|
With #Dreampool going to swamp the ladder after Blizzcon it is time to talk about maps for the tournaments ahead of us.
The obvious solution is to use the current WCS mappool. This imposes the problem that you cannot train on these maps on the ladder, due to the Dreampool. This is especially problematic for players that are not training in a well-established team enviroment or without training partners.
Another solution would be to use said ladder maps for tournaments, however, many of them are outdated in terms of balance and gameplay. One just has to think about how short the rush distance is on Xel'Naga Caverns or how open the natural expansion on Metalopolis is.
A last point to consider is that for the next WCS season it would proof to be highly valueable if any newly introduced map to its mappool was already playtested in an highlevel tournament enviroment.
Therefore I want to put a spotlight on some of the best community made maps during the last half year, worthy to be considered for tournament organizers and the WCS 2015 alike:
Map of the Month - July winner AEM Isomer![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LXc7RGL.jpg) A smaller map with lots of smaller ramps to shortcut the longer paths around and a very aggressive, yet abuseable middle expansion. Map of the Month - August winner KTV Mujō Gardens ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/d0C0UmW.jpg) A beautiful 2player map with many open spaces and powerful watchtowers its middle, which stretches a players defenses as the game progresses. Map of the Month - September winner Orichalcum![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/E8df2Gl.jpg) A map with a very interestingly placed gold base with a hard to watch, yet also hard to abuse backdoor path into the natural. Whether you sit tight or stretch yourself out with the benefit of extra income is up to your strategic choices! Map of the Month - October winner Sputnik ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KwE8w8s.jpg) Powerful highgrounds in front of your later expansions set the pace of the map. Can you become the king of the hill? Mapmaking Contest Map-Ximum winner Expedition Lost![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ndELTXe.jpg?1) Various third base options and backdoor into the mainbase that can be used to open you up to attacks or rather to shorten your own path to the enemies expansion have crowned this map to the winner of the Map-Ximum contest.
A big thanks to the creators of these maps and all the other awesome community mapmakers!
|
while I support this idea, I suggest you throw in a couple more than just the winner of every motm for some extra variety, maybe take the top 3 of them?
|
I think 5 is an excellent number to start with. I like this idea, Big J!
|
Excellent idea, grats for doing that (: Although as Meavis said top2/3 could be cool as well. I think we should mail this thread to IEM/DH/TaKe/etc
|
The problem with Top2/3 is the vast amount of maps in there.
I would prefer a situation in which we have these 5 maps, not bringing too much new stuff to the table. We need the pros to practice on these different maps, and the steeper we make the curve to actually try them out, the more likely the result of mass all-in buils becomes.
|
On November 05 2014 21:36 SC2Toastie wrote:
The problem with Top2/3 is the vast amount of maps in there.
I would prefer a situation in which we have these 5 maps, not bringing too much new stuff to the table. We need the pros to practice on these different maps, and the steeper we make the curve to actually try them out, the more likely the result of mass all-in buils becomes.
Yeah you're probably right.
|
|
|
On November 05 2014 22:22 SatedSC2 wrote:
Don't you kinda need 2 more maps for a standard 7 map pool? I guess you can just take Ohana and Cloud Kingdom from #DreamPool though =P
On the maps: Sputnik goes against my personal preferences, but the others are cool =)
EDIT:
It might be a good idea for someone from the mapping community/mapping groups to Tweet this thread at some popular tournament organisers - especially community organisers - to try and drum up some support for this idea. I actually prefer #DreamPool to this season's maps, but it would be cool to see new maps in tournaments.
I think Overgrowth and another map from the current map pool could do the trick tbh, no need to take maps from the Dreampool
|
that happening would be a small dream come true, but I think tournaments will be boring and just stick to the old maps.
|
On November 05 2014 22:35 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2014 22:22 SatedSC2 wrote:
Don't you kinda need 2 more maps for a standard 7 map pool? I guess you can just take Ohana and Cloud Kingdom from #DreamPool though =P
On the maps: Sputnik goes against my personal preferences, but the others are cool =)
EDIT:
It might be a good idea for someone from the mapping community/mapping groups to Tweet this thread at some popular tournament organisers - especially community organisers - to try and drum up some support for this idea. I actually prefer #DreamPool to this season's maps, but it would be cool to see new maps in tournaments. I think Overgrowth and another map from the current map pool could do the trick tbh, no need to take maps from the Dreampool
Adding current maps kinda goes against what we try to acchieve, because the old maps will be played first.
