EPTAnd then secondly you let your staff pick, which is like fucking madness. What makes people think they can just go and judge maps properly without any prior experience or mapmaking knowledge or some kind of high level background...
[CSL] Community Map-Making Contest - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
And then secondly you let your staff pick, which is like fucking madness. What makes people think they can just go and judge maps properly without any prior experience or mapmaking knowledge or some kind of high level background... | ||
|
SigmaFiE
United States333 Posts
On August 06 2013 06:22 Ragoo wrote: 2 maps per team when a team has sth between 2-6 excellent, seasoned mapmakers who can all mapmake on top10 TLMC level or GSL/Kespa level. Meanwhile 2 maps for all the teamless mapmakers which are 95% noobs. What a well thought out rule. And then secondly you let your staff pick, which is like fucking madness. What makes people think they can just go and judge maps properly without any prior experience or mapmaking knowledge or some kind of high level background... This is another great opportunity for all map makers to highlight their creative works as amateur (moving towards professional) level designers. The limitations of the number of submissions creates an environment that promotes the de-emphasizing of team created maps and gives greater opportunity to non-associated mapmakers. Simultaneously it helps to promote a higher quality map by team entities due to the quantity submission reduction (it encourages teammates to work AS teammates). You must conciously choose to put your best foot forward as an organization. This is a good thing, and promotes higher quality. Please accept this as a great opportunity and discontinue belittling the organization(s) that are taking risks by looking at and incorporating community created levels. The rules are established clearly and I doubt they will change. Accept it and move on. | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
@ their staff judging, I'm pretty sure they have masters and GM people on-board so it might actually go ok. Knowing something about maps would surely help, but TLMC had "expert" judges and most of the maps kind of flopped once played, so *throws hands up* I think a different perspective might be good and/or interesting. If you had TLMC type judges again you would just get the same types of maps as your results.. zzz. Something different might be nice - willing to give them a chance. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On August 06 2013 06:57 SigmaFiE wrote: + Show Spoiler + On August 06 2013 06:22 Ragoo wrote: 2 maps per team when a team has sth between 2-6 excellent, seasoned mapmakers who can all mapmake on top10 TLMC level or GSL/Kespa level. Meanwhile 2 maps for all the teamless mapmakers which are 95% noobs. What a well thought out rule. And then secondly you let your staff pick, which is like fucking madness. What makes people think they can just go and judge maps properly without any prior experience or mapmaking knowledge or some kind of high level background... This is another great opportunity for all map makers to highlight their creative works as amateur (moving towards professional) level designers. The limitations of the number of submissions creates an environment that promotes the de-emphasizing of team created maps and gives greater opportunity to non-associated mapmakers. Simultaneously it helps to promote a higher quality map by team entities due to the quantity submission reduction (it encourages teammates to work AS teammates). You must conciously choose to put your best foot forward as an organization. This is a good thing, and promotes higher quality. Please accept this as a great opportunity and discontinue belittling the organization(s) that are taking risks by looking at and incorporating community created levels. The rules are established clearly and I doubt they will change. Accept it and move on. Righto. For, of and by the community up-and-coming organization goes straight to TL mapmakers for new maps. Check. Mark. This is only good times hopefully just the first step in something long-lasting. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On August 06 2013 06:57 SigmaFiE wrote: + Show Spoiler + On August 06 2013 06:22 Ragoo wrote: 2 maps per team when a team has sth between 2-6 excellent, seasoned mapmakers who can all mapmake on top10 TLMC level or GSL/Kespa level. Meanwhile 2 maps for all the teamless mapmakers which are 95% noobs. What a well thought out rule. And then secondly you let your staff pick, which is like fucking madness. What makes people think they can just go and judge maps properly without any prior experience or mapmaking knowledge or some kind of high level background... This is another great opportunity for all map makers to highlight their creative works as amateur (moving towards professional) level designers. The limitations of the number of submissions creates an environment that promotes the de-emphasizing of team created maps and gives greater opportunity to non-associated mapmakers. Simultaneously it helps to promote a higher quality map by team entities due to the quantity submission reduction (it encourages teammates to work AS teammates). You must conciously choose to put your best foot forward as an organization. This is a good thing, and promotes higher quality. Please accept this as a great opportunity and discontinue belittling the organization(s) that are taking risks by looking at and incorporating community created levels. The rules are established clearly and I doubt they will change. Accept it and move on. I seriously doubt the map making community is at a point where we need to be fostering development outside of the major map making teams. There are already significantly limited opportunities for the very best mappers, let alone mediocre mappers on teams. Perhaps the rule would make sense if teamed mappers had their maps flooding every tournament, but that isn't the case. