|
First of all, I would very much like to congratulate to all our TLMC#15 Finalists, it had been quite a while since we have seen just so many new varied Finalists which makes me very happy as it just shows how much the scene keeps developing!
That said, this thread is dedicated mostly to non-Finalists, where the real work and heavy lifting happens.
It will certainly take me a while to get to every single one of you, so in the meantime it is highly recommended to check out previous Feedback Threads and "Mapping Guidelines" previously made.
As an extra note there is my youtube channel where I have been uploading Mapmaking feedback videos for finalists and non-finalists alike, it is highly recommended for y'all to peruse around. This time around there wasn't a Pre-Judging Feedback Stream, but we did have a video going over Quality Assurance steps and general optimization which I am sure will come very handy to the newer mapmakers. And remember, just because we might have not gone over *your specific map*, it doesn't mean that your map might not share issues which were covered there, so be sure to review it!
Before We Begin
For time reasons, all mappers can ask feedback for 2 maps, id like to give as much feedback as possible, but it is simply not possible for me to cover all maps, in the same manner, avoid asking "what's wrong with map X", instead focus on what areas you suspect could have been problematic
Submit your questions on the following fashion:
- Map Name
- Category the map was submitted to
- Map Overview
- Specific questions about your map
Just like on TLMC#14 might be videos this time around, there might not! No promises. And in the same fashion, other judges might also join, or might not, it depends on their own personal timeframes.
Gogogogo
|
Algor Mortis
Standard
+ Show Spoiler +
Were there some areas that were too open or exposed? Were the central bases beneficial or detrimental to the flow of the map? Was there too much dead-space?
Asthenia
Macro
+ Show Spoiler +
I am unsure about the rock towers on this map, and I would like to know if they are too inconsequential to the flow of the game. Also, do you think this map would have done better as a standard map, or are the first few bases defensible enough to justify this as a macro map?
|
Armada
Standard
+ Show Spoiler +
thirds too open? any dislike for the valley between the triangle and 12/6 bases? the rock tower? the chokiness.los blockers in middle of the map? fine, but just not as good as the other finalists? I never know exactly what to ask. I guess I'm just throwing questions out there and seeing if they stick.
Maybe to put it another way: was the map more/less favoured by terran/protoss/zerg judges for any specific reasons?
much like in the way that quicksand had been perceived as too zerg favoured by terran/protoss judges?
Backwoods Compound
Freestyle
+ Show Spoiler +
were the minerals separating the nat and the third seen as problematic in some way? i.e. tanks being sieged behind the minerals while tanks cover the marines. If not, was it just seen as boring or pointless, not freestyle enough, etc?
|
Buried Sanctuary:
Macro (Maybe standard?)
+ Show Spoiler +
Are attack paths too narrow? Too many high grounds and the middle high-ground doesn't make much sense? Is cornered base too hard to take? AZG usage is not very useful? Are the rocks usage inappropriate? I'm thinking maybe widening the map length and make the low ground paths wider will make it better. Do you have any suggestions to improve the layout? (I'm not sure if I can ask like this lol)
Korhal Plantation:
Macro
+ Show Spoiler +
Is the middle open space too large? Attack paths are too simple? Maybe bases are too many that would cause a longer late game? Are the rocks usage inappropriate? Are the three bridges unnecessary? My current thought is to change the arrangement of 3 bridges to different places rather than all in the middle and maybe add some high grounds in the previous bridge area. What do you think? And also, any further suggestions for improvements? And also, is the usage of a double-way gold mine good enough for this map to apply for Freestyle?
Well, since it's my first time participating in TLMC, I probably shouldn't raise my hope too high I guess. But is it ok for me to have the scores of these two lol. Thx!
|
So let get to the beef first.
Purple Mire
Macro
+ Show Spoiler +
Can you expand on the issues that made you cut the map early?
One quite important change made for this map for TLMC15 was that the main and natural were lowered one level. Originally they were one level higher and there were two ramps that led to the third and the 'triangular' base. In future that setup could return as 5 levels aren't limited to freestyle. Thus, I would like to hear how you think that would affect the assessment of the map.+ Show Spoiler +
Probably the biggest question about this has been is the third base vulnerable enough so that map doesn't become turtley?
Moving on.
Gresvan
Macro
+ Show Spoiler +
How big issue the limited movement between left and right side is? To me the paths work quite well when one player expand vertically and other takes the triangle base to push towards the side. But when both take the vertical expansions then attack paths feel much more limited. Is this big issue for the map?