How often will you need map 6/7?
|
On November 05 2014 22:49 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2014 22:35 OtherWorld wrote:On November 05 2014 22:22 SatedSC2 wrote:
Don't you kinda need 2 more maps for a standard 7 map pool? I guess you can just take Ohana and Cloud Kingdom from #DreamPool though =P
On the maps: Sputnik goes against my personal preferences, but the others are cool =)
EDIT:
It might be a good idea for someone from the mapping community/mapping groups to Tweet this thread at some popular tournament organisers - especially community organisers - to try and drum up some support for this idea. I actually prefer #DreamPool to this season's maps, but it would be cool to see new maps in tournaments. I think Overgrowth and another map from the current map pool could do the trick tbh, no need to take maps from the Dreampool Adding current maps kinda goes against what we try to acchieve, because the old maps will be played first. How often will you need map 6/7?
Maybe allow the two "old" maps to be used only for Bo7 then? Or just add two other maps, that would make the more sense.
|
Just to clarify the threads purpose: I don't mean that the presented maps should be a mappool on their own. I plainly wanted to give some posterboys of the mapping community, there are many other maps out there that deserve a second look.
Whether these or other maps get considered is a discussion on its own, the matter at hand currently is to raise some attention.
If I was to post more maps, who would really look through 10 or 15maps? Probably just the same people who visit the mapforums anyways!
Question: Should I remove the spoilers from the maps so that they are permanently visible when entering the thread?
|
|
|
I like only Sputnik others are little weird and unbalanced done by rampaMQkvak everywhere ramp blindspots. no need mappool with 4 foxtrot labs no thank you........
Also who voted this one map of the month players or some clever guy behind scenes ? 
|
Kinda sad Callisto (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/468734-2-callisto) didn't get any love !
|
Brand new LotV maps, no problem. ><
|
even if LotV were to be announced at Blizzcon (very likely), there will still be a long time before even the beta of it starts, besides that, how much do you trust blizzard with your maps? *cough* alterzim *cough* daedelus *cough*
the 3 most appreciated maps of all time being cloud kingdom daybreak and ohana for many, all came from the community, as well as frost, habitation station, bel'shir vestige...
edit: gues I got wooshed >.>
|
'twas a joke ^^
I would prefer all maps come from the community and Korean leagues, anyway.
|
Those maps seem OK, but don't forget when crying for community made maps that Deadwing and Nimbus were community made. "Blizzard made" =/= shit and "community made" =/= awesome.
|
then again, blizzard picked those, one of them being an amateur made map that was thrown in there simply for variety with the removal of alterzim. nimbus turned out to do poorly only later, there are many many more blizzard maps where that can be said about.
|
On November 06 2014 00:43 Meavis wrote:
then again, blizzard picked those, one of them being an amateur made map that was thrown in there simply for variety with the removal of alterzim. nimbus turned out to do poorly only later, there are many many more blizzard maps where that can be said about.
I agree this somehow bad map pool made of community maps is a bit of an unfortunate coincidence ; a very stale TLMC4 with a terribly uninspiring top 5 including Deadwing -probably because of the no 1v1 maps restriction that I hope is never to be seen again-, terrible choices from Blizzard (fetching Nimbus in spite of the "balance concerns" they were perfectly aware of) and the removal of Frost.
|
On November 06 2014 00:39 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Those maps seem OK, but don't forget when crying for community made maps that Deadwing and Nimbus were community made. "Blizzard made" =/= shit and "community made" =/= awesome.
With the exception of Deadwing that Blizz picked only because they absolutely wanted a Alterzim replacement, you have to remember that the current map pool was intented as a Terran-favoring map pool, which with the Terran buffs give maps like Nimbus its broken stats. And come on, which Blizzard maps aren't shit?
On November 05 2014 23:17 CamoPillbox wrote:I like only Sputnik others are little weird and unbalanced done by rampaMQkvak everywhere ramp blindspots. no need mappool with 4 foxtrot labs no thank you........ Also who voted this one map of the month players or some clever guy behind scenes ?
