|
Intro
It has been quite the popular trend, from mapmakers to professional players, to critique Blizzard maps. Some come across as poking fun, and others as more harsh or hateful. However, one must ask, can the community do better?
Clearly, maps such as Cloud Kingdom and Daybreak show the community is capable of making great maps. However, nothing brings quite as much legitimacy as executing Blizzard maps better than Blizzard. Thus, I challenge the community to do just that. This is intended to not only be a fun experience, but also to demonstrate to the public that community mapmakers are just as talented and skilled, if not more so, than the professionally paid Blizzard mapmakers.
How this Works
Competitors will choose any map of their choice created by Blizzard, and improve upon it in regards to both aesthetics and gameplay. Eligible maps include both 1v1 and team maps created by Blizzard. Note, not all Blizzard maps were on ladder, nor were all ladder maps made by Blizzard. I will have a list of a few specific unavailable maps below. Competitors are to improve upon the map(s) of their choice with the current metagame in mind.
The submitted maps will then be voted on by public vote to determine whether they are better, just as good, or worse than the blizzard original in the categories of gameplay and aesthetics. Where there are no particular winners or losers, the most popular and notable will be featured in the original post with the conclusion of the challenge. Additionally, there are currently no prizes aside the bragging rights. Nonetheless, dedication toward your submissions would be greatly appreciated!
Rules
If there are any questions with the following rules, or if you are unsure your layout or aesthetics meet the following limitations, feel free to send me a PM.
- Any map made by Blizzard is available for use.
- Any community map that was altered by Blizzard, such as Taldarim Altar, is not available for use.
- There are no limitations on who can or cannot submit. Though, you will obviously need a TL account in order to submit.
- A single person may submit up to 2 maps, team or 1v1.
- The maps can be changed within the confines of their original core ideas and layout. In other words, do not start with a Shattered Temple, and end up with an Entombed Valley. Must be recognizable from the original.
- All aesthetic touches including textures, cliff types, lighting, and doodads can be swapped in and out. However, the original aesthetic theme must be preserved. For example, lava can be added to Jungle Basin, but the Bel'shir Jungle theme must continue to be prominent. Must be recognizable from the original aesthetics.
- The current Heart of the Swarm metagame is to be kept in mind while improving upon the maps.
- The maps are to be created as if they were ladder maps. So Blizzard standards apply.
Unavailable for Entry
The following maps have appeared on ladder, but are community made and thus not accepted for entry. All other community created maps are also unavailable for entry. Only refurbished versions of Blizzard created maps are accepted.
- Tal'Darim Altar
- Daybreak
- Metropolis
- Cloud Kingdom
- Korhal Compound
- Ohana
- Neo Planet S
- Belshir Vestige
- Whirlwind
How to Submit
Submissions will be posted within this thread. A submission post is to include the following:
- Map name and author name.
- High resolution overview images of the original and refurbished version.
- Playable map size of the original and refurbished version.
- Nice close up pictures to show off the new and finely tuned aesthetics of the refurbished version. Anywhere from 4 -10 seems suffice.
Maps are to be submitted by Monday, June 24th at 11:59pm KST. The voting phase will start shortly after, and last for roughly a week. Good luck, and have fun!
|
This sounds cool! Can't wait to see how the community does in improving blizzard's map (plz make Zerus prime bearable ._.)
|
This looks like a fun idea.
|
Are multiple versions allowed to be designed from the same map? By different authors? By the same author?
The more important question:
Are there any minimum or maximum standards of what constitutes a different map beyond recognizable?
For example:
May we resize the map? Must we?
Can the mains be moved? Must they?
Can any other bases be moved? Must they?
Can rush distances be altered? Must they?
Can attack path widths be altered? Must they?
Can base sizes be changed? Must they?
Can mineral or gas placement be moved? Must they?
Can mineral patches or geysers be added/removed? Must they?
Can we lower/raise the terrain at any point? Must we?
Can ramp sizes be altered? Must they?
I'd also recommend that image sizes and orientation be standardized; something like 6 times the full map bounds for each map. It'd make it easier to compare them.
|
On June 03 2013 09:43 FlyingBeer wrote:
Are multiple versions allowed to be designed from the same map? By different authors? By the same author?