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On August 06 2013 06:57 SigmaFiE wrote: Maybe, but like I said, it's super easy to skirt this rule. Just temporarly leave your team and go solo for the duration of this contest. Or well, since there is no rule anywhere which says you can't be in both teams at the same time, there you have it. I've always thought the term "team" for mapping teams is a bit nondescriptive as well.+ Show Spoiler + On August 06 2013 06:22 Ragoo wrote: 2 maps per team when a team has sth between 2-6 excellent, seasoned mapmakers who can all mapmake on top10 TLMC level or GSL/Kespa level. Meanwhile 2 maps for all the teamless mapmakers which are 95% noobs. What a well thought out rule. And then secondly you let your staff pick, which is like fucking madness. What makes people think they can just go and judge maps properly without any prior experience or mapmaking knowledge or some kind of high level background... This is another great opportunity for all map makers to highlight their creative works as amateur (moving towards professional) level designers. The limitations of the number of submissions creates an environment that promotes the de-emphasizing of team created maps and gives greater opportunity to non-associated mapmakers. Simultaneously it helps to promote a higher quality map by team entities due to the quantity submission reduction (it encourages teammates to work AS teammates). You must conciously choose to put your best foot forward as an organization. This is a good thing, and promotes higher quality. Please accept this as a great opportunity and discontinue belittling the organization(s) that are taking risks by looking at and incorporating community created levels. The rules are established clearly and I doubt they will change. Accept it and move on. | ||
|
sCnDiamond
Germany340 Posts
On August 06 2013 07:01 Fatam wrote: @ their staff judging, I'm pretty sure they have masters and GM people on-board so it might actually go ok. Knowing something about maps would surely help, but TLMC had "expert" judges and most of the maps kind of flopped once played, so *throws hands up* I think a different perspective might be good and/or interesting. shots fired... I'm sure they let some master/gm players handle that, which will most likely end up with some more standard maps being taken. Which would explain why Ragoo isn't exactly in favor of the idea. | ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On August 06 2013 11:44 sCnDiamond wrote: Well, as much as saying this shoots my own agenda in the foot, but if pros wants standard maps and mappers don't, maybe standard maps are better? I don't really buy that idea that a platinum league mapper understands maps or any aspect of the game to greater extend than a pro or semi-pro in GM. They can have different opinions from each other how the game should, but a pro is always going to be better at looking into a crystal ball and saying how the game will play out given a map to judge.shots fired... I'm sure they let some master/gm players handle that, which will most likely end up with some more standard maps being taken. Which would explain why Ragoo isn't exactly in favor of the idea. | ||
|
Semmo
Korea (South)627 Posts
If we start arguing from things like the map rules and now moving on to the submission rules (with insults flying about), how are we going to be ever treated well? Also, shouldn't we think this more as a Map Jam? CSL isn't like getting your map into Dreamhack or MLG or anything... I do agree with just 2 maps per person, not team tho | ||
|
Fatam
1986 Posts
On August 06 2013 11:44 sCnDiamond wrote: shots fired... I'm sure they let some master/gm players handle that, which will most likely end up with some more standard maps being taken. Which would explain why Ragoo isn't exactly in favor of the idea. Haha, yeah that did come over caustic when I didn't really intend it to be. I just meant that if we had an expert judge panel and the resulting maps were mostly imbalanced (mostly, not ALL), that says something about how hard it is to judge maps. So maybe a different viewpoint is good, or maybe it's just a crapshoot and anyone with a reasonably good understanding of the game is fine as a judge and should choose whichever maps look fun and reasonably balanced to them. | ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