I really don't see how the other maps here are weird and imba tbh. And the vote is open to anyone, player or non-player, map enthusiast or map hater, who cares to go in the dedicated thread here on TL.
|
I feel like a community online based tournament should use this maps a long time before a major offline tournament uses them. Maybe like a weekly thing or one of the Basetrade TV tournaments would be ideal.
|
On November 06 2014 00:57 OtherWorld wrote:
And come on, which Blizzard maps aren't shit?
Some Blizzard maps were God awful (Daedalus huge ramp version, Klontas Mire, Alterzim, Korhal City, Waystation) but some others were perfectly fine (Akilon, Derelict, Newkirk, Star Station, I was actually OK with Daedalus standard ramp version). I think Blizzard mapmakers are terrible at making maps with standout features ("hey, Bob, let's make a huge map !" "Yeah Mike, make it 192x192" "Isn't it a tad too much, Bob ?" "Nah, Mike, and we'll call it ALTERZIM STRONGHOLD !") but rather good at producing standard though sometimes boring ones.
By the way don't forget we'll probably get some new Korean maps for the next legit map pool.
|
On November 06 2014 01:08 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 00:57 OtherWorld wrote:
And come on, which Blizzard maps aren't shit?
Some Blizzard maps are god awful (Daedalus huge ramp version, Klontas Mire, Alterzim, Korhal City, Waystation) but some others were perfectly fine (Akilon, Derelict, Star Station). By the way don't forget we'll probably get some new Korean maps for the next legit map pool.
Well it's a matter of personal opinion, but I personally find Akilon and Derelict awful. Star Station is OK I guess. And talking about Korean maps, I wish they would include more of them in the map pools. I'm still salty we didn't get to play OutBoxer on ladder ):
|
On November 06 2014 01:10 OtherWorld wrote:
And talking about Korean maps, I wish they would include more of them in the map pools.:
Same. It's sad to admit such crushing Korean superiority, but they're the best in mapmaking too ^^.
|
I support this idea, and I feel the OP should contact tournament organizations running one after blizzcon
|
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
|
On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Of course but the maps they produce for GSL/Proleague are often outstanding.
EDIT : often, not always, of course, Overgrowth and Whirlwind come with Icarus and Maze ^^
|
your Country52798 Posts
On November 06 2014 01:25 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Of course but the maps they produce for GSL/Proleague are often outstanding.
Different korean mapmakers have different quality maps. Some of the best mapmakers are non-korean, even 
Edit: Maze was awesome, don't diss it
|
On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS).
edit : We didn't get enough of Maze to see its potential imo. Most of the games were PvP, which doesn't help
|
On November 06 2014 01:26 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:25 [PkF] Wire wrote:On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Of course but the maps they produce for GSL/Proleague are often outstanding. Maze was awesome, don't diss it
Seriously ? It was P favored to the point of retardedness and every PvP on this map was a pain to watch. I hate this map with all my might.
|
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map.
|
your Country52798 Posts
On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map.
Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is?
|
On November 06 2014 01:27 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS).
can we generalize the foreign mapmaing scene with just superouman and uvantak then?
|
On November 06 2014 01:37 Meavis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:27 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS). can we generalize the foreign mapmaing scene with just superouman and uvantak then?
Most of the bad korean mapmakers never got a map on ladder though. And I'm not sure I'd rather have Superouman + Uvantak making every ladder map from now on or let's say EastWindy + Winpark.
|
On November 06 2014 01:37 Meavis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:27 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS). can we generalize the foreign mapmaing scene with just superouman and uvantak then?
Come on, don't take it so strictly, what we were saying is that all the Korean maps that got on ladder/tournament weren't broken and were remembered as at least good solid maps and often as very good/exceptional maps, which isn't the case with non-Korean maps (afaik Yeonsu, Nimbus, etc aren't Korean ; although the foreign mapmaking scene has provided some exceptional maps too, from Habitation to CK). Obviously bad Korean mapmakers exist.
|
On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is?
No lol I meant to remove the entrance alltogether of course.
|
On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is?
No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me.
|
On November 06 2014 01:43 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:37 Meavis wrote:On November 06 2014 01:27 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS). can we generalize the foreign mapmaing scene with just superouman and uvantak then? Come on, don't take it so strictly, what we were saying is that all the Korean maps that got on ladder/tournament weren't broken and were remembered as at least good solid maps and often as very good/exceptional maps, which isn't the case with non-Korean maps (afaik Yeonsu, Nimbus, etc aren't Korean ; although the foreign mapmaking scene has provided some exceptional maps too, from Habitation to CK). Obviously bad Korean mapmakers exist.
heavy rain was korean, red city was korean, but I doubt many know that map because of how swiftly it got shifted.
|
On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me.
Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful since nothing replaces playtesting
|
On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful
Because it makes Protoss allins even more ridiculous to stop than they already are.
|
On November 06 2014 01:49 Aquila- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful Because it makes Protoss allins even more ridiculous to stop than they already are.
"Protoss allins" is a very broad category, you know, and that isn't much of an explanation tbh. And you can consider it gives you a path to counterattack too
|
On November 06 2014 01:46 Meavis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:43 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:37 Meavis wrote:On November 06 2014 01:27 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS). can we generalize the foreign mapmaing scene with just superouman and uvantak then? Come on, don't take it so strictly, what we were saying is that all the Korean maps that got on ladder/tournament weren't broken and were remembered as at least good solid maps and often as very good/exceptional maps, which isn't the case with non-Korean maps (afaik Yeonsu, Nimbus, etc aren't Korean ; although the foreign mapmaking scene has provided some exceptional maps too, from Habitation to CK). Obviously bad Korean mapmakers exist. heavy rain was korean, red city was korean, but I doubt many know that map because of how swiftly it got shifted.
Heavy Rain was bad the same way Yeonsu was bad, those maps just suffered from a metagame problem they couldn't really anticipate. I loved Red City, why do you think it's such a bad map ? (I agree it was so chokey, probably the reason why, as P, I loved it ^^)
|
On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful since nothing replaces playtesting
Because some all-ins simply cannot be stopped if the attacker has the opportunity to use the backdoor entrance after he forced tons of defense in the natural. Imagine a Terran building 5 Bunkers in the natural to defend an Immortal all-in - then Protoss goes for the backdoor where Terran has no defence there, and has no time (nor resources left anyway!) to rebuild it. In the past, Icarus had something less favourable (the backdoor was in the natural), yet so many PvTs there featured a 2b Immortal to exploit that; it would be even worse here. Maybe there would be a way for all of this to stabilize in the long term with opening shifts and overall adaptation (but there's not an unlimited potential there), but I don't think backdoor rocks leading to the main is a good map feature. I can't say for sure because it would require weeks of testing anyway but it immediately raises a huge question mark for me.
|
On November 06 2014 01:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful since nothing replaces playtesting Because some all-ins simply cannot be stopped if the attacker has the opportunity to use the backdoor entrance after he forced tons of defense in the natural. Imagine a Terran building 5 Bunkers in the natural to defend an Immortal all-in - then Protoss goes for the backdoor where Terran has no defence there, and has no time (nor resources left anyway!) to rebuild it. In the past, Icarus had something less favourable (the backdoor was in the natural), yet so many PvTs there featured a 2b Immortal to exploit that; it would be even worse here. Maybe there would be a way for all of this to stabilize in the long term with opening shifts and overall adaptation (but there's not an unlimited potential there), but I don't think backdoor rocks leading to the main is a good map feature. I can't say for sure because it would require weeks of testing anyway but it immediately raises a huge question mark for me.
Have you considered those facts ? :
- On Expedition lost, the rotation time between the back door and the natural is shorter for the defender than for the attacker.
- On Icarus, the rotation time between the main and the natural is shorter for the attacker than for the defender.
- On expedition lost, the back door is only 1 force field wide
- On Icarus the back door is at least 3 force fields wide
- On expedition lost, the defender is on the high ground when defending his main or his natural
- On Icarus the defender is on the highground when defending his maim but on even ground when defending his natural
- On Expedition lost, breaking the back door offers a new counter attack path (rush distance shortened)
- On Icarus, an army standing at the bottom of the main's ramp denies any ground based counter attack.
- On Expedition Lost taking a third isn't impossible
- On Icarus taking a third (= not doing a 2 base all in encouraged by the gold minerals at the natural) was a huge risk for the protoss.
No play testing needed to make those statements.