The more important question:
Are there any minimum or maximum standards of what constitutes a different map beyond recognizable?
For example:
May we resize the map? Must we?
Can the mains be moved? Must they?
Can any other bases be moved? Must they?
Can rush distances be altered? Must they?
Can attack path widths be altered? Must they?
Can base sizes be changed? Must they?
Can mineral or gas placement be moved? Must they?
Can mineral patches or geysers be added/removed? Must they?
Can we lower/raise the terrain at any point? Must we?
Can ramp sizes be altered? Must they?
I'd also recommend that image sizes and orientation be standardized; something like 6 times the full map bounds for each map. It'd make it easier to compare them.
You are able to do everything you listed as long as the map confines to the original core ideas and layout. You are entirely welcome to add bases, remove bases, narrow pathways, make a certain section high ground, add rocks, remove a XWT, ect. However, the altered map has to greatly resemble the original. In other words, the altered map just has to be a better executed version of the original. However, you do not have to make any physical changes if you feel they are unnecessary. You can simply touch up the aesthetics if you desire, but not recommended.
Though, as far as adding and removing mineral patches and geysers, you must keep in mind that bases must be along the standards: blue bases are 8m 2g and golds are 6m 2g. I have this rule so the maps are essentially ladder ready, just as Blizzard's are.
|
|
|
Ok this might be a really stupid question but how do i get my hands on a blizzard map?
|
On June 03 2013 10:42 WedRine wrote:
Ok this might be a really stupid question but how do i get my hands on a blizzard map?
Launch the editor, hit the open files button, go to the battle.net tab, sign in, and ta-da. You have access to every map Blizzard has ever published.
|
I fail to see the point in this challenge. Every player I know already think that Blizzard's maps are bad for the most part and the good stuff comes from the community and Korean/GSL mappers. I prefer to make my own maps instead of fixing Blizzard's.
|
Someone can make DoA's day and remake Desert Oasis for today's metagame.
Then the next step is to organize a 'ye olde map remake tournament.'
|
I've already started messing around with Xel'Naga Caverns. I'm surprised at how significant the changes I'm having to make are considering this used to be one of the best maps available. I'm noticing major issues with every single base on the map.
|
Luckily I've already made an improved version (at least imo) of Desert Oasis back in the day, even though it was one of my 1st maps so the map is not completely symmetric, and the aesthetics are really not that good. I did fix it up a bit, making the looks slightly better and the layout to be more fitting for HotS, but it is still not that good of a remake. The only reason I am not making a new version is because I don't have a lot of time, so here it is:
The name of the remake is "Shomem", which means desolate in Hebrew.
Original: (Playable bounds 140x140)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wAYjAes.jpg)
Remake: (Playable bounds 148x148)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1xgBtGp.jpg)
Sadly I think the aesthetics of DO are better than those of my own map, but to my defense it was a really long time ago.
|
On June 03 2013 11:11 spinnaker wrote:
I fail to see the point in this challenge. Every player I know already think that Blizzard's maps are bad for the most part and the good stuff comes from the community and Korean/GSL mappers. I prefer to make my own maps instead of fixing Blizzard's.
First thing, Akilon is one of the best maps on ladder right now, if not the best, and this is according to many people I talk to, and while you do say "for the most part", people tend to forget that not only "bad" maps come out of Blizzard.
About the "bad" maps, basically people just like to hate on Blizzard because its easy, but overall their maps use to be meant to shake up the metagame, maps like Klontas Mire, Entombed Valley and Korhal City are really different than the standard, which most people don't like, but is the best way to make the game more interesting. In fact the only reason the game got so stale in the later stages of WoL is because people stopped Blizzard from changing the metagame with maps because every new map that wasn't exactly like Daybreak got flamed and called "another bad Blizzard map". Of course Blizzard made some actual bad maps and kept them in the map pool for too long, but its not as horrible as people make it to be.
