I would very much like to celebrate the wrapping of a new TLMC, it is a lot of work from several people to do each one of these, and no less from all of you guys, whom do the work to craft the best, most appetizing maps each time around, so I would like to thank all of you, and to celebrate our TLMC#17 Finalists!
That said, this thread is dedicated mostly to maps which didn't made it to the judging step.
The public sheet with the corresponding scoring of the maps can be found at:
It will certainly take me a bit 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!
For time reasons, all mappers can ask feedback for 3 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 and TLMC#15 might be videos this time around, I might actually do them all as videos actually, but it will depend, we will see. And in the same fashion, other judges might also join, or might not, it depends on their own personal timeframes.
From the stream I got that: Atera can just be resubmitted. Only issues were cliff hiding minerals from triangular third and main being bit small.
Ruskaletto needs more open middle area and different cliff levels should be more distinct. Also some minor visibility issues at bottom of the map.
I don't really need a video as you covered things already on the stream, but I could like short comment on Eldeyja. I guess it got cut because of being resubmission and getting relatively average scores previouslay while being in hyper competitive standard category. Is this a correct assumption?
Hello, Kantu! Fortunately, my thread will be short for you (edit: on second thought, maybe not) since I only submitted 4 maps this contest and only 1 of them was screened out.
This was my first map contest, and I am about to ask about my first map, which...clearly shows my inexperience, I think.
◉ Map name: Othello ◉ Category the map was submitted to: Standard ◉ Map Overview:+ Show Spoiler +
◉ Specific questions about your map:
◉ 1. One concern that was made to me by a certain GM Terran was that the center was too oppressive because whoever controls it can freely rotate across the corners of the map and the defender has to make an awkward defensive rotation all the way back to the triangle 3rd that ends up being slower. Do you agree with this assessment? ◉ 2. I had to experiment with the size of the LOS blocker chokes flanking the central bridge to allow both for Zerg/Protoss to flank tank pushes on the high ground overlooking the triangle 3rds as well as constrict army rotations for whoever holds the center (see point 1). Was the center still too good for tank pushes? ◉ 3. I think the chokes may not have been set up well and the attack routes are awkward, especially the entrance into the triangle 3rd and the attacker's ramp leading down to the triangle 4th. Was this something that contributed to the map being screened out? ◉ 4. Is the forward low ground rich gas base too strong? ◉ 5. Are the linear 3rd and 4th bases too distant?
1. How did the layout of the first few bases, inspired by the map King Sejong Station influence the overall rating of the map? In particular: - Orientation of the Natural. - Natural with second entrance blocked off by Rocks (and leading to a very close 3rd base option.) - 3rd base that has a big chasm infront and thus has two main paths leading to it. - The big ramp from the natural down to the third that can we walled off when combined properly with the vespene Geysir .
2. How would I have to design this specific map differently so that a King Sejong Station inspired Layout is not favoring a certain race or makes particular strategies/build orders too powerful?
3. If the Gold Base is unfair, what would I have to change about Gold Base itself or the area around the Gold Base to not make it too powerful? How did the relative distance of the Gold Base to the Main + Natural & Opponent impact the map rating?
4. If the layout of the Main Base is problematic, then what are the reasons it could lead to imbalances? How would a better shape look like?
5. What are other obvious flaws that I did not pay enough attention to?
Thx for your time and effort. Looking forward to your answer.
I didn't particiapte in judging but I did participate in QA later on, and have previous experience with pre-judging and full content judging. Take some of what I have to say with a grain of salt as I haven't been as active in recent years but I might be able to give some small pointers if I see some glaring issues.
On November 21 2022 06:40 MrIronGolem27 wrote: ◉ Map name: Othello
I can agree with the sense that the middle is incredibly important to control due to it entirely being highground. The main oppressive feature here is that the square highground on each side of the central bridge is overlooking the two major attack paths towards itself. Taking the principle of defenders vs attackers in response time, it is very easy for the player 'defending' that highground to move between angles of attack in a short timeframe compared to the attacker needing to wrap around a larger distance and thus slower timeframe Taking away the doodads looking at bare terrain, the middle is quite uninspired and 'straight forward'. I would propose re-imagining the middle with more features, perhaps bends, ramps, or other variations. I can't make your map for you, but the middle imho is the largest detractor from the rest of the map. Don't fret too much though, this is a very common problem.
I think your first three observations are astute. I don't think the rich geyser has much of an impact with how the middle currently is, but if you were to change the middle it might become a problem.
I think the linear third is a bit far, but that is easily adjustable. The distance to third and fourth doesn't seem too extreme, but your love for the forcefield bridges might be impacting your use of space. You could pull alot of things closer here, and you'd be surprised how much space it gives you to make your middle more interesting and less restrictive.
On November 21 2022 07:19 IIEclipseII wrote: Radhuset Station
As someone who did pre-judging, I can garauntee you that upon opening either Kantu or I would've said internally "Oh, cool, another sejong inspired map" and left it at that. Inspiration does not change perception or results. I myself have tried KSS styled layouts before, and with this map you are now no stranger to the difficulties that this layout provides in LotV. However, that being said, the major flaw with LotV KSS layouts is the natural, which you already appropriately addressed.
I think the major issue here is the rocks at the natural. I would instead to replace the rocks with a mineral wall (probably 10 mins each patch) at the lowest point of the ramp, and additionally add the rocks to the ramp below that base, like so:
I can't see as well through the overview, but there are other small things that might have had influence, such as ease of reaper access into the natural and main.
I think you did a pretty good job of allowing each race various means to control this map without being too overbearing on most of the map, but something irks me about how narrow the very center is. I wonder how it'd be if that narrow center was changed to lowground, and you re-work the ramps around it as to not disrupt the initial rush path too strongly. It might help with flow from the north and south sides of the map. Not entirely sure. One other tiny thing, I might move the main mineral lines like two cells closer to the main ramps for early BO timings.
Map name: Ghost And Darkness Map category: Freestyle
Even though u went through the map briefly i would to ask if u you have any ideas how the map can be improved and be less volatile, and also explain what makes it volatile.
Another one is where id like to ask if you could "remove mineral walls" and view the map, as a standard layout as well, cause i might decide to submit it into standard category.
There was some use of non standard rocks and modification of some data. It would be helpful for myself (and everyone!) to understand in detail if that was the issue for it not passing the initial screening process.
Also, any other gameplay related feedback in addition to that (:
I assume the lack of a normal triangular base for terran is what killed it, in conjunction with the consequences of the diagonal symmetry, risk of a backdoor that is hard to flank by ground and the winner gold base on the rush path. I bet there is something else I'm missing. They layout itself is very fickle and didn't come together very easily at all.
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/qwEvLoE.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/966007105763041310/1028466855117066351/Othello_136x136.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/gaPQ6yM.jpeg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/hMRg8adm.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/dfTw0Bp.jpeg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/7jK4JjK.jpeg)