Icarus was way more all in friendly than Expediton Lost. Same goes for Blistering Sands. On Blistering Sands, the defender had to fight the ennemy on even ground at the natural, the back door was 2 ff wide, the defender had to deal with the Line of Sight blockers at the top of the ramp, the rotation time from the back door to the natural's entrance was shorter for he attacker than for the defender and taking a third was impossible.
|
On November 06 2014 01:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful since nothing replaces playtesting Because some all-ins simply cannot be stopped if the attacker has the opportunity to use the backdoor entrance after he forced tons of defense in the natural. Imagine a Terran building 5 Bunkers in the natural to defend an Immortal all-in - then Protoss goes for the backdoor where Terran has no defence there, and has no time (nor resources left anyway!) to rebuild it. In the past, Icarus had something less favourable (the backdoor was in the natural), yet so many PvTs there featured a 2b Immortal to exploit that; it would be even worse here. Maybe there would be a way for all of this to stabilize in the long term with opening shifts and overall adaptation (but there's not an unlimited potential there), but I don't think backdoor rocks leading to the main is a good map feature. I can't say for sure because it would require weeks of testing anyway but it immediately raises a huge question mark for me.
Though on Icarus the backdoor entrance was much wider and on equal grounds. Shouldn't that make it much easier to hold on Expedition Lost?
Also given how little we saw of Icarus and that the Immortal allins went both ways as far as I remember and that it was WoL, that doesn't necessarily make them broken. Just stronger than usually, right?!
|
there's nothing wrong with the backdoor on expedition lost, just the mindset of some people.
the only things that bother me about expedition lost, is how little room there is at the 3rd and 4th base, if you were to expand along the map border.
|
On November 06 2014 02:21 algue wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:59 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful since nothing replaces playtesting Because some all-ins simply cannot be stopped if the attacker has the opportunity to use the backdoor entrance after he forced tons of defense in the natural. Imagine a Terran building 5 Bunkers in the natural to defend an Immortal all-in - then Protoss goes for the backdoor where Terran has no defence there, and has no time (nor resources left anyway!) to rebuild it. In the past, Icarus had something less favourable (the backdoor was in the natural), yet so many PvTs there featured a 2b Immortal to exploit that; it would be even worse here. Maybe there would be a way for all of this to stabilize in the long term with opening shifts and overall adaptation (but there's not an unlimited potential there), but I don't think backdoor rocks leading to the main is a good map feature. I can't say for sure because it would require weeks of testing anyway but it immediately raises a huge question mark for me. Have you considered those facts ? : + Show Spoiler +- On Expedition lost, the rotation time between the back door and the natural is shorter for the defender than for the attacker.
- On Icarus, the rotation time between the main and the natural is shorter for the attacker then for the defender.
- On expedition lost, the back door is only 1 force field wide
- On Icarus the back door is at least 3 force fields wide
- On expedition lost, the defender is on the high ground when defending his main or his natural
- On Icarus the defender is on the highground when defending his maim but on even ground when defending his natural
- On Expedition lost, breaking the back door offers a new counter attack path (rush distance shortened)
- On Icarus, an army standing at the bottom of the main's ramp denies any ground based counter attack.
- On Expedition Lost taking a third isn't impossible
- On Icarus taking a third (= not doing a 2 base all in encouraged by the gold minerals at the natural) was a huge risk for the protoss.
No play testing needed to make those statements.
Yes. Look, the best I can do is the following: I'll try to find some Protoss to test the map, or I'll offrace myself if I find some Terran opponent, and I'll come to your thread with comments and replays.
|
On November 05 2014 23:17 CamoPillbox wrote:I like only Sputnik others are little weird and unbalanced done by rampaMQkvak everywhere ramp blindspots. no need mappool with 4 foxtrot labs no thank you........ Also who voted this one map of the month players or some clever guy behind scenes ?
Holy fuck that's hilarious, i'm not even mad.
But nonetheless, it is not very smart to judge all my work on a single map, anddddddddd Mujo Gardens has less ramps than sputnik.
On November 06 2014 01:38 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 01:37 Meavis wrote:On November 06 2014 01:27 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:24 Meavis wrote:
korea has bad mapmakers as well, just because you don't see them here on TL doesn't mean they don't exist.
Well obviously when talking about Koreans maps here we are talking about GSL/PL Korean maps, and I think most of them have been exceptional (at least in HotS). can we generalize the foreign mapmaing scene with just superouman and uvantak then? Most of the bad korean mapmakers never got a map on ladder though. And I'm not sure I'd rather have Superouman + Uvantak making every ladder map from now on or let's say EastWindy + Winpark.