On August 02 2013 12:01 CollegiateStarleague wrote: 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. Just to make sure I understand you correctly, are the following allowed? - 6/1 in-base natural with back door rocks - 8/2 gold On August 01 2013 04:10 CollegiateStarleague wrote: Maps will be judged on overall balance such as number of bases as well as placement, chokes versus open space, amount of attack paths, airspace, etc. as well as interesting usage of HotS features and overall “look”. Are HotS features a requirement, or can I enter a map that can also be played with WoL? | ||
|
CollegiateStarleague
United States577 Posts
On August 06 2013 13:42 And G wrote: Just to make sure I understand you correctly, are the following allowed? - 6/1 in-base natural with back door rocks - 8/2 gold If I understand you, you want to make a natural similar to Crevasse, except with backdoor rocks; this is acceptable. With the 8/2 gold base, I think you meant to say 6/2 gold? There is no problem with those types of bases either, as we do see them on tournament maps not too infrequently, such as on Neo Planet S; just make sure it works well with the terrain setup of the map. On August 01 2013 04:10 CollegiateStarleague wrote: Maps will be judged on overall balance such as number of bases as well as placement, chokes versus open space, amount of attack paths, airspace, etc. as well as interesting usage of HotS features and overall “look”. Are HotS features a requirement, or can I enter a map that can also be played with WoL?[/QUOTE] As with the other criteria, there is no hard requirement or limit for this. We will reward interesting usage of the features if it works well, but we will not penalize for not using them. If you feel your map works better without any of the new features, feel free to omit them. | ||
|
Samro225am
Germany982 Posts
On August 06 2013 09:41 Plexa wrote: I seriously doubt the map making community is at a point where we need to be fostering development outside of the major map making teams. There are already significantly limited opportunities for the very best mappers, let alone mediocre mappers on teams. Perhaps the rule would make sense if teamed mappers had their maps flooding every tournament, but that isn't the case. this! why highlight average maps when the map teams have problems getting their maps into circulation? It all depends on your decision if you want the highest possible quality (no limitation except x map(s) per map maker) or if you want to cap the quality through artificial limitations. On August 06 2013 13:29 Fatam wrote: Haha, yeah that did come over caustic when I didn't really intend it to be. I just meant that if we had an expert judge panel and the resulting maps were mostly imbalanced (mostly, not ALL), that says something about how hard it is to judge maps. So maybe a different viewpoint is good, or maybe it's just a crapshoot and anyone with a reasonably good understanding of the game is fine as a judge and should choose whichever maps look fun and reasonably balanced to them. imho this should be treated as a great opportunity to get maps tested in a competitive environment. a map jam is mostly map making community oriented. | ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
On August 06 2013 16:07 CollegiateStarleague wrote: With the 8/2 gold base, I think you meant to say 6/2 gold? There is no problem with those types of bases either, as we do see them on tournament maps not too infrequently, such as on Neo Planet S; just make sure it works well with the terrain setup of the map. Actually I really meant 8/2 gold bases, as 6/2 gold is the standard. I still haven't figured out whether 8/2 normal, 6/2 gold or 8/2 gold works best in that particular location, though, so this will likely be a moot point. Good to hear Crevasse-style naturals are allowed. | ||
|
Phoenix_
United States37 Posts
On August 06 2013 16:41 And G wrote: Actually I really meant 8/2 gold bases, as 6/2 gold is the standard. I still haven't figured out whether 8/2 normal, 6/2 gold or 8/2 gold works best in that particular location, though, so this will likely be a moot point. Good to hear Crevasse-style naturals are allowed. I probably wouldn't imagine 8/2 gold would be very fair; with 6 mineral patches it would give a slight advantage in overall income at optimal saturation, while requiring less workers of course. With 8 gold patches, it will likely make the gold bases too essential, as it would provide 40% more income with the same amount of workers used. I could be wrong, but it seems like it would make the game to focused on controlling the gold base(s) depending on how the map layout is set up. Just my 2 cents, in case you didn't already think of it. | ||
|
And G
Germany491 Posts
| ||
|
SiskosGoatee
Albania1482 Posts
On August 06 2013 13:29 Fatam wrote: Well, it's true, especially for TMLC 1. They praised Korhal Compound for being awsome, the staff. And it turned out to be a balance disaster in PvZ and never really got tournament traction. It's like I said a lot, I don't buy this self-esteemed expert-ness of 'established mappers' at all.Haha, yeah that did come over caustic when I didn't really intend it to be. I just meant that if we had an expert judge panel and the resulting maps were mostly imbalanced (mostly, not ALL), that says something about how hard it is to judge maps. So maybe a different viewpoint is good, or maybe it's just a crapshoot and anyone with a reasonably good understanding of the game is fine as a judge and should choose whichever maps look fun and reasonably balanced to them. | ||
