EPT
On May 14 2014 21:49 And G wrote:
A big problem with those rules is this particular sentence in the TLMC4 announcement:
I think that a lot of people took this as a sign that deviation from established map design principles was encouraged, especially in regards to naturals and the accessibility of thirds, so I'm not surprised that publishing the list of general rules (which really reads like your typical "how to create a decent map 101") after the contest left some mapmakers who thought TLMC wanted them to bend those very rules with a sour aftertaste. Even more so because the quote seemed to imply that more rigorous testing than usual would be taking place (because how else are you going to judge the effect a map has on the meta?) while in fact the exact opposite was the case.
A single sentence such as "maps should adhere to established map design conventions and not try to re-invent the wheel" could have prevented this confusion.
A big problem with those rules is this particular sentence in the TLMC4 announcement:
I think that a lot of people took this as a sign that deviation from established map design principles was encouraged, especially in regards to naturals and the accessibility of thirds, so I'm not surprised that publishing the list of general rules (which really reads like your typical "how to create a decent map 101") after the contest left some mapmakers who thought TLMC wanted them to bend those very rules with a sour aftertaste. Even more so because the quote seemed to imply that more rigorous testing than usual would be taking place (because how else are you going to judge the effect a map has on the meta?) while in fact the exact opposite was the case.
A single sentence such as "maps should adhere to established map design conventions and not try to re-invent the wheel" could have prevented this confusion.
Firstly, NewSunshine pretty much summed it up. Everything in the OP are things that the best map makers are aware of and adhere to for all intents and purposes.
Secondly, there was a statement about the maps needing to be ladder appropriate. While admittedly that was in conjunction with removing any anti-ladder features like rising lava, there was an option to PM me directly to ask if your map was ladder appropriate.
Thirdly, that line has been used in all TLMCs (at least some variation on it has), it hasn't really caused issues in the past (except when all that "standard" maps won in TLMC2).
Fourth, monk echod eerily similar thoughts after TLMC2 so the information in the OP isn't entirely new.
Fifth, unless your contest explicitly is looking to challenge some of the ideas in the OP it's highly likely that any reasonable judging team will use similar metrics to the OP in order to determine the maps they like the most. Rather than interpreting this as a ruleset that was magically made up to judge maps against, you should see this as a break down of the thought process the judges had when evaluating the maps. When you put yourself in a similar position I think you'll go through similar motions. This information should be considered whenever you submit to a contest which will have judges assessing your map to maximise the chance that they will look at your map favorably.
Sixth, I appreciate that people are disappointed in the contest for whatever reason (be it because they didn't place, because they feel the contest mislead them, etc.) but I would hope that people are able to learn from this contest and improve as mappers. For instance, in your particular instance Crusader was starting to hint at all the things which makes a great map. Last season Uvantak submitted Seunos Pacificos (or something like that) which was the unofficial 8th placing map in TLMC3. He obviously built on those foundations in this contest and I think if you keep at it you have every opportunity to make an impact on the mapping scene.
