EPTIt would be safe to assume silly stuff like tar pits, permanent time warps and blinding clouds aren't allowed as map features.
Edit: Awwwwww, nevermindddddd *walks away sulkily*
[CSL] Community Map-Making Contest - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
eTcetRa
Australia822 Posts
It would be safe to assume silly stuff like tar pits, permanent time warps and blinding clouds aren't allowed as map features. Edit: Awwwwww, nevermindddddd *walks away sulkily* | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
It would be safe to assume silly stuff like tar pits how dare thee | ||
|
eTcetRa
Australia822 Posts
| ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On August 01 2013 09:09 NewSunshine wrote: Are you honestly even trying to suggest that the layouts of my maps aren't more creative than yours even ignoring any and all resource layouts?Yeah, smart thing to say. He means competitive in the same sense as Blizzard, where the maps could conceivably be ladder maps. Creativity goes beyond throwing in 2 gold minerals, actually. Give it a try sometime. Oh wait, I forgot, you're just trying to make a personal attack because you have no actual content to attack me on for the bazillioned time but this time even the personal attacks make no sense because without any mineral layouts I've made some of the most unusual maps out there. Edit: Besides that, nowadays the Blizzard ladder map standard is the standard for competitive? Darest thou, by the way, 'thee' is objective. It's like saying 'How dare him' rather than 'How dares he.' | ||
|
jon osterman
71 Posts
On August 01 2013 08:19 SiskosGoatee wrote: I would invite everyone to post whatever they submit in this thread, doing it public makes it all the more exciting. Apart from that, how am I going to bitch that the least original map won again if I can't see the more original ones? +1 Please do not fear .. showcasing is like asking a girl out .. at worse you will get your heart broken into a million pieces and we all now how useful that is to evolve and mature. ty CSL, MSI and NCIX mapmaking tournaments with "their" own maps is the in thing now  | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On August 01 2013 09:09 NewSunshine wrote: Yeah, smart thing to say. He means competitive in the same sense as Blizzard, where the maps could conceivably be ladder maps. Creativity goes beyond throwing in 2 gold minerals, actually. Give it a try sometime. SHOTS FIRED! On topic: This seems really neat, I like the idea of a tournament using maps made by the players. I just wish my school had a CSL team. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On August 01 2013 20:32 SiskosGoatee wrote: + Show Spoiler + On August 01 2013 09:09 NewSunshine wrote: Are you honestly even trying to suggest that the layouts of my maps aren't more creative than yours even ignoring any and all resource layouts?Yeah, smart thing to say. He means competitive in the same sense as Blizzard, where the maps could conceivably be ladder maps. Creativity goes beyond throwing in 2 gold minerals, actually. Give it a try sometime. Oh wait, I forgot, you're just trying to make a personal attack because you have no actual content to attack me on for the bazillioned time but this time even the personal attacks make no sense because without any mineral layouts I've made some of the most unusual maps out there. Edit: Besides that, nowadays the Blizzard ladder map standard is the standard for competitive? Darest thou, by the way, 'thee' is objective. It's like saying 'How dare him' rather than 'How dares he.' Besides the irony I've spotted there, I don't see anything substantial to your post. Troll harder. And yes, I would stay away from any altered mineral layouts, as Blizzard policies stipulate 8m2g bases, 6hym2g bases, and nothing else. The question has already been answered saying that Blizzard policy is the word here, and that's good enough for me. Also, considering the possibility of a future TLMC, I'd rather make maps that could potentially be submitted to that as well, so adhering to Blizzard's rules is the best thing to do at the moment. | ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
Do you accept map revamps ? Should I PM the map file or the name of the map ? open space, amount of attack paths, airspace, etc. as well as interesting usage of HotS features and overall “look”. Could you be more precise ? | ||
|
CollegiateStarleague
United States577 Posts
On August 01 2013 17:33 eTcetRa wrote: The only question I have, being quite a reserved mapmaker as far as crazy features goes, is are the old tournament style half bases allowed? Like the original center bases in daybreak. Assuming your answer earlier meant that Icarus mineral layouts aren't allowed, I just want to know, as ill change something in one of my works in progress for CSL. It would be safe to assume silly stuff like tar pits, permanent time warps and blinding clouds aren't allowed as map features. Edit: Awwwwww, nevermindddddd *walks away sulkily* In general, the main bases should be the standard 8/2 format, with some leeway for pocket bases such as on GSL Daybreak, which has been a long-used and beloved tournament map for its time. There are also other interesting features that have been explored in maps such as for Proleague such as with timed xel'naga/rocks, but keep in mind that extra features may affect balance, so it is something to keep in mind. On August 02 2013 06:21 algue wrote: a few questions : Do you accept map revamps ? Should I PM the map file or the name of the map ? Could you be more precise ? As we are a team league as opposed to an individual league, there is some wiggle room for "imbalance", so if one match-up is slightly favored (55-45) or so, it is not the end of the world, but there is a limit; if any race is given a huge advantage in terms of terrain and base designs, it will likely not be accepted. It is difficult to express the requirements for each point, as it is not just a set of independent criterion, but how the entire map works as a whole that is important. For example, a map may have some chokes but at the same time also offer more attack paths to the natural/3rd/4th/ect. so that a player always has options so they won't get bogged down easily, while rewarding tactical moves and awareness. Essentially, we will look into how each of the different aspects of the map come together and how everything would affect the play styles of each race. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