|
TheFish7
United States2824 Posts
On August 06 2013 12:35 Semmo wrote: Wow. We mapmakers really create a ruckus, don't we? (I'm guilty as well at times as well) If we start arguing from things like the map rules and now moving on to the submission rules (with insults flying about), how are we going to be ever treated well? Good point, I think that this sub-forum scares away a lot of folks, we have a tendency to jump down each other's throats, which makes for good debates but might throw some people off. On August 06 2013 07:01 Fatam wrote: @ their staff judging, I'm pretty sure they have masters and GM people on-board so it might actually go ok. Knowing something about maps would surely help, but TLMC had "expert" judges and most of the maps kind of flopped once played, so *throws hands up* I think a different perspective might be good and/or interesting. Judging maps is really hard, its a bit like the stock market; you could follow it for years and learn everything but still get burned by some unexpected move. IMO the only true way to judge a map is trial-and-error; playing many games on it and seeing if any imbalance or otherwise un-fun feature shows up. It might be possible to predict the balance of "standard" maps, i.e. maps with commonly used features, but only because those features have shown up before and we know how they'll pay out. Any time an unknown element is introduced to the mix, you're suddenly looking into the tea leaves to find out how it will play out. | ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
| ||
|
Ragoo
Germany2773 Posts
On August 06 2013 22:36 TheFish7 wrote: Judging maps is really hard, its a bit like the stock market; you could follow it for years and learn everything but still get burned by some unexpected move. IMO the only true way to judge a map is trial-and-error; playing many games on it and seeing if any imbalance or otherwise un-fun feature shows up. It might be possible to predict the balance of "standard" maps, i.e. maps with commonly used features, but only because those features have shown up before and we know how they'll pay out. Any time an unknown element is introduced to the mix, you're suddenly looking into the tea leaves to find out how it will play out. The thing is that unless you are doing that with real pros in real competition you are only really confirming stuff we already know, or in the case of like weird maps you can come to totally wrong conclusions. I mean pros can develope totally different strats and meta without any map/balance changes, overthrowing ideas that we thought were basically set in stone all the time. Someone like Innovation is far above the level of some average EU pro like beastyqt and still this guy is far far above what the usual tester person's level is. The way some master player and a pro approach a certain new map is vastly different and the possibilites they have as well. On August 06 2013 13:29 Fatam wrote: Haha, yeah that did come over caustic when I didn't really intend it to be. I just meant that if we had an expert judge panel and the resulting maps were mostly imbalanced (mostly, not ALL), that says something about how hard it is to judge maps. So maybe a different viewpoint is good, or maybe it's just a crapshoot and anyone with a reasonably good understanding of the game is fine as a judge and should choose whichever maps look fun and reasonably balanced to them. Thats some completely made up bullshit. When and how was it confirmed that these maps were unreasonably imbalanced. Just because you didn't like the maps doesn't mean they were imbalanced, you are just making shit up to talk them down. Secondly if balance was all there is to a map then sure just let a bunch of pros decide what is most balanced or better yet just reskin and only slightly changed proven balanced maps all the time. Thats like the very very basics of what mapmaking (and level design) can actually be about if you completely ignore the design part and ways to force new kinds of play to keep the game fresh and interesting (like BW). Altho I think you understand that seeing that you tend to overdo it instead of the other way around. And as you well know most random people you ask (whether normal guys or pros) actually prefer to have standard shit all day every day. This is (imo) well documented if you look at the poll results of last TLMC. That's not saying that nobody likes more diverse maps in the map pools but that's definitely what the majority does. Also there is barely anything that can substitute a long mapmaking experience, living and breathing maps and SC2's design for some years is integral to being able to judge how a map can play out in the bigger context (not just balance, not just gimmicks, not just "tanks on cliff , map is imba"). Except for very few select people that not only play high level or follow lots of tournaments but actually have a lot of thoughts about what makes maps work and how the SC2 design plays out and discuss this with other people constantly (I would say monk is such a person) nobody can judge maps properly. And that includes many of the pros who have a very skewed, racially biased, balance oriented, etc view on maps. | ||
| ||
