EPT[NASL] New Maps Discussion - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
| ||
|
psteeleneg
48 Posts
| ||
|
Dexington
Canada7276 Posts
On December 07 2011 13:10 Primadog wrote: Any chance to release the semi-open replays, so we can see how the maps play out for competitive matches? Top of page 1 | ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
| ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On December 07 2011 13:04 Dexington wrote: Every tournament is getting new maps. The current map pool is incredibly stale and having every tournament use the same maps gets a little stale to watch, tbh Now go tell that to the pro players who can prepare for a certain set of maps that will be played in just about every major tournament, or they can prepare for a different set of maps that will only be played in NASL. I'm a fan of NASL would would like to see them do better and get bigger, but the things they need to work on is getting koreans back in their tournament, and their production, not having a unique map pool that might deter good players from wanting to play in their tournament. | ||
|
FoxyMayhem
624 Posts
Concrete Dreams was always intended to be a better Terminus, and I think it is. I feel good about this one replacing Terminus. Concerns have been raised that Protoss and Terran can expand to 4 bases too safely, but with the multiple attack paths, air harass vulnerability, and the option of zerg to expand to far corners of the map to create a favorable base-trade scenario, I think it has a very good chance of being balanced. This is the first of my three picks. Lunar Station is an interesting case, assuming the gold bases are converted to standard blue 2-gas bases. Looking at the normal 3rd base, the one not currently a gold, it's situated like Xel'Naga Caverns, minus the back entrance and highground overlooking the minerals. I fear it is too safe, and would lead to turtly 3 and four base games. On a map like Concrete Dreams this is the whole point. Here, is it a good thing? I think the map is as good as the Antiga Shipyards -- better, perhaps -- but without some outstanding thing that makes me go "this map needs to be played!", I can't really see it grabbing one of the picks. Ohana is, in my opinion, the best of those listed maps for 2 player spawns. Accessing the third expo is interesting for attacker or defender, and, kind of like Tal'Darim Altar's 4th, there is a place for the zerg to expand to if their efforts are blocked. You expand right up to your opponent's main, or you contest the high-ground middle expansions. This one takes the second of my picks. I would need to see Emerald Jungle in action to see if it's layout is too turtly, and if it sets itself apart somehow. To those in the know, if it does, I quite like the map. Overgrown visually looks awesome. Again, I feel a bit ignorant since I haven't watch enough reps, but it looks quite zerg favored, between the difficult third and the openness. If it does work out to be balanced, I'd like to see it. I fear Damage Inc will become an almost exclusively 4-gate map as Tal'Darim Altar has because of the non-ramped entrance. It's visually pretty, but noisy, and am afraid it might be obnoxious to observe, both for the players and for the viewers. If not, fantastic. Could it be a great map? Yes. But I can't see it right now. I'm worried, again that it would become too turtly with 4 relatively easy bases. In most games that means macroing up for 12 or so dull minutes and then one side crushing the other. Not true for the highest level play, but I fear for the viewer experience for those games not at the tippy top. I really like the layout from the natural on, though -- if the natural was the main, thus removing a base, these concerns would be eliminated (though the mineral ramp blocker might need to change). My wrists hurt, so I must stop being so detailed. My last pick goes to Artifice. Visually impressive with a refined layout, and memorable. Perhaps the best map of them all. Hope that helps at all! Again, if replays so a different story than my concerns, then disregard my concerns. | ||
|
Dexington
Canada7276 Posts
On December 07 2011 13:26 hunts wrote: Now go tell that to the pro players who can prepare for a certain set of maps that will be played in just about every major tournament, or they can prepare for a different set of maps that will only be played in NASL. I'm a fan of NASL would would like to see them do better and get bigger, but the things they need to work on is getting koreans back in their tournament, and their production, not having a unique map pool that might deter good players from wanting to play in their tournament. I think players can learn 3 new maps for a chance at $50,000 | ||
|
DrunkenTemplar
Australia647 Posts
| ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On December 07 2011 13:44 Dexington wrote: I think players can learn 3 new maps for a chance at $50,000 maybe, I mean this is just my opinnion, and I want to see NASL do better annd keep going to become the american version of GSL (since MLG is kindna its own thing schedule wise) but I really feel like when every other tournament has a set of maps they use, and then another tournament tries to be unnique with their own maps, players have to choose if they wannt to really put in the work and practice on that tournaments exclusive maps, or for the maps for every other tournament out there. | ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
On December 07 2011 13:24 Primadog wrote: I'm blind. wut. | ||
|
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
On December 07 2011 12:23 dAPhREAk wrote: honestly, i think you should pose this question solely to actual players and mapmakers, not the community. i think any contribution from the community would be a serious waste of time. this includes my own comments since i pick maps based on how pretty they look, and have no idea what a balanced map actually is even though i play at a masters level. that being said i like ohana, emerald jungle and artifice. I have asked players, and am talking with the map-makers... I want to take feedback from all 3 groups. | ||
|
SigmaoctanusIV
United States3313 Posts
| ||
|
IronManSC
United States2119 Posts
| ||
|
holynorth
United States590 Posts
honestly, i think you should pose this question solely to actual players and mapmakers, not the community. i think any contribution from the community would be a serious waste of time. this includes my own comments since i pick maps based on how pretty they look, and have no idea what a balanced map actually is even though i play at a masters level. The community provides the money. Our opinion should be the first priority. | ||
|
Letall
Sweden384 Posts
The three attack paths and the open middle make zerg counter attacks a lot more threatening which moves the games away from basicly being one strong push through the middle of the map in TvZ. One problem with this map however seems to be that that the 3rd is to hard for Terran and Protoss to secure vs Zerg. Judging from the replays Overgrown looks to be pretty balanced in TvP and produced some pretty good games in that MU. | ||
|
lefix
Germany1082 Posts
i have seen quite a few comments on the size of the maps. so i wanted to provide some numbers on map size & rush distances for comparison because i feel like sometimes images can be misleading because of their textures/doodads. all the numbers are analyzer unit numbers for maps with multiple spawns, longest and shortest distances were taken ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0N1XZ.jpg) I agree that some of the maps are fairly large. but none of them are out of the ordinary, imho, when compared to other maps currently used in competitive play. There is indeed the possibility of doing some changes to the maps, like removing golds, depending on the feedback. On FPS Issues: NullCurrent also did did a little benchmarking workwhich can be found here. He ran the tests on a non highend system to make fps drops more visible. a little summary of the results: + Show Spoiler + First out is Metalopolis, to give us some reference to the numbers later on: Average FPS: 32 Lowest FPS: 23, next to the LoS blockers in the main + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/FV0J4.jpg) Then a map which has lots of doodads and one you can expect to have low FPS: TPW Concrete Dreams: Average FPS: 31 Lowest FPS: 25, next to some fires + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ZtlyQ.jpg) An older map which has less doodads than most newer maps: TPW One Must Fall: Average FPS: 30 Lowest FPS: 25, but only when the camera is "inside" a god-ray which is a very small portion of the map otherwise the lowest was 27, right over the LoS blockers on the map. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MYuWU.jpg) Now a map which has had some complaints about lag: TPW Ohana: Average FPS: 31 Lowest FPS: 23, in the middle caused by the numbers of trees there + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VDJTm.jpg) TPW Overgrown Average FPS: 30 Lowest FPS: 27, northern part of the center + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7Zth7.jpg) TPW Lunar Station Average FPS: 31 Lowest FPS: 27, in the middle over pipes + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CPMh7.jpg) TPW Emerald Jungle Average FPS: 33 Lowest FPS: 23, trees and waterfalls + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Lz3iq.jpg) TPW Damage Inc Average FPS: 30 Lowest FPS: 24, map edge with lots of generators and some fires + Show Spoiler + Note: This picture is wrong, but the map was the latest and the circled areas are the correct ones, but on the new map ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KiTKs.jpg) | ||
|
DerekJCEX
United States64 Posts
My favorite maps here are: 1) Artifice 2) Ohana 3) One must fall Great stuff btw. I'm very happy to see new maps in a major tournament. This will be a big reason why I tune in to watch the NASL. | ||
Teoita
Italy12247 Posts
| ||
|
Alexj
Ukraine440 Posts
| ||
|
Fishgle
United States2174 Posts
but mostly i want a map pool thats consistent across tourneys. : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=289827 | ||
| ||