When talking about Blizzard maps people like to talk of maps from the beta or early WoL as examples, which at least for me sounds very silly as you have to remember no one knew anything about the game at the time, and they just toyed around to see what the players like and what makes the game the best, which eventually turned out to be bigger maps with easy naturals, although it was impossible to know that from the start. Another thing to notice is that many people praise Icarus while looking down at Klontas Mire, which is funny because the maps are very similar, this just shows how much people are biased against Blizzard.
|
On June 03 2013 12:22 moskonia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 11:11 spinnaker wrote:
I fail to see the point in this challenge. Every player I know already think that Blizzard's maps are bad for the most part and the good stuff comes from the community and Korean/GSL mappers. I prefer to make my own maps instead of fixing Blizzard's.
First thing, Akilon is one of the best maps on ladder right now, if not the best, and this is according to many people I talk to, and while you do say "for the most part", people tend to forget that not only "bad" maps come out of Blizzard. About the "bad" maps, basically people just like to hate on Blizzard because its easy, but overall their maps use to be meant to shake up the metagame, maps like Klontas Mire, Entombed Valley and Korhal City are really different than the standard, which most people don't like, but is the best way to make the game more interesting. In fact the only reason the game got so stale in the later stages of WoL is because people stopped Blizzard from changing the metagame with maps because every new map that wasn't exactly like Daybreak got flamed and called "another bad Blizzard map". Of course Blizzard made some actual bad maps and kept them in the map pool for too long, but its not as horrible as people make it to be. When talking about Blizzard maps people like to talk of maps from the beta or early WoL as examples, which at least for me sounds very silly as you have to remember no one knew anything about the game at the time, and they just toyed around to see what the players like and what makes the game the best, which eventually turned out to be bigger maps with easy naturals, although it was impossible to know that from the start. Another thing to notice is that many people praise Icarus while looking down at Klontas Mire, which is funny because the maps are very similar, this just shows how much people are biased against Blizzard.
I wholeheartedly agree with this post. Blizzard has put fourth a very respectable amount of good maps.
|
I have another slightly less dumb question, does anyone know how to convert the a map to HOTS, so that I'm able to use HOTS textures, doodads, etc.?
**EDIT**
never mind figured it out myself ^_______^
for anyone else having this problem, go to file > dependencies... click "add standard" and add the on called Swarm(mod), I think you can remove the one called Liberty(mod) without getting into trouble.
**EDIT2**
the ever helpful timetwister22 ninja'd me.
|
On June 03 2013 13:11 WedRine wrote:
I have another slightly less dumb question, does anyone know how to convert the a map to HOTS, so that I'm able to use HOTS textures, doodads, etc.?
File>Dependencies. Add the dependency called 'Swarm (mod)' and remove any others.
|
|
|
Hahaha this is awesome, nice man.
This has an interesting subjective constraint on what is permissible. For example, this thing, which is awesome and should definitely be submitted. But does it count? I obviously learn towards yes, but there are some substantial "conceptual" differences, although there are also core similarities.
|
On June 03 2013 13:38 EatThePath wrote:Hahaha this is awesome, nice man. This has an interesting subjective constraint on what is permissible. For example, this thing, which is awesome and should definitely be submitted. But does it count? I obviously learn towards yes, but there are some substantial "conceptual" differences, although there are also core similarities.
I would say that's a great example of just how far one can edit the map and be okay for submission. It is the core similarities that are to remain the same. Clearly, changing a map just a little will start to shift it's concept, especially if you mess around with rush distances.
|
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you...
Freshwater Gulch
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i4pBvo9.jpg)
Remake of 'Backwater Gulch'
Playable: 144x144
Players: 2
All spawns enabled.
Additional pics:
+ Show Spoiler +
Backwater Gulch:
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TDbd08Y.jpg) Playable: 140x140 Players: 2 All Spawns enabled.
maker's thoughts:
+ Show Spoiler +Okay, so this was a fun project that I didn't take too too seriously.
What I initially tried to do was make it all viable with today's meta and stuff, and while I think it might be better than the original its still no wonder. secondly I tried to capture the same ambiance which I think i did kinda OK, but the Mara Sara texture set is extremely buggy so the textures gave me a ton of trouble which is why the textures does look a little rushed, furthermore the entire map only took me about 5 hrs of on and off work to complete so obviously I haven't spend too much time thinking about the balance, (which can be seen, lol) I really enjoyed making it though and I look forward to see some more submissions.!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sVHkW5k.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Os3VU18.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9laHjnC.jpg)