I remember reading Semmo saying that EastWindy and Winpark were not making maps because irl things (windy got married iirc?). Can you clear it up Semmo?
Also n1º, I really would not enjoy stepping over other mapmakers, i'm really not that kind of guy, i would rather have the TLMC's and then steal ideas from them for future ones >: )
Also n2º, it seems that many on the thread are putting non-standard maps or less standarish maps in the same category as the standard ones, this must be done very carefully, mostly because they have different missions, a standard map tries to allow as many possible styles of play as possible, meanwhile a non-standard map will sacrifice some of the styles of play to allow more intricate layouts that give players other less explored tactics, strategies and gameplay that are map specific, so beware that.
Also n3º, Hmmmmmmmm i forgot what it was  I'll comment later if i remember it.
/edit, fixed the bold in the first quote.
|
I'd love to see these get used in tournaments. As much fun as the dreampool is gonna be, I've million games on metalopolis, and on xelnaga... new is probably better
|
On November 06 2014 03:06 Uvantak wrote:
I remember reading Semmo saying that EastWindy and Winpark were not making maps because irl things (windy got married iirc?). Can you clear it up Semmo?
Oh that would be a sad thing . And to be clear Uvantak, nobody is denying you're a great mapmaker.
|
On November 06 2014 03:04 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2014 02:21 algue wrote:On November 06 2014 01:59 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:46 OtherWorld wrote:On November 06 2014 01:44 TheDwf wrote:On November 06 2014 01:35 The_Templar wrote:On November 06 2014 01:33 Aquila- wrote:
Expedition Lost: Remove the backdoor rocks in the main, this is not wol beta with blistering sands, then it might actually be a decent map. Lol. So you want 2 entrances into the main from the start, or you want the center to be even more inaccessible than it is? No, he probably wants just a closed main. I had the opportunity to play that map in a competition but the backdoor rocks leading to the main were just a big no-no for me. Why so? With pure theorycrafting I don't see why it would be so bad considering it is compensated by the narrowness of the space in front of the natural, but your experience playing on it would be helpful since nothing replaces playtesting Because some all-ins simply cannot be stopped if the attacker has the opportunity to use the backdoor entrance after he forced tons of defense in the natural. Imagine a Terran building 5 Bunkers in the natural to defend an Immortal all-in - then Protoss goes for the backdoor where Terran has no defence there, and has no time (nor resources left anyway!) to rebuild it. In the past, Icarus had something less favourable (the backdoor was in the natural), yet so many PvTs there featured a 2b Immortal to exploit that; it would be even worse here. Maybe there would be a way for all of this to stabilize in the long term with opening shifts and overall adaptation (but there's not an unlimited potential there), but I don't think backdoor rocks leading to the main is a good map feature. I can't say for sure because it would require weeks of testing anyway but it immediately raises a huge question mark for me. Have you considered those facts ? : + Show Spoiler +- On Expedition lost, the rotation time between the back door and the natural is shorter for the defender than for the attacker.
- On Icarus, the rotation time between the main and the natural is shorter for the attacker then for the defender.
- On expedition lost, the back door is only 1 force field wide
- On Icarus the back door is at least 3 force fields wide
- On expedition lost, the defender is on the high ground when defending his main or his natural
- On Icarus the defender is on the highground when defending his maim but on even ground when defending his natural
- On Expedition lost, breaking the back door offers a new counter attack path (rush distance shortened)
- On Icarus, an army standing at the bottom of the main's ramp denies any ground based counter attack.
- On Expedition Lost taking a third isn't impossible
- On Icarus taking a third (= not doing a 2 base all in encouraged by the gold minerals at the natural) was a huge risk for the protoss.
No play testing needed to make those statements. Yes. Look, the best I can do is the following: I'll try to find some Protoss to test the map, or I'll offrace myself if I find some Terran opponent, and I'll come to your thread with comments and replays.
Thank you for doing this tbh. The main thing the mapmaking scene needs right now is people playing the maps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a lot of respect for what this thread is trying to accomplish. #OccupyMappool
|
On November 06 2014 08:04 pure.Wasted wrote:
I have a lot of respect for what this thread is trying to accomplish. #OccupyMappool
only a small percentage of maps get almost all the plays #OccupyMappool
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/i4yo6bo.jpg)