Could this be solved by flipping the forward base and moving it to next to the ramp with small rocks on the side further away from natural while adding a small ramp, maybe blocked with rocks, to where the forward base was?
Another thing I would like to know if you don't mind, is that did Seaside Resort get scored better than last time with the new middle and other changes? No need to go into the details. I just know it got one 4 but not sure should I continue to tweak it to edge it to the top.
|
This is my first time making maps so any general feedback would be useful to me. I'm honestly not even sure about what questions to ask since I'm so new at this. Any mapmakers/ readers of this thread that want to feel free to give me feedback!
Cybros Archives
Standard
+ Show Spoiler +
Are the 3rds too far way (linear) or open (triangle)? Are all the high ground bases too easy to hold? Are the textures okay or is the mini-map too dark and hard to see? Is the middle area too open/ same width pathing on entire
Foxglove Gardens
Rush
+ Show Spoiler +
Did this map fall victim to 4 spawn locations? Would this map work better if I disabled vertical spawns? Are there bigger problems than just that? Did people not like the back 2 back 3rd base? Is the high-ground next to the triangle 3rd too siege-able?
Thanks for your time in answering these questions!
(edited to fix mistype and images not showing up)
|
Remember to have .jpg or .png after your imagur URLs or they wont show up correctly.
|
Data-C
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/jXJpfVc.jpeg)
Macro
Probably the map I spent the most time on decorating and changing stuff around. I considered making the 4/10 o'clock highground bases into lowground, so there is no scary ramp leading into the already relatively vulnerable triangle third. The rocks in the middle don't do much either other than making the rush distance long enough for the map to feel macro, which is probably not allowed anymore, because then the map is too "big" for the terran pro player community. Yeah, would be nice if you could enlighten me on what the judges' thoughts were on the map and how it placed in the macro category. There are probably issues with airspace and openness too, but fixing those would probably mean a complete remake.
|
I know that I am a newer mapmaker, and my maps are bound to have many mistakes that more experienced mapmakers would notice instantly. I hope that with this thread, I can identify some of these ^^.
Pristine Ice
Standard
+ Show Spoiler +
Pristine ice is, by far, the map that I put the most effort into. I am curious how well it scored compared to my other maps, Dark whispers and Shakuras Outpost.
Some of the most common criticisms of my maps that I have received in general are about the lack of significant chokes to make traversing around the map more difficult. Does this map fall victim to that? Is the center ramp too large? Is the half-pipe in front of the natural a good map feature (I know this is a general question, but I'm not really sure how else to ask about it)? Another common criticism of my maps that I have received is that they are too omni-directional, which leads to them being too zerg favored. Was that an issue in this map? Are there any other huge issues that I fail to even realize?
If it is ok, I would like to save my second map feedback until after I see the relative scores of my maps, as it might allow me to ask for slightly better feedback.
Thank you!
|
Lost Facility
Standard
+ Show Spoiler +
i see a few potential problems with the map, how important was each one of them?
- low ground area directly in front of nat with 3 ramps leading up towards the nearby bases.
- extensive use of LOS Blockers
- a potentially great division by debris if the coolingtowers are knocked down
- 2 close is bases in the corners (and general corner design)
- the long curved unpathable area stretching from the lowground in front of the nat, along the forward base restricting movement to much before the (6x6) debris is taken out. (too good of a siege position?
- the forward base itself, maybe winner base problem?
- slightly exposed main ramp
- mismatch of overall choke sizes and open areas
- amount of air space around main (and nat)
Ravensburg
Rush
+ Show Spoiler +
- were bases too open / too far away? especially the corner base
- was the xnt in the center problematic?
- was the central highground (in combination with both 3ds being lowground) perceived as to strong?
- does the map look to bad? (honest question despite knowing judges should not care about look)
- mismatch of overall choke sizes and open areas
- amount of air space around main (and nat)
- terran map?
|
Timeless Wild
+ Show Spoiler +
So I'm wondering quite a bit on what I did wrong, or if its another case of nothing was "wrong" but I just didn't reach the mark because other maps looked better. But since that isn't my question (Tho I will like to have the avg scores for my map for point of ref for what map I should dissect to see if some of my common errors got through.)