| ||
|
CollegiateStarleague
United States577 Posts
"Please submit maps via email to admin [@] cstarleague.com by August 18, 11:59pm PST. Mapmakers are limited to two maps per entity (teams are counted as a single entity). Please include as much information as you can, such as liquipedia page information, a short overview of the map, as well as the name on battle net if published (so we can test them internally)" We have already started to receive submissions, some more detailed than others, but please keep in mind to include as much information as possible, as well as publishing the map on battle net if possible, so we can properly check out the maps; the more information, the easier it is for us to be able to properly judge the map. Thank you and GLHF to all participants. | ||
|
Timetwister22
United States538 Posts
Open it to 2 per mapmaker. Even if every mapmaker submits 2 maps, you'll only get roughly 100 submissions. 100 sounds like a lot, but you should be able to knock out around 70 right away just by the overviews provided. Then you will be left with 30 higher quality maps, which will really give you guys at CSL a chance to design a map pool toward specific gameplay styles. Whereas, if you only have 10-12 quality maps, you will be much more limited in your options. It is in the best interests of the CSL to allow 2 per mapmaker. You'll get more quality maps, more variety, more choices, and overall stronger contest results. This is how TLMC has been able to come out with such great maps. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On August 03 2013 12:52 Timetwister22 wrote: Pretty much, I wanted to comment on this but I forgot that it's absolutely bizarre to punish people because they are on a team.Two maps per team will really limit your submissions amount. There are roughly 4 mapmaking teams, so you will get roughly 8 submissions from teamed mapmakers. Considering a large majority of mapmakers are teamed, that's quite silly. Furthermore, teamed mapmakers still make their own stuff, just use teams for general direction and feedback. Maps are generally not team wide projects, as the individual mapmaker does 98% of the work and final decision making. So, it's not like a team can submit two maps that represent their team. They will submit two maps that, at most, represent only 2 of their members. Not the entire team. Thus, once again, limiting two per team is really silly. Limiting 2 maps per team is just a really bad idea overall. You won't get enough variety, participation, or as high quality of maps as you may desire. Open it to 2 per mapmaker. Even if every mapmaker submits 2 maps, you'll only get roughly 100 submissions. 100 sounds like a lot, but you should be able to knock out around 70 right away just by the overviews provided. Then you will be left with 30 higher quality maps, which will really give you guys at CSL a chance to design a map pool toward specific gameplay styles. Whereas, if you only have 10-12 quality maps, you will be much more limited in your options. It is in the best interests of the CSL to allow 2 per mapmaker. You'll get more quality maps, more variety, more choices, and overall stronger contest results. This is how TLMC has been able to come out with such great maps. Apart from that, easy to circumvent this rule, just make a one man team for the duration of this. Anyone can make a team at any point. I am now the exclusive SiskosGoatee team, premier mapmaking, no one else allowed in unless you think Antiga Shipyard is cool. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
A flat 2 maps per person seems simpler and more sensible. <3 Anyhow thanks for holding the contest. We're grateful for more opportunities to see community maps played. | ||
|
CollegiateStarleague
United States577 Posts
| ||
|
CollegiateStarleague
United States577 Posts
| ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
I mean, let's be honest here. TPW doesn't have a judge so they probably won't have 90% of the maps in the final pool. (looooooooooooool, tpw so mad! haha <3) | ||
|
RFDaemoniac
United States544 Posts
| ||
|
Samro225am
Germany982 Posts
On August 04 2013 12:15 SidianTheBard wrote: Only two maps per team is great because it allows me, a non-team map maker a better chance to get a map into a tournament map pool..............Seriously though, I hope you mean 2 maps per person. Pretty much look at what Timetwister said. Every person should be allowed to enter maps. Limiting it to two per team is pretty lame imo. I mean, let's be honest here. TPW doesn't have a judge so they probably won't have 90% of the maps in the final pool. (looooooooooooool, tpw so mad! haha <3) no offense, but this rule just limits the number of better maps and increases the chance of average maps being showcased. oh, and i do not say this because i would have planned to take part  and it is not a personal thing - but just an observation:when ypu look at the community there are many teams with many good map makers on roughly the same level plus several individuals who are really good. two maps per map team that 75% of the top map makers cannot submit a (personal) map. On August 02 2013 12:01 CollegiateStarleague wrote: As we are a team league as opposed to an individual league, there is some wiggle room for "imbalance", so if one match-up is slightly favored (55-45) or so, it is not the end of the world, but there is a limit; if any race is given a huge advantage in terms of terrain and base designs, it will likely not be accepted. lol, how nice that you even allows maps that are SO imbalanced! | ||
|
jon osterman
71 Posts
 edit : still no eye candy  | ||
| ||
