to take the third along the main. Mutas can basically sit in one spot and deny mining from three bases, which is absurd to be honest. Granted, makes static defense better because you only have to defend one area instead of three, however with the new muta regen static defense is trash vs mutas with he exception of spores due to their +biological.
I don't really like the thirds either because of how open the pace path is. The thirds themselves are fine, but you have to keep in mind that armies have to go between the third and natural to defend the two bases, so the path between them cannot be super open as it is here. There need to be chokes leading into the area in front of the natural, otherwise the incentive to take a third is greatly diminished. Good news is that this is an easy problem to fix.
Now, this map is not a bad map. It's really cool actually, but it has come at a time where it does not fit the metagame. Good map, bad time to release it. If medivacs, mutas, and/or sky toss get nerfed a bit then this map will do much better in the metagame.
Looks really nice, but I would add another base on the edge near each mineral line, that is because the maps seems like it has really low amount of bases for the current metagame.
Other than that this map looks wonderful, one of the best 3 player map I've seen.
This one is really stretching it. The layout simply does not work for sc2. Consider how powerful drops/muta/air is when those cliffs are behind the mineral line like that. Then consider the walk distance to the third. Also, that lower right spawn is better than any other. Why are the mineral lines positioned like that? The original had a better thought process behind that.
Another BW port made by you with the same texture set you've used in ever single BW port you've ever done. /siiiigh
It's cool but it won't work in sc2, not with air being so strong, not with chokes being so strong for certain races, not for early game being so strong for certain races.
The Nostalgia factor helps for certain people, but that's about all it's got going for it.
Foilage has been generated.... But nice map We used this for Starbow for a little while I think. I have it in my map-pack. Good to see you "finished" it!
The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
On May 03 2013 16:38 iamcaustic wrote: The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
a port is not done in half an hour, so yes i call it tpw because i put effort in creating this. it looks exactly the same because thats my goal in mapping and it was all along, to bring back the broodwar feeling back into sc2.
that means i try to get as close as possible to the original with textures, layout and doodads. this one actually uses 6 custom textures. thats also alot of effort to do those.
maybe i dont give enough credit but who cares really.
On May 03 2013 16:38 iamcaustic wrote: The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
a port is not done in half an hour, so yes i call it tpw because i put effort in creating this. it looks exactly the same because thats my goal in mapping and it was all along, to bring back the broodwar feeling back into sc2.
that means i try to get as close as possible to the original with textures, layout and doodads. this one actually uses 6 custom textures. thats also alot of effort to do those.
maybe i dont give enough credit but who cares really.
You mean you put effort into recreating this, and no one is doubting that. Pretty huge dick move to claim something as your own because you spent time replicating someone else's work, but give no credit to the guy that actually did all the work designing the whole concept on top of creating the original map because -- as you eloquently put it -- "who cares?"
Like I said before, if you wanna do a port as a tribute to the original author and give proper credit where it's due, I think that's great. What you're doing here, however, is mapmaking plagiarism. That's not so great.
On May 03 2013 23:29 lefix wrote: Quote from OP: "This is a remake from the Broodwar Map Pathfinder."
On the topic of quoting things...
On May 03 2013 16:38 iamcaustic wrote: The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
I get and respect that you're sticking up for one of your mappers, Lefix, but I'm really not sure how this is defendable:
On May 03 2013 22:41 Terranlover wrote: maybe i dont give enough credit but who cares really.
Honestly you are just trying stir a shitpan Caustic. Nobody wants it.
On the topic of the map: Cool port with changes where necessary. I'd love to see something a little more evolved from this submitted to the TLMC, though. You have more to offer to it!
On May 03 2013 23:47 eTcetRa wrote: Honestly you are just trying stir a shitpan Caustic. Nobody wants it.
On the topic of the map: Cool port with changes where necessary. I'd love to see something a little more evolved from this submitted to the TLMC, though. You have more to offer to it!
I'm actually just asking him to take 2 seconds to give the original author credit in the map's description on battle.net because it's the right thing to do. I wouldn't have needed to make what's now 4 posts on the subject if it weren't for these wacky responses to what I feel should be common sense.
Even Blizzard adds the original author's name to the descriptions of their LE versions of maps taken from the community.
On May 03 2013 16:38 iamcaustic wrote: The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
a port is not done in half an hour, so yes i call it tpw because i put effort in creating this. it looks exactly the same because thats my goal in mapping and it was all along, to bring back the broodwar feeling back into sc2.
that means i try to get as close as possible to the original with textures, layout and doodads. this one actually uses 6 custom textures. thats also alot of effort to do those.
maybe i dont give enough credit but who cares really.
You mean you put effort into recreating this, and no one is doubting that. Pretty huge dick move to claim something as your own because you spent time replicating someone else's work, but give no credit to the guy that actually did all the work designing the whole concept on top of creating the original map because -- as you eloquently put it -- "who cares?"
Like I said before, if you wanna do a port as a tribute to the original author and give proper credit where it's due, I think that's great. What you're doing here, however, is mapmaking plagiarism. That's not so great.
wtf dude he clearly states that this is a remake. end of the story. (btw I didnt see the creator's name of Fighting Spirit on your link as well lmao)
and balance or not, this looks more interesting than 200 dualsite/daybreak clones out there like these DF[name] maps (no offense)
On May 03 2013 23:47 eTcetRa wrote: Honestly you are just trying stir a shitpan Caustic. Nobody wants it.