I'll ask the actual question:
Do you got anything you can say about the bot left/top right corners? This map has not the best history with them being interesting. But since I got this middle design I actually want to commit to I really dont know if how I did the corners was the best option. Or the watch tower there is abit wasteful (I'm considering putting it on the highground, or merking it in favor for more ovi pods.)
Toxic Growth
+ Show Spoiler +
Toxic Growth is one of my few maps where I'm trying to make something standard while moving slightly away from the formula. I was basically trying to recreate Cyber Forest's mid while taking up less area and providing more instantly connecting loops. So I'm going to ask whats wrong with the bot left/top right corners?
I noticed post submission phase during tlmc15 that I severely had a mishap in the corners, and I think that had an effect on the judging (beyond the custom cliffs probs) but if this map didn't even reach the judges I'm honestly wondering what could of been it downfall. But I rather pick at whats been bugging me the most.
+ Show Spoiler +ps: If I can get the avg scores for my maps that would be much appreciated, I just want to know how far my maps got before I start asking questions elsewhere.
|
Biogenesis
+ Show Spoiler +
Was the 31-32 sec rush distance too short to provide good gameplay?
Does the pathing feel odd or awkward? Should there be other, easier paths to the 3rd / 4th ?
Flying units split from ground units a lot on this map, is that a major issue?
Call of The Abyss
+ Show Spoiler +
Is the map too open?
Are high ground outposts in front of the natural expansion too powerful?
The middle feels very choked - was that an important factor in scoring the map?
|
On July 28 2021 08:18 samsim wrote:Algor MortisStandard + Show Spoiler +Were there some areas that were too open or exposed? Were the central bases beneficial or detrimental to the flow of the map? Was there too much dead-space?
When it comes to Algor Mortis it made it on the top 10* with the caveat that it was part of a big score tie with other maps for the spot, which is something quite common on TLMC's for the standard category, given just how competitive it can be, again, standard category specifically, it is far rarer to see score ties on other categories
The map is well executed but it has an excess of ramps and terrain differences, this area in front of the thirds is specifically problematic
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/WJoLCVD.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/AFMiAO5.jpg)
The highground is overpowering for these cases, this is not limited to just siegetanks, but immortal compositions sniping the thirds, Protoss judges in specific were not too keen on having both potential thirds be exploitable in such a way
Corners and sides of the map have a very good amount of airspace as is, some mapmakers prefer to have no airspace, but that's very much a stylistic decision
When it comes to openness, that was certainly a big sticking point, the alternatives might be to move one of the thirds into the midground and re-structure the map some in order to balance out the change, or take a more aggressive approach such as changing the center of the map
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/C0ZL6XO.jpg)
I personally believe that a re-structuring of the center of the map would open you up some very interesting and just cool map design ideas, like rocks on the highlighted spot which can be taken down on the mid-lategame for easier army movement and flanks, but that's very much your decision, you could go for simply raising and re-arranging the third bases instead
On July 28 2021 08:18 samsim wrote:AstheniaMacro + Show Spoiler +I am unsure about the rock towers on this map, and I would like to know if they are too inconsequential to the flow of the game. Also, do you think this map would have done better as a standard map, or are the first few bases defensible enough to justify this as a macro map?
Yeah, I very much believe it would have fared better as a standard map, currently the third bases even when they are at an ok distance, they are still rather open-ish (specially frontal of main base), for macro maps it is not uncommon to see third bases at ~~35 units distance from townhall to townhall and here both third are at ~44 units with the closest at 40, that coupled with the openness detracts of the category
As for the rock towers, well, the ones in the center are cool, and I see them being used, but the ones on the corner would certainly not, for the corners I would much recommend to making them more compact, think Overgrowth type fourths, the 12/6 oclock third bases could also be trimmed in size with the skirt of pathable area, and further compact the map
Overall it is a really solid map and with modifications such as mentioned above, I can see it working well
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/J8OUwsi.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/NpoDqwT.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/JPqx1zc.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/eSXTepy.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/NgviKcG.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/jtrzqa7.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/AL7VFj7.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://imgur.com/tW1tfDH.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/DzgCEnh.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://imgur.com/vi6lc3b.png)
![[image loading]](https://imgur.com/3QJK32B.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://imgur.com/KWWHRRk.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/rHmYSOj.jpeg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/7M3EEex.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/SdeoAsS.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/xwyfBKD.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/IFxN6s4.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/xXVdZjU.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/br7O667.jpeg)