On the topic of the map: Cool port with changes where necessary. I'd love to see something a little more evolved from this submitted to the TLMC, though. You have more to offer to it!
I'm actually just asking him to take 2 seconds to give the original author credit in the map's description on battle.net because it's the right thing to do. I wouldn't have needed to make what's now 4 posts on the subject if it weren't for these wacky responses to what I feel should be common sense.
Even Blizzard adds the original author's name to the descriptions of their LE versions of maps taken from the community.
I have to side with Caustic here. If you want to take yourselves serious as mapmakers, then you should do as anyone who quotes / uses literary works on an academic level : make sure you give credit where credit is due, otherwise it starts leaning towards plagiarism, even if that was not your intention.
If you don't care about all that stuff... then don't expect to be taken seriously either.
On May 03 2013 16:38 iamcaustic wrote: The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
a port is not done in half an hour, so yes i call it tpw because i put effort in creating this. it looks exactly the same because thats my goal in mapping and it was all along, to bring back the broodwar feeling back into sc2.
that means i try to get as close as possible to the original with textures, layout and doodads. this one actually uses 6 custom textures. thats also alot of effort to do those.
maybe i dont give enough credit but who cares really.
You mean you put effort into recreating this, and no one is doubting that. Pretty huge dick move to claim something as your own because you spent time replicating someone else's work, but give no credit to the guy that actually did all the work designing the whole concept on top of creating the original map because -- as you eloquently put it -- "who cares?"
Like I said before, if you wanna do a port as a tribute to the original author and give proper credit where it's due, I think that's great. What you're doing here, however, is mapmaking plagiarism. That's not so great.
wtf dude he clearly states that this is a remake. end of the story. (btw I didnt see the creator's name of Fighting Spirit on your link as well lmao)
and balance or not, this looks more interesting than 200 dualsite/daybreak clones out there like these DF[name] maps (no offense)
If you load up "Galaxy - Abaddon Blaze" in the Battle.net client, the first part of the description is as thus:
"Created by the Galaxy mapmaking team. Inspired by Fighting Spirit, created by Rose.of.Dream."
It's like 2 seconds to add that into a map description to give credit to the original author when people load up the map in SC2. That's the description that matters, because most people don't actually read TL map threads. I'm not sure why people are so up in arms about the idea of adding "Original map created by Earthattack (김응서)" in the map description as common courtesy for the original author's work.
Anyway, I'm not going to clutter up the map thread any further. I've said my bit, and I think deep down Mereel is a better person than to take credit for other peoples' work, so I leave it in his capable hands.
there is a reason that for ages people reference other books/texts and give credit to other authors. the 'text' behind a text is integral part of what it is and in my opinion it is the same with other design products - like maps - because giving credit to the original author does not only express respect towards his/her work, but also tells the audience something about the history of a map/design idea.
it is not difficult to say that map x inspired your work or that you ported the map from bw where it was originally conceived by map maker x.
people who support the idea to give credit to the author are not craving for recognition but help the idea of authorship in map making, hence support map making per se by emphasizing the importance of the person behind the design ideas that ultimately make the game what it is.
giving credit does not take away anything from you as a map maker. porting a 3p is a hell of a job.
On May 03 2013 16:38 iamcaustic wrote: The map having no chance at being any good in SC2 is one thing, but even going so far as to call it a TPW map just because you ported it? That's basically the StarCraft equivalent of kids on DeviantArt tracing someone else's art and claiming it as their own creative work. Now don't get me wrong, I've made a port as well, but I also made numerous design adjustments and aesthetic changes to make it into my own derivative work, on top of giving proper credit to the original author where it matters most -- the map description in the Battle.net client. "Port of the original Brood War map" isn't proper credit, especially when the majority of SC2 players have no background knowledge of the competitive Brood War scene. That can easily be misunderstood as porting one of your own BW maps into SC2.
If all you wanna do these days is make BW ports for SC2, power to you man. That's not a crime or anything, regardless how well they'll play out in a different game. Just put more effort into giving credit where credit is due instead of coasting off the work of others and labelling it as your own, where only a fraction (BW vets) of a fraction (Competitive StarCraft audience) of the SC2 player base will know any better. Absolutely nowhere is Earthattack (김응서) mentioned; not in the map description, not in the map's additional info, not even in this thread.
I get and respect that you're sticking up for one of your mappers, Lefix, but I'm really not sure how this is defendable:
On May 03 2013 22:41 Terranlover wrote: maybe i dont give enough credit but who cares really.
Nobody knows who Earthattack is... even less so than the name Pathfinder from BW.
Honestly what you're saying has truth in it, but I don't think it's a big deal one way or another. Tons of artists write their songs based off of previous artists songs and give NO credit. Want to see something cool?
They're basically the same song (melody, chords, rhythm section)... but nobody knows that. It pisses me off, but not that much when you learn that almost all artists, including Bob Dylan, copied other songs. Metal copies classical quite often.
So yes it's nice to give credit. Especially when you're remaking the map entirely. But Mereel has put a lot of time into remaking it and making his own adjustments for SC2. I wouldn't condemn him. And of course it can be a TPW map.
I love these 3 player maps. Going to try to make one. Very nice layout, though I would add 3 more expands (1 for each player). Also air play looks a bit strong... Overall good map
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RxBeFPF.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/409_Pathfinder.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NEbilVI.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RfVpH4S.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7LceejO.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gd9oiLm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4lYDM9W.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8kVBgTD.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/b95SgBS.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/3G12Ndz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ihKnWKv.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QZnDD9b.jpg)
